Melinda and Melinda (2004)

Two alternating stories about the attempts of Melinda (Radha Mitchell) to straighten out her life.Was Will Ferrell doing a Woody Allen impression? I think he was. I enjoyed that Allen (who wrote and directed) decided that if he was not going to have himself starring, he would have actors who could imitate his mannerisms and speech (even when not looking anything at all like him).I do like the concept here of how a story could be told either as a comedy or a tragedy. That is a nice idea, and one that is well-executed. And I also like that Allen keeps to his philosophical themes and makes a point or two about Stravinsky. But the genius of this film was either lacking or went over my head, because it is not among his best work in my mind.While there remain many Allen films for me to see, I would have to say his best of the post-2000 era is "Match Point". This one is, at best, a distant second.

Here I am, for what seems the thousandth time, introducing a review as being of a film from a legendary director whom I've shamefully seen nothing by. Still, better late than never, no?Something of an experimental concept, Melinda and Melinda follows a conversation between two playwrights: one a tragedian, the other a comedian. They each believe their particular form of fiction reflects the true reality of life, and seek to prove this by twisting the same root story to a particular end.On paper, Melinda and Melinda sounds an ingenious idea: telling the same story from different perspectives to discern the differences between comedy and tragedy. Alas, this is not quite what the film actually does with itself. I expected, perhaps foolishly, to see the same scenarios and characters from different perspectives; to perceive the same strings of events through alternating pairs of eyes. What actually happens, in essence, is that we flip between two similar but quintessentially different stories. Their only considerable similarity is in their beginning at a dinner party, which itself lasts not particularly long in either case. This had me somewhat disappointed, my expectations flung from the window and replaced with, you might say, two elongated short films. Melinda and Melinda, contrary to what its synopsis suggests, is not an in-depth examination of comedy versus tragedy, but rather two half films loosely strapped together by occasional and dysfunctional scenes of the original characters summarising the plots thus far. These scenes are wince-inducingly clunky, the performances overstated and criminally redundant. The worst effect of the misuse of the film's premise is that, due to their essential non-relation, the two segments are left to function independently, which neither is well equipped to do. The tragedian element is particularly lacking, none of the characters or circumstances eliciting sympathy, relatability, or anything in the way of the audience's consideration. It's not bad, per se, but nor is it at all good; to watch characters to whom we're not endeared have their lives crumble as a result of infidelity is simply boring. The comic segment excels in comparison, but is itself quite flawed. Much as I might dislike the man in just about everything, Will Ferrell takes centre stage, his early despair at burning his "Chilean sea bass lightly dusted with lime" simply the film's best moment. The positive effect of his presence is short lived, however, the quirky silliness wearing thin before long. Charming nonetheless for most of the running time, he's certainly—I genuinely cannot believe I'm saying this about Will Ferrell—the best thing in the film. The comic section as a whole is certainly better, its humour a lifeboat in the overwhelming sea of boredom its opposite offers. Perhaps a ninety minute expatiation of this would have been better, but alas, that is not what we are given. By the end, it's clear that the original idea has been abused, mistreated, and brutalised beyond all recognition. A typically poorly delivered wrap up from the playwrights informs us that—who'd have guessed!—life is neither tragic nor comic but a combination of the two. No thank you.A great idea so fumbled, mishandled, misused, and dropped on its head in its execution that it bears no trace of the wonderment it first postulated, Melinda and Melinda is just plain disappointing. With one half soporific and the other half enjoyable, it's horribly unbalanced, and punctuated (thankfully) infrequently with very poor summative scenes. Its comic side is fine; its dramatic side banal and bland. In short, it's a complete mess.

"Comic or tragic, the most important thing to do is to enjoy life while you can. Because we only go round once, and when it's over, it's over. And, perfect cardiogram or not, when you least expect it, it could end like (snaps fingers) that."The general opinion about Melinda & Melinda is pretty mixed. I fully expected this to be one of Allen's weaker movies, but I ended up enjoying the heck out of it. I don't know if my enjoyment was because of my recent infatuation with Radha Mitchell, or if the movie really was just that good. Whatever the reason, I'm convinced that this movie is sorely underrated. A group of friends sits at a table at a restaurant, and listens to two versions of a story; one comic, and the other tragic. The stories are both played out with completely different actors; save for the character of Melinda (played by Radha Mitchell), who arrives unexpectedly in the middle of a dinner party in both stories. I know that may sound a little confusing, in a movie that questions whether the essence of life is comic or tragic, it works well.Three complaints: some of the humor was hit-and-miss, the script was a little too unfocused to communicate the themes of comedy and tragedy in a way that presented a totally focused point, and Ferrell didn't have a perfect handle on the "Woody Allen role" (though I can't really think of who could have done it better).  Those are the only less- than-favorable comments that I have to make. I thought the film as a whole was a combination of a great cast and smart writing, and those are the main things I look for in anything Allen directs. This is a traditional Woody Allen movie. More Annie Hall than Match Point. Which means it's very verbose, focused on a specific type of people that you only find in New York City, and it has his trademark humor. I would hesitate to recommend this to an Allen novice, but if you know what you're getting into and you "get it", then you might enjoy Melinda & Melinda as much as I did.

Let's face it, even our favourite and most talented film directors get it wrong sometimes, and this is one of those times. This film script is one of those 'clever ideas' that people get late at night, and when they are half drunk they say: 'Wouldn't it be great if ...?' But in the cold light of the morning, this should have been abandoned as too artificial. The idea of having two alternative stories about a girl called Melinda, one comic and one tragic, is too theoretical. You might as well try and make a film out of DAS KAPITAL, which is also theoretical. Woody here is 'too clever for his own good' and it backfires. There is no use talking about the performances, as actors here are not the point. A film which is excessively contrived, as this one is, is simply an embarrassment to everyone associated with it. I must say, the evening scenes of the people talking about the two Melindas are the most contrived of all, and not at all cinematically well executed. Films are meant to be illusions, but they need to be convincing illusions, not artificial fabrications such as university undergraduates would come up with while chatting in the dorm.