Bananas (1971)

Simply A Masterpiece

Good movie but grossly overrated

Best movie of this year hands down!

The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

I think your enjoyment of this movie depends if you are a fan of Woody Allen or not. Since I am not, I didn't enjoy it at all.Plot In A Paragraph: Fielding Mellish (Woody Allen) works as a product tester. Fielding has the hots for Nancy (Louise Lasser), the girl collecting petition signatures door to door for the liberation of San Marcos, so he pretends to be interested in her cause. A relationship develops between them, but when she dumps him, he is devastated. He thinks he'll have to get very involved in the situation in San Marcos to win her back.I did enjoy the scene with a young Sylvester Stallone (as subway thug) interestingly enough, Woody Allen initially sent Stallone back to the casting agency after deciding he wasn't 'tough-looking' enough. Stallone pleaded with him, and eventually convinced him to change his mind". And I did like Howard Cosell's scenes at the beginning and end of the movie, but I am at a loss as to why it was called "Banannas"

Review: This has to be Woody Allens worst film! The storyline is badly written and the jokes were terrible. As usual, Allen seems to get his leg over at some point, which wasn't surprising, but the whole political storyline was all over the place. Personally, I lost interest halfway through the film and I struggled to stay awake. And why  doesn't he comb his hair! Anyway, I usually prefer his earlier work to his films during the 90's, but I can't see why anyone would enjoy this film. Judging by the movies taking, it must have gone down well with audiences, which must be down to the period that the movie got released. Terrible!Round-Up: I don't know what Woody Allen was trying to attempt with this film. Most of his movies have a hidden message, but this film is completely bananas. The commentary from the news cast was also a bad attempt at humour along with the terrible training in the jungle. Basically I found this film a total waste of time and I can't find a good word to say about it.Budget: $2million Worldwide Gross: $12millionI recommend this movie to people who are into there Woody Allen movies about a product tester who gets kidnapped by rebels. 1/10

This film is an excellent depiction of how people construct narratives of their own past. They take what they like, exaggerate those aspects, try to fit it into a coherent story. They try to construct stories that depict them as who they want to be. People may tell these constructed stories to others, but they also try to convince themselves of the veracity of their constructed stories. This movie explores these ideas in a very powerful way, through the viewpoint of a boy growing up. I found it especially meaningful because I can personally relate to it. I'm not going to spoil the best scenes for you by telling you the way in which the ideas are presented.

Not, in my opinion, one of Woody Allen's best, being not quite as endlessly quotable as Annie Hall, as heart-breakingly truthful as Husbands and Wives, as relateable as Hannah and Her Sisters, as visually beautiful as Manhattan or as ground-breaking as Zelig. But it is tremendously entertaining, very easy to like and is one of Allen's most accessible along with Sleeper and The Purple Rose of Cairo(also great films, especially the latter which is another one of Allen's best). Sure it has some uneven spots, the story does play second fiddle to the gags and does feel rushed with the odd occasion when Allen seemed to be losing control of his material somewhat; the ending personally did fall flat and there are too many copy and paste close-up shots which did have a dizzying effect. For its unevenness though, Bananas still works really well and is a case of being flawed but with the pros outweighing the cons by some considerable distance. The score is very catchy with the odd witty touch and is very fitting, Allen's directing is very competently done though with the understandable- seeing as Bananas was only his third film- sense that he was still properly finding his own voice and he does give a great performance too(one of his funniest actually), here he shows that he is completely at home in comedy without being too self-indulgent regardless of his intentionally neurotic character. The acting generally in Bananas is fine and there is good rapport between everyone with the chemistry between Allen and Louise Lasser quite sweet, though only Allen really stands out. But it is in the dialogue and sight gags that makes Bananas as fun as it is. The dialogue is deliciously biting and smart(though a few parts may not sit well with some today), with the best of the one-liners are unforgettably quotable. And the sight gags and slapstick are easily some of the funniest of any Woody Allen film, the best of which being the subway train, magazine and especially trial scenes. Loved the homages to Ingmar Bergman, Charlie Chaplin and Luis Bunuel too and the title, deriving from banana republics and the Marx Brothers' The Cocoanuts, is equally inspired. All in all, recommended highly, not a masterpiece but with a huge amount to enjoy. 8/10 Bethany Cox