Small Time Crooks (2000)

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Woody Allen has had an award-winning career in comedy – as a writer, actor and film director. But, his frequent roles as a whiny character on film soon become grating to me and wear out much of the comedy of the script. This film is an exception. Although other projects have received the honors, "Small Time Crooks" is one of the funniest of his films. It has more witty dialog and funny situations than most. And the script is loaded with enough hilarious dialog that it overrides the few occasions when Allen's character reduces to whining about something. The plot for this film is superb and very funny with its several diversions. The acting is tops by the entire cast. Allan is very good as Ray, and Tracey Ullman is a riot as his wife, Frenchy. Jon Lovitz is Benny, Tony Darrow is Tommy and Michael Rapaport is Denny. All have very funny scenes and lines. Hugh Grant does a fine job as a straight man. But Elaine May as May has the best lines by far and steals the scenes in which she appears. I rate this one of the funniest and best of Allen's movies, especially for the screenplay and the excellent cast. It's a very good caper comedy. Here are some of my favorite lines from the film.Ray, "What would you say if I told you you were married to a genius?" Frenchy, "I'd say I must be a bigamist."Benny, "Where do you get four fourths and a third?" Denny, "Look, I don't do fractions, right?"TV reporter, "Or, as we in television say, there's no accounting for the public's taste."May, "I'm a hemophiliac." Edgar's wife, "Oh dear, are you bleeding?" May, "Why would I be bleeding?"May, "They diagnosed it as Parkinson's. But they think it could be the Ebola virus or Mad Cow Disease."

As someone who has loved or really liked(although from about 5 or 6 disappointments) most of what they've seen so far of Woody Allen's filmography(28 as of now), there was a lot to like about Small Time Crooks. But compared to a lot of Allen's other films, it was also uneven and disappointing. Getting onto the many good stuff, Small Time Crooks is beautifully photographed and there is a great use of locations, which look similarly great. Most of the acting is great, especially from Tracy Ullman who is splendid and Elaine May who is ditsy, charming and her comic timing is priceless. Woody Allen- whose directing I don't have a problem with here- gives a good performance too that does remind you of some of his earlier work. Jon Lovitz and Michael Rappaport are a lot of fun in the little screen time we see them in. The first half is great as well, with very witty and sharp writing that feels like a throwback to Allen's earlier wisecrack comedies and that was part of the appeal. In typical Allen fashion as well there is a lot to say on issues and relationships and it's done insightfully. The three main characters are compellingly drawn. Sadly, the second half doesn't match up, the pace sags, the writing is not as witty and sometimes take a patronising approach and the characters that made the first half entertaining disappear and are forgotten about seemingly. And while as said the acting is fine, Lovitz and Rappaport did deserve more to do, Elaine Stritch is pretty wasted and I wasn't enamoured by Hugh Grant here either, his character was underwritten and the performance felt too much of a self-parody. The story is not as interesting in this half either with some plot strands underdeveloped and clumsily resolved. In conclusion, enjoyable, well made and performed but lesser and uneven Woody Allen. 6/10 Bethany Cox

One of the best things about Woody Allen is his ability to take wildly unique premises and story structures and somehow make them all feel intrinsically his. When you are watching a Woody Allen movie, you know it, no mistake. That wasn't the case at all with Small Time Crooks. There have been times in his career where I've felt like he didn't even know what he was doing but he didn't want to stop working so he just shoveled something out (Whatever Works) but so far I think this is the worst example of that. For one, it doesn't feel like a Woody Allen film, but worse is the fact that it doesn't even feel like it's the same film for the whole thing.It jumps all over from one recycled plot line to the next, all mashed up with a bunch of characters that I couldn't have wanted to spend less time with if I tried. These ignorant, selfish, moronic people had none of the charm or enjoyability of most Woody characters, the ones that somehow feel fresh and entertaining and true but also like I've known them my whole life. These were just miserable dimwits acted out by some of the laziest performances I've seen in his films. It looked like he was sleepwalking through the whole thing and honestly I wish I had been too. Maybe then I could just forget this piece of garbage.

I have always thought of Woody Allen as someone with his own particular take on things so it's strange - for me - to find him straying into Donald E. Westlake territory, albeit the comedy crooks side of Westlake as exemplified by Dortmunder, Kelp, etc, rather than his more serious side. Having said that Woody proves adept at homage though he soon more or less abandons his associates to concentrate on a satire of nouveau riche which has been done a million times before and often better. Nevertheless it's a rare Woody Allen film that doesn't offer some rewards - often in the shape of one-liners, sometimes (Manhattan) in the use of 'standards' on the soundtrack. This is, on balance, minor Allen but still has its moments.