I first sat down and watched SEPTEMBER when I was about two thirds of the way through Woody Allen's prodigious body of work. Renown for his penchant for re-shoots and his dissatisfaction with the finished product of his own films (Allen still maintains Manhattan should never have seen the light of day?!) Allen actually made SEPTEMBER twice.

Unhappy with the pacing of his original cut Allen recalled the cast and crew only to find several key actors tied to other projects. One man's pretension is another's genius. In any case, the end result is one of the most tightly structured and superbly performed chamber pieces this viewer has seen in a long time.

Very much a theatrical play put on…

It came out during my college years, when the idea of "dramatic Woody" didn't interest me, so this was my first viewing. And, I assure you, it will be my last. Didn't think it would be possible to outdo Interiors for irritating-as-hell, utterly false chamber drama, but here he goes again with miserable people talking to one another almost entirely in therapy sessions. He amps up the volume so the third-act exchange of accusations and confessions seems like a different color, but it's merely off-white instead of white. And while Stritch does fine work as the "why wallow in angst" dame (a la Stapleton's Interiors role), everyone else exists entirely as a writerly device, with Allen so fixated on their…

This is a great Woody Allen film if you ask me.

I never see or hear this film mentioned when the discussion of Allen's body of work comes up-it's his lowest grossing film and I suppose it never found an audience and that's a shame.

It's his follow up to Hannah and Her Sisters and it's that film's complete opposite although dealing with the same issues. In Hannah the characters go through these pivotal moments and come out gaining a new outlook on life or seeing the greatness in what was already there-in this film the characters come out gaining nothing-it's almost as if they are left in worse shape than they started in.

Allen's direction-his camerawork is so quiet-subtle-it…

Took me a while to start getting around to the 3 '80s Allen films I'd never seen due to their poor critical consensus, but my fondness for A Midsummer Night's Sex Comedy should have indicated they might rise above their reputations. And that's certainly true here. The relationships between the characters feel interchangeable with any number of his other films, but he strikes a gloomy, austere tone early on that functions like a black hole - nothingness, but nothingness that pulls you in. In its best moments the characters stare straight ahead at their fears of loneliness, aging, and the the emptiness of the universe, and they don't blink simply because they're too overwhelmed. Most of these moments come in…

This is a great Woody Allen film if you ask me.

I never see or hear this film mentioned when the discussion of Allen's body of work comes up-it's his lowest grossing film and I suppose it never found an audience and that's a shame.

It's his follow up to Hannah and Her Sisters and it's that film's complete opposite although dealing with the same issues. In Hannah the characters go through these pivotal moments and come out gaining a new outlook on life or seeing the greatness in what was already there-in this film the characters come out gaining nothing-it's almost as if they are left in worse shape than they started in.

Allen's direction-his camerawork is so quiet-subtle-it…

Though I think the mystery surrounding Allen's decision to reshoot and rewrite the whole film before release is more interesting than the film itself (word is he was even ready for a third pass at the thing), you can't deny his skill at envisioned psychoanalysis as it trickles out of people who are probably incapable of love. Okay, so that sounds like a downer. Let me back up. When September pulls off filmed theater it works pretty well. When it lapses into Bergmanesque confessionals, it works pretty well. None of it really sizzles, though. The things at stake just don't seem as immediate as they should. Part of the problem lies in the actors: Farrow plays mousy and Elaine Stritch…

I first sat down and watched SEPTEMBER when I was about two thirds of the way through Woody Allen's prodigious body of work. Renown for his penchant for re-shoots and his dissatisfaction with the finished product of his own films (Allen still maintains Manhattan should never have seen the light of day?!) Allen actually made SEPTEMBER twice.

Unhappy with the pacing of his original cut Allen recalled the cast and crew only to find several key actors tied to other projects. One man's pretension is another's genius. In any case, the end result is one of the most tightly structured and superbly performed chamber pieces this viewer has seen in a long time.

Very much a theatrical play put on…

It came out during my college years, when the idea of "dramatic Woody" didn't interest me, so this was my first viewing. And, I assure you, it will be my last. Didn't think it would be possible to outdo Interiors for irritating-as-hell, utterly false chamber drama, but here he goes again with miserable people talking to one another almost entirely in therapy sessions. He amps up the volume so the third-act exchange of accusations and confessions seems like a different color, but it's merely off-white instead of white. And while Stritch does fine work as the "why wallow in angst" dame (a la Stapleton's Interiors role), everyone else exists entirely as a writerly device, with Allen so fixated on their…