By Chlotrudis Independent Film Society
Rating: 3.25
Director: Woody Allen
Starring: Alec Baldwin | Andrew Dice Clay | Bobby Cannavale | Cate Blanchett | Peter Sarsgaard | Sally Hawkins | Tammy Blanchard
Country: united_states
Year: 2013
Running time: 98
IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334873/combined
Thom says: “I feel so lucky to be still living during Woody Allen’s marvelous renaissance and this latest effort is truly one of his best that totally transforms his usually recognizable dialogue into an entirely new aura of intelligence. Most of the characters he features in this gorgeous gem are fully drawn and easy to place except for the central character of Jasmine (brilliantly portrayed by Cate Blanchett as one of the star turns of the decade) who is by turns mysterious, demented, deluded, fascinating, and unforgettable. This is not a nice woman but Blanchett transforms the character into a whirlwind of emotion. Because of Allen’s recent, delightful comedies of paeans to Paris & Rome in MIDNIGHT IN PARIS & TO ROME WITH LOVE and learning that this film was shooting in San Francisco I was rather hoping that BLUE JASMINE would do the same for the city I live in but that’s simply not the case here. A third of the production is in New York & the two-thirds filmed here, while certainly favorably drawn towards the magic of this small city, only shows it as a backdrop to the sensational script, & not as a separate character.
“Jasmine, self-proclaimed destitute socialite arrives in San Francisco to stay with her lower-middle-class sister Ginger, who’s having an affair with a likable ‘redneck’ type. Ginger (played by the out-of-sight Sally Hawkins, who’s unfortunately being a bit forgotten with all the hoopla over Blanchett) divorced her husband after they lost all their sizable lottery winnings after investing in a nefarious scheme with Jasmine’s sleaze ball high-roll husband Hal (another nice turn from Alec Baldwin). So the story shifts back & forth from Manhattan to San Francisco, showing us Jasmine’s glamorous life back in New York before her precipitous fall.
“Jasmine has no easy time of it out in San Francisco where she’s horrified at Ginger’s digs, her awkward children, and (gasp) having to find employment as a doctor’s receptionist. And we need to find out what happened to Jasmine back East. While there are enough comic touches in this shrewd script (Allen’s writing his best screenplays ever) to not let the heavy drama slip into tragedy what finally transpires before us is a literate, magical wonder of superb cinema, and a performance of such elegant and profound scope that I stood in awe of the relevance of this unqualified masterpiece.
“ I do have a question for anyone that chooses to answer as it occurs again in this film where someone in a spate of anger smashes an item in a room. I see this in so many films, with often ever more dire results, like an entire room being smashed up. I, myself have never thrown an object in anger and it’s never even crossed my mind. Am I abnormal? Why is it used so often in films? It accomplished nothing and they never show who has to clean it up. 5 cats”
Marilyn says: “Not sure I agree totally with your opinion although I did think the acting was wonderful all around with Blanchett leading the pact. This is a serious piece for Woody, less humor, more gravitas and the actors carry the script. I felt it lacked a decent third act—a resolution of the plot line that is always difficult even for the great writers. 4 cats”
Chris says: “As protagonists in Woody Allen films go, Jasmine (Cate Blanchett) has to be one of the least likable. A New York socialite stripped of her wealth after the arrest of her Bernie Madoff-esque husband (Alec Baldwin), she scurries off to San Francisco to live with her working-class sister, Ginger (Sally Hawkins). Upon arriving at her new digs, she sashays around in a perpetual, deeply affected stupor, criticizing everything about Ginger’s life, from her modest apartment (shabby but still chic enough for an Allen film) to her greaseball boyfriend Chili (Bobby Cannavale)—yes, Chili. Jasmine serves as a prototypical fish out of water (and, as many have noted, a faint gloss on Blanche DuBois from A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE)–she’s a ripe, deserving candidate for a comeuppance.
“Fortunately, BLUE JASMINE isn’t always that simplistic. Although Allen continually lets slip how out of touch he is with the real world (Jasmine taking a computer course? In 2013?), his examination of class and identity is one of his more compelling recent themes. Through Jasmine, he seems to ask if someone like her is truly capable of reinvention or prone to the same old destructive patterns due to her own hubris. Blanchett’s performance is a breathless tour de force because, with great care, she presents Jasmine as a woman who is constantly straddling these two poles, trying to adjust to her new surroundings and move on with her life but incapable of ignoring how her life has changed and what she’s lost. As Allen gradually reveals more about her past, our perception of her also changes significantly. At the end I didn’t know whether to pity Jasmine or feel vindicated by her many losses. At its best, BLUE JASMINE could almost be a pitch-black comedy if it wasn’t so ultimately sad. 3.5 cats”
Beth Ca says: “I realized leaving this film that I never before hated a Woody Allen film. But, there’s a first time for everything. I can’t believe how bad this film is. Woody Allen was just asleep at the switch. I would not have liked this movie no matter who made it, yet I must judge it more harshly given the great gifts of Allen as a filmmaker. He is far better than this. The acting was fine, and the film benefits from a good cinematography/design budget, but the script is abysmal and the characters were never well developed. The plot is thin and as transparent as cellophane. I don’t understand why so many people are reviewing this film favorably. And, seriously, what doctor is going to prescribe that many Xanax to a woman in her state? 1/2 cat”