You have long wanted to spend a special weekend in New York, you know, it will be just fantastic, then we can ride on a carriage, yes, if only it would not be the work of Woody Allen. This is always something beautiful, the more terrible it is to wait for his new films every time, suddenly the old man will finally move, the horses will move or, God forbid, make a remake, but no, so far so good, and we have yet another classic Woody.
Let's take a look at what Rainy Day in New York is. The film is filled with talk worse than Tarantino, even for Woody Allen, who never exchanges a lot of sense in paint. The characters chat, discussing weather, leisure and art, annoyed by ugly laughter, drunk with good wine and company, playing the piano.
No special effects, no complicated drama, no psychos. One, quite a sweet story about New York and nothing more. And it’s not that they endlessly tire of ideology, no, they skillfully control the plot and are filled with light humor, from which the whole motley and numerous audience laughs. In general, despite the chatter, the film is perceived easier and brighter than even the final battle with Thanos, and moreover, the conversation is not at all a reason, only a consequence of what can cause irritation. The film is too elite. Many of us, even decently well-off and orderly successful, do not really like floppiness and bohemian. What can we do? Soviet hardening is strong even in Russian children.
The character of “Rainy Day in New York” is a rich son, a student at an elite college, smoking cigarettes through the mouthpiece and spending free time watching an art house. Wandering around museums, bars and singing, just like Bertie Wooster, but quite modern. His name is even indicative of Gatsby, but, again, this Gatsby is quite modern. His environment is the Dons troy Empire style and the New York show-off, mixed with high-born, backed up by erudition and youthful romanticism, and meeting the love of such a character in a film about a simple girl, at first you are surprised ... Nevertheless, Woody Allen very quickly humanizes his heroes raising the viewer and character to a common level and without dropping into the mud absolutely no one.
A mixture of luxury, erudition with never-emphasized meaninglessness and bad taste, the classic light cute and funny satire Allen and even the absence of stupid humor is presented in it as the absence of "toilet" jokes, but how else?
His films, which are infinitely simple and naive to simplicity, are always not only endlessly cute, but also filled with numerous, albeit microscopic, details intertwining, like a rope into the basis of a story that withstands tons of criticism, even deserved, because you can and sometimes even want to scold the plot . Of course, enchanting naivety rolls once again and inexplicable things in the film do not happen. But honestly, excellent, that is, a five-point five. And even with a minus, only a person who came to the film for naivety and for Woody Allen can deliver the film. Actually, a minus for the fact that a person who just came to an arbitrary romantic drama avoids doubts about what he had to, well, it’s a shame to shoot like that. Will not succeed !!!
What the film is about, I think, is clear: this is love, youth, naivety and the ending, which we knew about from the very beginning, but did not expect to get to it this way. The film is embodied as simple and ingenious as it was invented. The cast is not going off scale, but somehow it turns out that the actors are completely loved. Well, take at least Wolverine’s brother, and even better, the heavenly captain, who brilliantly played a character who undoubtedly recognizes the character that Woody Allen was supposed to play. Without exaggeration, we can say that the person in whose person Dumbledore became gay, played the director of this film ...
There are no smaller stars here. There are lesser-known stars who have managed to win back more than magnificent. The characters came to life and became not just people, but recognizable characters of the same Woody Allen.
The work of localizers is also commendable. The local voice acting, although it gives out a translation, but the game in the voice is felt no less confident than in the actors. However, I still want to see the original, but I would like to see it the second time.
The camera works normally, but there is something to notice, the operator tries to tear the characters off the background, making unexpected, but in general relevant portraits. And in the end, a costume, makeup and selection of locations.
Visually, the film brings us back to some fantastic times, combining the seventies of two past centuries and only the iPhone in the hands of golden youth give out the seventeenth of this.
I think it’s noticeable that I liked the film, I was delighted and not ready to wish a better rainy day in New York ...