September (1987)

Sick Product of a Sick System

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

Even the most wooden and lifeless Woody Allen film is full of brilliant writing leaving me little to complain about. September by far the most under-whelming of Allen's films I've seen during this retrospective project yet I can easily pull a dozen quote-worthy lines from the film. The 1987 feature of Woody Allen seemed came off uninspired and under- directed. Still, though, Allen addresses a myriad of emotion lying deep below the surface of the individuals involved. Like many Woody Allen films, September involves relationships with partner switching and a healthy dose of heartbreak. September doesn't seem sure what it wants to be about, or if it is sure, its execution is off. What it is sure of is how to subtly convey guarded emotions in a truly beautiful way. That scene closing out the film with the pan of the home and all the memories it contained was simply beautiful.

Review: I really found it hard to get into this movie. I found it pretty boring and the concept wasn't that great. Like many other Woody Allen movies, this film is based around troubled relationships and couples falling in and out of love with each other. The 2 best friends who fall in love with the writer who has writers block and the mother and daughter who find it hard to get along, we're uninteresting after a while and they seemed to become a bit annoying because of there constant moaning. I'm also not the biggest fan of Mia Farrow who I find to be quite talentless and miserable in all of her roles, and I got fed up with her constant whining. Anyway, my expectations for this movie wasn't that high so I wasn't surprised with the outcome. I was hoping for something a bit different from Woody Allen, but he just seems to be adamant about telling the same type of stories in most of his movies, Disappointing!Round-Up: OK, I have watched quite a few of Woody Allen movies and I'm slowly finding his films to be about the same thing. I still have quite a few more to watch and I have found a few gems so far but that is mostly from his earlier work or the movies that he doesn't star in. I prefer the movies with Diane Keaton to his work with Mia Farrow and his latter work with some big named stars are pretty impressive, although he does tend to stick to the same concept. I honestly don't think that he will be getting taken seriously until he has decided to stop making films, but I have to admit, the movies that he has made recently have been making quite a lot of money which is why I decided to begin this journey. Budget: N/A Domestic Gross: $487,000 (Terrible!)I recommend his movie to people who are into there Woody Allen movies about a group of friends who are in troubled relationships and question there love for each other. 3/10

Woody Allen's dramas aren't the cup of tea of most audiences but the ones who have the patience and understanding of what this genius is trying to do are certainly rewarded. Flowing like a play, "September" takes place in a summer house in Vermont where three couples are vacationing in a relative tranquility that is about to be disturbed a little when some of them fully realizes they married the wrong partner and they want to live the right one.So, we have Lane and Peter (Mia Farrow and Sam Waterston), Stephanie and Howard (Dianne Wiest and Denholm Elliott) and the veterans Diane and Lloyd (Elaine Stritch and Jack Warden) and here's how things turn between part of them: Howard loves Lane and she seems connected with him but she can't leave her husband, who is deeply in love by Stephanie, who is trying to resist his attempts for her. While these four are clinging to their own feelings, remembering the past and all, the older couple (Lane's mother and her step dad) seems to be having a good time and making some plans for the future that might upset the eternally depressed Lane.With this crossed couples and their broken hearts, Allen touches us by saying that we shouldn't be attached to anything. We shouldn't be so attached to other people (because they disappoint you no matter the relations you had with them); we shouldn't be attached to things (as later is shown when Lane's mother wants to sell Lane's house and we have this huge argument about the good connection, the memories they had with the place); and most of all we shouldn't be so attached to our memories (perhaps the most dangerous of the ties). But, we're human beings and this sense of being connected with something or somebody is what makes us different from other creatures, so how do we end with? How do we make things in the way of not suffering? What does this character will make with their lives? Us and them are going to still be living in the same old contradiction of all, doing the things we don't want to, maybe one day, get the things we really want. And it all happened in that crazy month of August (if you pay attention the story takes place in August, not September). How's things going to be in September, the future? Who can tell?It's a minor work by Woody, who seemed to be looking for perfection with such fine material that he filmed one version with different actors (Sam Shepard, Charles Durning and Maureen O'Sullivan replaced by Waterston, Elliott and Stritch) to later make this final version cause he saw things weren't working the way he wanted with that cast. I don't know why such demands (it cost a lot in his budget and the movie failed at box-office, and now it's one of his more obscure works, his least known); the script is well written, Allen at its best with dialogs and inspired dramatic moments (exchanges between Stritch and Farrow are amazing, the whole cast is brilliant). If you found it must be watched because of its great cast and the compelling plot Allen creates with these characters. I dare to say "September" is one of his finest works. 10/10

"September" is a 1987 film from Woody Allen, which he intended as a "filmed play." In that, it succeeds; in fact, one might assume that it was a play. It certainly could be performed on stage.The story concerns an unsuccessful photographer from New York, Lane (Mia Farrow) who is spending the summer in the family summer home trying to heal from a breakdown. There, visiting for the weekend at the summer's end are Lane's mother Diane (Elaine Strich), her husband Lloyd (Jack Warden), Lane's best friend Stephanie (Dianne Wiest), a man who lives in the guest cottage, Peter (Sam Waterston), who has spent the summer trying to write a book; and a friend of Lane's, Howard (Denholm Elliot). During the weekend, feelings come to the surface and secrets are revealed. Peter is in love with Stephanie, who is married; Lane is in love with Peter; Howard is in Love with Lane; and Lane and Diane have unresolved issues, which have caused Lane a great deal of anger and pain.This is a derivative story that draws on elements of "Autumn Sonata," though it is nowhere near as searing, and any number of ensemble pieces. The story of Lane and her mother is based on the Lana Turner-Johnny Stompanato scandal.The acting is terrific. Elaine Stritch is magnificent as a self-centered former (probably society) beauty whose selfishness has hurt her daughter; Sam Waterson's Peter exhibits a quiet disappointment in himself, and his desperate love for Stephanie is palpable; Dianne Wiest is brilliant as Stephanie, who is unhappily married, and her reluctance to betray Lane and move forward with her life is very poignant. Farrow is childlike and fragile with underlying rage erupting in small ways, and then finally exploding. Under Allen's direction, Farrow proved to be a wonderful actress. Elliot as the devastated Howard and Warden as Lane's stepfather, who adores his wife and stays in the background, give solid performances in smaller roles.This is a short film, something like an hour and 22 minutes, yet there are some repetitive scenes and dialogue. Nevertheless, it's all worth it not only for the acting but the confrontation toward the end between Farrow and Stritch. It's not Bergman and Ullman, but it's still powerful.Recommended.