This movie was interesting. I love Woody, and the cinematography was quite, quite excellent, yet the film failed to get me involved. The script, although pretty original, ultimately failed because of its lack of structure. I would hasten to say (and I haven't checked yet) that whoever wrote this was a first timer.
The story of the miracle hand was suitable idea, yet I felt more could have been done with it. In addition, the direction (from a director I admire) was sloppy. Much of the acting (Fran Drescher???) seemed less then inspired, although Woody Allen was (and always is) very good comedically. Stone was ok in her brief appearance, and David Schwimmer, although HORRIBLY MISCAST as a priest, (could he be ANY more Jewish?) worked.
I think my major problem with the movie was a seeming lack of professionalism, which isn't to say it was bad by any strech of the imagination. Watching a movie like this, you sort of have to suspend your disbelief. Any attempt to take it seriously would ruin the movie (apparently much of the cast and crew didn't take the project seriously)
ANYWAY...tough call on this, but 6/10 is my vote~
The story of the miracle hand was suitable idea, yet I felt more could have been done with it. In addition, the direction (from a director I admire) was sloppy. Much of the acting (Fran Drescher???) seemed less then inspired, although Woody Allen was (and always is) very good comedically. Stone was ok in her brief appearance, and David Schwimmer, although HORRIBLY MISCAST as a priest, (could he be ANY more Jewish?) worked.
I think my major problem with the movie was a seeming lack of professionalism, which isn't to say it was bad by any strech of the imagination. Watching a movie like this, you sort of have to suspend your disbelief. Any attempt to take it seriously would ruin the movie (apparently much of the cast and crew didn't take the project seriously)
ANYWAY...tough call on this, but 6/10 is my vote~