REVIEW: TO ROME WITH LOVE

Last year, Woody Allen made what some people would call a "comeback."  Is it really a comeback though, when you're Woody Allen?  Woody Allen's been making virtually a movie a year, and a lot of times he makes good movies, but not to the point of success that "Midnight in Paris" did.  I loved "Paris," but I also loved what some consider one of his misses, the Larry David comedy "Whatever Works." (But that could be because I love "Curb Your Enthusiasm.")  Overall I'm just a big Allen fan, although I've seen maybe 6 of his films at the most, he's become one of my favorite directors, due to his obvious style in cinema.

"To Rome with Love" is the third (and supposedly final) installment of his European trilogy (along with "Paris" and the exquisite "Vicky Cristina Barcelona").  Allen is like Picasso in that way, when he goes through a period of films.  The fact that he could just go on a vacation to these places and create movie magic out of them shows more talent than I'll probably see in the movies in the next few years.  I give him respect for that. However, unlike "Whatever Works," "To Rome with Love" did not work for me.

The film is an anthology piece, where multiple story lines are going on at the same time.  This is one of my first experiences in an anthology film, and it's clear why he chose this style: they're essentially short stories set in the gorgeous, architecture-set backdrop of Rome.  I suppose I was just expecting the stories to all come together in the end, like a "Seinfeld" episode, but alas, that wasn't the case.  It is four stories of tourists in the great, romantic city, and romance is certainly in the air.  Celebrity is a common theme in all four of the stories:  an Italian man (Robert Benigni) wakes up to find that he's becoming an instant celebrity for literally no reason whatsoever; a woman gets lost in the city from her husband and stumbles upon one of her favorite movie stars; a man (Jesse Eisenberg) meets a vivacious friend of his wife who's an aspiring actress; and a retired opera director wants to make a star out of his soon-to-be son-in-law's father who only sings beautifully in the shower. Simple, right?

As complicated as it sounds on paper, it is easy to follow onscreen, because, as previously noted, the stories don't intertwine like I was hoping they would.  Benigni, (who I last saw in theaters in the god-awful live action version of "Pinocchio" back in 2002) doesn't play it nearly as over-the-top as he could have, which is saying something, as a man who becomes an instant star, recognizable to everyone.  This segment had the fantasy element "Paris" had last year, but here it comes off as pretty monotonous, even though the audience is supposed to have the same feelings Benigni has.  People like Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton sprang to mind when one of the characters says that Benigni is "famous just for being famous."  It's Allen's commentary on the world's fascination with celebrities; famous for a time, then they move on to the next schmuck...but what is it doing in a movie about Rome?

As much as I like Jesse Eisenberg, I can only assume two things now: 1. He's being typecast as the nervous, stuttering leading man or 2. His acting range is limited to that type and playing Mark Zuckerberg.  I hope he proves me wrong in his next project.  His segment, involving him meeting his wife's exciting friend, was the most annoying, especially the presence of Ellen Page.  I get the idea Page isn't a traditional bombshell, and she does grow on you.  It's just her character, who, noted by Alec Baldwin, who follows Jesse and Ellen around a lot, comes off as incredibly talky and a phony.  She bothered me too much.  Also, without spoiling anything, Baldwin's presence in the film isn't explained until the very end of the movie.  It was a nice twist, but the combination of him and Page just got old fast after a while.

Adultery is another theme in "Rome."  Eisenberg, although warned by his wife of Page's charms, becomes infatuated by her.  This theme carries on in the next segment where a woman, who stumbles into a movie star, is debating adultery, because, well, Y.O.L.O. to put in stupid teenage terms.  Little does she know her husband is facing the same problems with a hooker played by Penelope Cruz.  Cruz probably gets the title of best performance in this film, if only because her character is so bold, and free-spirited.  The last segment, featuring Allen as the opera director, is a one-joke premise that I could see from the start.  To his credit, Allen did give himself the most interesting role, and gets the most laughs out of the ensemble, despite being 30 years younger than the rest of them.

Even one of Allen's lamest films is still better than most director's worst films, and that's something to remember.  Allen's career has featured a lot of hit and miss, and "Rome," an overstuffed pizza pie with too little character development, sadly had to land on the miss section.  Here's hoping his next feature will be back to where we love Allen best: New York.

Rating: 2/4 stars

P.S. 90% of the character's clothes consists of baggy pants and button-up shirts. That also bothered me for some reason.