To be fair to Lorne, the mainstream critics were similarly divided on the quality of the film. Myself, though I basically agree with Betsy about the merits of YWMATDS, I don't say it's Woody's best or even one of his top five. But IMO it's definitely one of his only excellent films of the last ten or so years.

It's sort of like Husbands and Wives or Crimes and Misdemeanors. That is, it fits squarely into the "dramedy" genre--as opposed to the "comedy" (Bananas, Sleeper, Annie Hall, Take the Money and Run), "comedy-drama" (Manhattan, Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Hannah and Her Sisters), or (yuck) "drama" (Another Woman, Cassandra's Dream, September, Interiors) genres that Woody has made.

And it's a very fine example of the dramedy genre. The acting is wonderful right down the line. In particular by Josh Brolin, who has been establishing himself as one of our best character actors, but outdoes himself here with an utterly egoless portrayal of a total loser idiot, and yet on some level makes us care about him.

Lucy Punch, as the hooker wife of Anthony Hopkins, is brilliant. Naomi Watts takes a potentially thankless role and turns it into an acting lesson. Gemma Jones as her mother is bewitchingly ditzy. The movie is funny and sad and legitimately "ironic." And for once I don't care that the story goes nowhere. We really don't want there to be a typical "ending." Because scene by scene and moment to moment there is always something to enjoy and often something to be enlightened by. The film is misogynistic but in a frequently very funny way.

In short, one of Woody's top ten if not his top five. Oh, hell, here's my list:

1) Manhattan
2) Annie Hall
3) Zelig
4) Husbands and Wives
5) Everyone Says I Love You
6) Broadway Danny Rose
7) Vicky Cristina Barcelona
You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger
9) Manhattan Murder Mystery
10) What's Up Tiger Lily?

(Side note: Why does 8 (the figure eight) come out as an emoticon?)

The dregs:

Hollywood Ending, Deconstructing Harry, Whatever Works, The Curse of the Jade Scorpion.

Overrated:

Sweet and Lowdown, Crimes and Misdemeanors, The Purple Rose of Cairo.

I'm amazed by a top 10 Woody Allen list that doesn't include Hannah and Her Sisters, Radio Days or Love and Death.

The acting is wonderful right down the line. In particular by Josh Brolin, who has been establishing himself as one of our best character actors, but outdoes himself here with an utterly egoless portrayal of a total loser idiot, and yet on some level makes us care about him.

There was one slight bright spot to make up for missing my Daily News (with my letter-to-the-editor) Friday: I got to read the Post's Michael Riedel theater column, with its description of the "Spider-Man" problems as it struggles through rather dangerous rehearsals, and I read Kyle Smith's movie reviews. He hated, hated, hated "Fair Game" (Valerie Plame and her husband were liars and Sean Penn's hairdo is "a fuming gusher") and "Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer" (a "hero-worship documentary")--somehow his political bias always manages to slip through. But his review of "Due Date" is probably funnier than the movie. He hated it even more than he hated Plame and Spitzer, no doubt for better reasons. He loathes Zach Galifianakis ("this fur pudding, this brown sheep, this soggy lump of shag carpeting") and Downey "hasn't been so conspicuously wasted since the late 1990s." I'd never take Smith's word on the merits of a movie, but he could be right about that one.

Is it acceptable to review a film based on its trailer?

Is it acceptable to review a film based on its trailer? I just saw the one for Gulliver's Travels; I guess it was only a matter of time, but Jack Black has really worked his way deep into Razzie territory.

It is reminiscent of Hook in totally misinterpreting the tone of a piece classic literature, which is interesting, given the similarities between Jack Black and the equally lost Robin Williams.