Download Free Cassandra's Dream

An intriguing thing about Woody Allen's CASSANDRA'S DREAM is the
presence of actor Phil Davis. The movie deals with a plot to kill
Martin Burns, the character played by Davis. The character isn't
particularly interesting and the reasons for wanting him dead remain
mostly unclear, but, as Burns -- if you don't look too closely and from
a distance -- Davis bears a vague resemblance to Woody: same thinning
gray hair, prominent eyeglasses, gaunt face, skinny physique and taste
in casual sport coats. The character gets precious little screen time
and Davis gets very little opportunity to give Burns anything
suggesting a personality, so the similarities are purely superficial --
but then, the resemblance CASSANDRA'S DREAM has to a Woody Allen movie
is also vague and superficial.

It is, admittedly, unfair to criticize a filmmaker for not making a
movie that fits neatly into a previously constructed mold, to try to do
something different. And Woody has two established styles -- absurdist
comedy and dark, oh-so serious melodrama. In his prolific career he has
managed to run the gamut between the extremes, occasionally mixing
tones, yet still creating films that have a distinctly "Woody Allen"
quality. But, as was the case with the equally banal (and vastly
overrated) MATCH POINT, the problem with CASSANDRA'S DREAM is that it
is not only devoid of Woody's style, but of any style. As always, the
film is technically proficient and slickly done, but there is a
coldness, a lack of purpose behind CASSANDRA. Like many of his films,
it is essentially a dramatized short story, but it lacks either his
rambling, cynical sense of humor or a pointed moral that makes its
serious tone have a bite. Even his tired trademark rant about the
futility of life due to the absence of a benevolent god is given only
slight attention.

The story is relatively simple: In London, two close, working-class
brothers find themselves strapped for cash and seek to borrow money
from their wealthy uncle. Uncle Howard is more than willing to oblige,
but there is a catch; the boys have to earn the money by killing one of
Uncle's business associates, the aforementioned Mr. Burns. From there,
the story could go in two directions: a comedy of errors as the two
hapless amateurs try to commit the crime or a suspenseful drama as the
two get drawn deeper and deeper into a dark world that neither wants
nor is prepared for. Allen takes the story in the latter direction,
though unfortunately, as he has shown previously, he has no skill for
creating suspense or directing scenes of violence.

CASSANDRA'S DREAM isn't a bad movie, but rather an inadequate one -- or
more accurately, an incomplete one. The performances are just fine,
with Ewan McGregor and Colin Farrell as the brothers, Ian and Terry,
doing their best to flesh out thinly drawn characters. Indeed, the
actors could easily carry the material were it not for the weakness of
Allen's poorly contrived narrative. Even accepting as a given that Ian
and Terry are amateurs, their plan to kill Burns is embarrassingly
simple-minded and illogical: If Uncle Howard is the one most likely to
want Burns dead, wouldn't his poor nephews' sudden display of
unaccountable wealth seem suspiciously convenient? The story needs to
be fleshed out with believable complications and should build to an
ironic twist that delivers a bang and not a mere whimper.

The screenplay that Allen offers is not without its merits. The two men
played by McGregor and Farrell, are basically decent blokes, but their
need for money and the way Uncle Howard (Tom Wilkinson) manipulates
them to go bad in the name of family loyalty pushes them to rationalize
their behavior. Further, Ian is ambitious and Terry is a gambler, and
Allen subtly defines Uncle Howard as an ambitious gambler in his own
right. But, the story also shows that Ian and Terry have parallels to
Burns as well, similarities the script would have done better to
explore with much greater interest. As is, the battle between good and
evil as Allen lays it out is exceedingly lame; the "we-can't-do-this /
we-have-to-do-this" dialogue is not backed up -- or hyped up -- with
any dramatic tension. When the boys actually meet Burns and they (and
we) find him to be a nice, friendly man who seems undeserving of his
fate, the dramatic tension should be kicked up a notch. We are barely
allowed to care for Terry and Ian to the point where we don't want them
to commit the crime, but we should certainly care as well whether their
innocent victim dies. As in MATCH POINT and CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS
(and to some degree even MANHATTAN MURDER MYSTERY), Allen can't seem to
muster up much interest, let alone sympathy, for the victims of the
crimes he concocts. A recurring theme in so many of his films is
characters who rant and rave about how unjust and cruel our supposedly
godless world is, yet when Woody creates little worlds for his movies,
the god he plays isn't any more compassionate or caring. What's missing
-- and I know it is a tired complaint -- is Woody's sharp wit that not
only blesses his best characters with the quirks and charm that make
them humorous, but humane as well. When Woody defines his characters
through wit, they come alive; when he defines them by their bitterness
and discontent, they remain stagnant and uninteresting, and worse,
largely one-dimensional. All of Woody's laborious moralizing dialogue
never has as much power as one of his well constructed pieces of casual
sarcasm..

In London, the loser brothers from a working-class family, Ian and Terry, buy a second-hand sailboat name Cassandra's Dream for their leisure....

Great underated movie .

I just saw Woody Allen's latest movie at the Toronto Film Festival. Any
who watch this expecting a flat-out comedy are likely to be
disappointed. The movie is far more dramatic than comedic. Essentially,
the movie is about two brothers who decide to commit a murder, one to
get himself out of debt, the other to help his brother and also for his
own monetary profit. Woody involves us in their thoughts in deciding to
do it, during the murder and afterwards. I found it psychologically
believable and found myself very involved with the story. If anything
is weak it's the ending. It's simply too abrupt and unemotional. Woody
has made us care about these two brothers and then ends it suddenly
with no sense of grief (except for a brief shot of one of the brother's
fianc.