alexisphelps Hadows and Fog isn't Woody Allen's most celebrated work, in fact it barely gets a mention but I liked the film. Its setting is a circus in some town in Eastern Europe and the film is brimming with marquee names like John Malkovich, John Cusack and Jodie Foster to even Madonna. The jokes and gags are funny though not in a direct way and there is a bare plot so to speak. The decision to shoot in black and white is sound as the cinematography is a highlight even detractors of this film speak well of.

SnoopyStyle Bookkeeper Kleinman (Woody Allen) is awakened by a vigilante mob with a plan to catch a serial strangler who always strikes during foggy nights. He goes to the morgue to ask the doctor (Donald Pleasence) about the plan. After he leaves, the doctor is killed by the strangler and he fears a glass will point to him.In a traveling circus, sword swallower Irmy (Mia Farrow) discusses leaving with her clown boyfriend Paul (John Malkovich). She catches him cheating on her with tightrope artist Marie (Madonna). Irmy runs away and is taken in by prostitutes (Lily Tomlin, Jodie Foster, Kathy Bates). Jack (John Cusack) pay her $700, an outrageous sum, to sleep with her. The police raids the whorehouse and they are brought to the station where Kleinman steals the glass.This is a meandering tale. Its black-and-white style points to the old German silent movies. It's stock full of big actors in small roles. It has bits of funny moments, mostly Woody with Mia. Woody is playing around with the style. There is no murder mystery since the killer's face is shown. It doesn't make for a compelling story but it's an interesting exercise nevertheless.

Edward Reid Life is illusion. Shadows and Fog is a delightfully bizarre and absurd tale, with vivid theatrical images, the visual atmosphere perfectly complemented by the background music mostly by Kurt Weill. For once Allen's schmuck is merely the perfect contrast to the rest. Allen's presentation and philosophy work far better in this indirect and enigmatic setting than in the more direct New York settings he uses too often. This film is why I keep watching Allen's movies despite the many which are generously described as missteps -- this one is right up there with The Purple Rose of Cairo, Alice, Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Sweet and Lowdown, Hannah and her Sisters, and Manhattan.

runamokprods Another mid-career Allen film unfairly dismissed both by critics and (I must admit) myself at the time of it's release. Sometimes with great filmmakers, we get spoiled and anything flawed or less than pure genius gets maligned for being weaker than that filmmaker's very best work instead of being appreciated for being miles ahead of most of the films that get made.I was shocked at how much better I liked this on a recent re-viewing almost 20 years after seeing it in the theater. Yes, the super-star cameos still seem a bit distracting and self-serving, but nowhere near as much as in 1992. Yes, some plot elements work better than others, the ending is kind of clunky, etc. But this is still a great-looking, visually dense film, that manages to tread (most of the time) a very difficult tightrope of being funny and playful, while still exploring disturbing themes of paranoia, guilt, crowd mentality, religion, etc. Certainly not a great film, but a brave one more worthy of being enjoyed for it's strengths than attacked for its admitted shortcomings.