I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Truly Dreadful Film

This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

As we near the end of 2017, one of the most prolific directors working today is Woody Allen. He directed a film every year since the early 1970's and at a ripe 80 years young, he is still going strong today. My review is for his second directorial effort, Bananas. No, this film is not about bananas although if you know Latin American history, the movie has a country resembling one from the Banana Republic. Actually, bananas is a slang word for "crazy." Truth be told, that is an apt description for this movie. The movie is totally bonkers, but in a good way. You learn right away that Woody Allen has a flair for dialogue. Not clichéd dialogue, but words that are different and that mean something. He is also a natural comedian, which helps him when it comes to his screenplays, directing, and acting.Coming off the Vietnam War and the troubles regarding the Banana Republic in Latin America, this kind of film was ripe for the taking and Allen seized his opportunity to make a satirical, over-the-top movie. The movie lambasts topics ranging from politics to relationships and it's really easy to find the humor in it. I really love how Allen does not take the film seriously. If the film became too serious, or bogged down in political correctness this film would have been a major disaster. Many of the jokes or scenes work, but not all of them do. The scene where Allen was showering with another man in his suit was distracting and not that funny. But the funny scenes outdo the other scenes in a great way. My favorite scene is after Allen's character marries a girl, Howard Cosell of all people delivered commentary on the first sexual encounter between the newlyweds as if it was a boxing match. My God, I loved that scene very much. For those of you who don't know, Howard Cosell was a commentator on ABC's very popular program, Wide World of Sports. From the scenes I mentioned to the mere fact that Allen's character becomes a dictator of a random, foreign country, it's clear Allen is embracing the over-the-top style of the movie.Woody Allen's second directorial effort is about some awkward man named Fielding Mellish (played by Allen himself) who is a consumer product tester. After his girlfriend Nancy (Louise Lassier) dumps him, he decides to travel to the fictional South American country of San Marcos to take a break from his current life. But he gets caught up in a revolution (a very similar look to the Cuban Revolution), and somehow becomes a dictator for San Marcos after the rebels overthrow the government. But now the American government and the FBI turn a keen eye on Mellish.The film is practically devoid of any big name stars. I would say the quick cameo by Howard Cosell brings the most star power to the film, and he's not even an actor. I'm not knocking on anybody in the film, but they just don't have the star power as of yet. In the case of Allen, that will change. But here we have an early example of what kind of auteur the man is. He knows his way with words and he can be a very funny guy. Case in point where he decides to go to a sub shop and order thousands of orders for his rebel camp. Just seeing people bring the food to the camp in wheelbarrows was priceless. Louise Lassier was married to Allen at the time of filming, and she does a decent job as the girl who is awkward in relationships and is in love with political rallies more than her boyfriend. If anyone is good at spotting cameos, keep an eye out for Sylvester Stallone. He plays one of the thugs on the subway.I thought Bananas was a very entertaining, well-written satire by Woody Allen. He certainly has a style you have to grow accustomed to and it's still hard for me to do that. I used to refuse to watch any of his works because his style turned me off, but I'm slowly warming up to his movies. I was able to enjoy this movie very much, but some jokes didn't land well as others did. Regardless, this is an effective movie from early in Woody Allen's career and despite some small flaws, I can easily recommend it.My Grade: B+

You know, I thought the 'Execucizer' was a pretty good idea, a stationary, all purpose exercise machine for the busy executive who can't get away from his desk to work out. The picture played it for laughs but I thought it was pretty imaginative in concept. You wouldn't even have to miss a board meeting to get fit, what could be better?Well I can take Woody Allen up to a certain point, but when he gets too introspective it can become draining. When the scandals of his later life were revealed it took away any respect I might have had for the guy as a comic and an actor. Actually, the film was quite prophetic back in 1971, or was Woody even back then trying to tell the world he was a pervert waiting to come out. He gives himself away at the magazine stand when he tried to explain away his girlie mag - he was doing a study on perversion and child molesting. Someone should have taken him seriously.The film itself has it's funny moments, the best was the café order to feed the rebels of San Marcos. Every scene with Louise Lasser took me back to her mid-Seventies quirky hit, "Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman". That's another one I could only take so much of, but quite funny when it first started out.It's no secret that liberal film makers take their swipes at folks of religious conviction, that was on display here with the parallel parking crucifixion scene and Mellish (Allen) making the sign of the cross prior to dining with the rebel President of San Marcos. But he balanced things out a little when skewering New Age sensibilities with non-sensical talk to Nancy (Lasser) about her totality and 'other-ness'.Some cool cameos in the picture, using Howard Cosell to good effect as the play by play announcer for the San Marcos revolution and Roger Grimsby in a decidedly somber journalistic mode. You'll also catch Sly Stallone as an uncredited subway thug, a couple years before he joined up with The Lords of Flatbush.

Fielding Mellish (Woody Allen) is a pathetic worker drone. He tries to push out a couple of subway thugs (Sylvester Stallone) but it doesn't quite work out. Political activist Nancy (Louise Lasser) knocks on his door and he falls head over heels for her. He tries to impress her by going to the banana republic of San Marcos ruled by dictator General Emilio Vargas and then joining the revolutionaries.The humor is a bit random and a bit too broad. Also Louise Lasser is not compelling enough. She definitely doesn't add anything to the comedy. I just feel this comedy is way too disjointed. I get whiplashed from one comedy skit to another. One scene may be funny but the next one has me scratching my head. Even the camera style seems disconnected and too much of the comedy fails to hit. It's suggested that there are some improvisations but that is a particular skill that not all comedians or actors have. Woody seems capable but I wouldn't bet anybody else in the movie is quite as capable. Woody needs a good co-star to play off of him. This is a movie that has some great jokes but when the jokes don't work, they really bother me. And he really needs better comedy partners in the movie.

"Bananas" carries the same mix of tender goofiness and self-deprecating romanticism than Woody Allen's first-feature film, confirming what it had already established : the emergence of the most promising comical and comedic talent. I still prefer "Take the Money and Run" because the film was more groundbreaking as the first comedy to exploit the documentary-format, a sub-genre that would be labeled next as 'mockumentary'. However, rediscovering "Bananas" is like an insightful journey into the roots of Allen's talent.Take the title for instance; "Bananas" as a double reference to the slang word meaning 'crazy' and the banana-republics (a derogatory term defining South-American dictatorships) has the same political resonance than the Marx Brothers' "Duck Soup". "San Marcos" or "Freedonia" … like "Duck Soup", a fictional setting is the arena allowing to speak the most politically incorrect statements about human nature, and its thirst for power, in the names of such big words as 'freedom' and 'democracy'. But like in "Duck Soup", politics are the vehicles for gags, not the opposite. "Bananas" has the texture of a satire, but when you realize that no drop of blood is shed, even during executions, you know the comedy is to be seen in a lighthearted way.Take now the main protagonist, with the perfect name for a neurotic loser: Fielding Mellish. Mellish is a machine-tester for a General Equipment firm. The majority of movie lovers would recognize in his first entrance the clever wink to another comical milestone: Charlie Chaplin, during the famous eating-machine scene in "Modern Times" … and the mayhem caused by the Execusizer (a gym built into office desk) is even funnier because it goes unnoticed by the firm executives. Other bits of silent humor are used in "Bananas", a confrontation with two thugs in the subway (one is played by a young Sylvester Stallone), a training-montage in San Marcos' jungle. The legacy of Chaplin is so present I wondered if the grotesque sight of Allen with a false beard parodying Fidel Castro wasn't a reference to Chaplin as Hynkel … all things being relative, of course.However, Allen never imitates but rather uses his writing talent to plant the seeds of his comical inspiration, that would finally bloom with his first mature comedy : "Love and Death", the film that would reveal another major influence : Ingmar Bergman. Woody Allen would reveal himself as the unlikely center of a wide cinematic universe, reconciling even the most different genres and directing styles. "Annie Hall" would become the consummate -thus the most acclaimed- Woody Allen movie. And in "Bananas", you could tell there were some glimpses of "Annie Hall" through the intellectually engaging romance with Louise Lasser. The Allenian romance would be the director's signature. To close the Woody Allen's influences parenthesis, "Bananas" might borrow many elements from Allen's predecessors, but the film is original and unique in both style and writing.It borrows naturally a lot from "Take the Money and Run", through its clever mix of realistic directing and journalistic format style. The cameos of Howard Cosell commenting on a President's assassination and the aftermath of a honeymoon, with Allen and Lasser's delivery mimicking the way exhausted athletes talk after a match, are ones of the film's highlights. And it's quite an accomplishment to use non-professional actors parodying themselves to such hilarious extremes. This material isn't revolutionary, the parody has already exploited by Mel Brooks and Monty Python, but Woody Allen elevates them to much higher summits by juggling with other forms of humor, without never distracting from the core of the story, and even when it does, it's always redeemed by a hilarious punch-line.Many viewers would look at the film as a series of disjointed sketches, each one working alone but not necessarily making a good film altogether. I would understand the criticism if it wasn't for the pivotal element of the film, which is Fielding Mellish. As the central protagonist, he's both the actor and the victim of all the unfortunate incidents that fill the film with its zany goofiness. He's never too glorious to be a hero, but never passive enough to be a victim. He's just the way he is, and Allen doesn't need many efforts to make us laugh, he's so weird and incomparable that no matter which situation you put him into, it's a laugh-out-loud guarantee. And I can't go on without mentioning one of the funniest break-up scenes ever, when Lasser tries to find out what is missing in her relationship. They enumerate the different aspects of Mellish' personality that could have turned her off, and the list is so long you wonder why he's still trying to find the one reason.Still, the romance is never independent from politics, which are the subject of more mockeries than Mellish' character himself. Most reviewers would try to analyze the film on the basis that it was meant to be a satire… and I think this is the best way for disappointment. I love to take the word "Bananas" as the most standard gag of a man slipping on a banana peel, this is what the film is: a big gag. Belonging to Woody Allen's goofy period, the film is not to be taken seriously. Like in "Duck Soup", it's all about the gags. If one scene puzzles you, wait for the punch line and you're going to get its reason to be. The gags are unequally funny, but as a whole, we spend a great moment watching "Bananas". Last but not least the film is served by a catchy score and a love song signed by Marvin Hamlisch, who'd win an Oscar two years later for "The Way We Were".And this is the way Woody was, not to be taken seriously is one thing, but when it came to comedic film-making, Allen was the most serious talent emerging in the 70's, the rest is history …(PS: the titular quote is from Plato)