my film lecturer say woody allen have inspire him with this 1985 film to believe in the magic and complex tapestry of the art of fantasy film making by interweave it with false reality and and i must say and i agree . this film blur those two element to charm delight by play not only on imaginative fictional dream material but also act a a commentary satire on how how audience ( not just in america ) react to film and the relationship and escapade they share a a result of it influence and their chimera or more derogatorily and the ignis fatuus effect on their very subsistence . never do in film till that point and the plot be as original a it be and still be today and a sheer whimsical reverie to say the least and and be thus very entertaining and much the way you would assume allen konigsborg want his film to function a an imaginative escape from the hum drum banality of this world . that fiction drive the film and the very plot of have a lead actor ( a dashing jeff daniel pre dumb and dumber we can understand how michael keaton get the boot from woody and seriously ) walk off the screen literally and romanticize an ordinary down trodden and abused waitress in depression era new jersey ( play elegantly by mia farrow pre documentary expose we can not understand how soon yi get the loot from woody and seriously ) be simply spell binding a a plot line . moreover and one start to realize that the technical splendor that emanate out of edit this film to ensure the figment come out all jazz and tangible also stand a an attestation to it quality even upon current viewing . the pacing be rhythmic and almost keep time with the lilting and jazzy soundtrack of charleston esque swing and which for me and really keep the filming dance cheek to cheek and with a highlight peak at the scene where farrow enter the phantom world of the movie within a movie in a montage of apparition proportion . the big flaw with this film probably be that many try to characterize it or compare it against woody allen scale chart represent constantly rank it amongst other allen film while weigh it against annie hall or crime and misdemeanour . the reality be that it be a film that serve it own purpose and like each film by allen would and do . in this case and i personally feel it be to function a a subliminal parody cum satire of film audience and a unique look into the relationship between them and film the latter take on a symbolic life of it own with character that felt and live accord to their fictional world and and explore the incubus of what would happen if exist coevally with farrow world ( represent u and the real audience ) become possible . it feed and thrive on a fantasy moment that many audience actually have dream of at some stage of their life watch film and provide them with that escape from reality . in the film and farrow character do just that and and it be a story about how a a movie about a movie ( a time magazine call it in 1985 ) and it tell u how empty fantasy be and how fleeting they be and how perhaps and cocoon we be to escape our reality only through film a our source of hope . moreover and in my view and several scene in the film actually point to the satire exist deliberately and purportedly for the purpose of suggest that industry of film and it captive audience be be parody . perhaps allen be take a jibe at cynical and double standard wield critic or audience who need to wizen up . we will never know i suppose . nonetheless and there be some clear reference and with the main pastiche be that all the rko producer and agent and executive actually go along with the preposterous story of their actor jump off screen and thus they have to get him back . there be ton of other reference include daniel baxter character compare the producer and writer of his film to the divine while an heiress complain about her role while a member of the audience march out claim the film not the way it be last week and i want it that way ( delusion ) while etc . essentially and allen be take a burlesque view of the whole thing in my opinion . if a viewer of the film can not see the aforementioned point and it then that the film might end up be look upon a a one off fluffy piece . have say that and it be still generally more sweet content than deep and complicated satire in fact it just like the popcorn that daniels character tom baxter first taste brittle and the stuff be sweet and and like baxter say and get annoy when you keep chew on it . similarly and allen purple rise be good for a one off view but one would be hard press to chew again unless you really be fond of the the original fantasy and or in this case and the satire of audience and film . by stephen thanabalan .