Lionsgate | Release Date: July 15, 2016
6.6
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 149 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
91
Mixed:
44
Negative:
14
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
TVJerryAug 1, 2016
Jesse Eisenberg is the latest delightful incarnation of writer/director Woody Allen's classic neurotic character. He plays a young man who moves to '30s Hollywood for a job in the film industry. Although show biz names are frequently dropped,Jesse Eisenberg is the latest delightful incarnation of writer/director Woody Allen's classic neurotic character. He plays a young man who moves to '30s Hollywood for a job in the film industry. Although show biz names are frequently dropped, this isn't a behind-the=camera story. It centers around his frustrated love affair with a young secretary (Kristen Stewart, who shows no special allure in the role). Even with Allen's energetic style, the dialogue is usually flat and most scenes go on too long. What the film has going for it is the art direction: beautiful sets/locations, lovely costumes and Vittorio Storaro's rich, gorgeous classic cinematography. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
Brent_MarchantJul 22, 2016
A mildly amusing though largely inconsequential release that provides little in the way of story, character development or insight. The period piece production values and cinematography are indeed top-notch, but the performances are generallyA mildly amusing though largely inconsequential release that provides little in the way of story, character development or insight. The period piece production values and cinematography are indeed top-notch, but the performances are generally underwhelming and the writing surprisingly pedestrian. It's rather strange to think of "Woody Allen" and "fluff" in the same thought, but, regrettably, they go together all too well in this uninspired, generally humorless offering. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
TheMetacritiqerJul 29, 2016
The 2nd best Lionsgate movie ever after Expendables 2. The real star here is Kristen Stewart. And once again, Eisenberg is type cast but thats ok. a slightly better than average movie
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
GinaKAug 3, 2016
A movie without any convincing drama and so a major disappointment. It is beautifully colored and I thought Kristen Stewart gave a wonderful performance (she actually seemed conflicted), but all this did was highlight what a woodenA movie without any convincing drama and so a major disappointment. It is beautifully colored and I thought Kristen Stewart gave a wonderful performance (she actually seemed conflicted), but all this did was highlight what a wooden performance Jessie Eisenberg gave. Was he miscast or is this all he is capable of? But then you could say Steve Carrell was miscast too, except his performance was interesting from beginning to end, even though Allen didn’t give him much to work with. In a way this movie is sad because Allen can still come up with interesting characters but all of them in this film were wasted because nothing much happened that anyone could really care about. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
televinJul 24, 2016
I thought Steve Carell was terribly miscast . He seemed to be playing his Michael Scott character (The Office) as Phil Stern.....Was a typical Allen movie in many ways , meandering thruout. Eisenberg and Lively did quite well , Stewart's 15I thought Steve Carell was terribly miscast . He seemed to be playing his Michael Scott character (The Office) as Phil Stern.....Was a typical Allen movie in many ways , meandering thruout. Eisenberg and Lively did quite well , Stewart's 15 minutes will come to a close soon. The "love stories" in the flick were interesting but much of the film just seemed like a lot of fluff......If you like Allen you will probably like the film Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
lancekozOct 28, 2016
I liked this as a fan of the style and music, but the uneven script had the lead playing an unwarranted range that Eisenberg just could not handle, and there was a distinct lack of chemistry between him and Stewart. All the other actorsI liked this as a fan of the style and music, but the uneven script had the lead playing an unwarranted range that Eisenberg just could not handle, and there was a distinct lack of chemistry between him and Stewart. All the other actors seemed more interesting! Carrel had some gravitas, the sister and husband and parents looked and acted much more the part of thirties' characters. Story gets a bit funnier and more dramatic in the last half, but still, oddly unsatisfying. In Woody's current movies, there is a point where the husbands are mercilessly lying to their wives as they embrace... a creepy commentary on the the value of matrimony that he keeps repeating. At first I got a sense maybe he's trying to play it for laughs but it happens so often, I distinctly feel like it has a confessional role in Woody's life. Kind of tiring.
GORGEOUS to look at tho.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
jgzegerJun 29, 2019
Jesse Eisenberg plays the familiar Woody Allen character who we've all gotten tired of a long time ago. There is little to recommend in this film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
GreatMartinJul 29, 2016
As an old man after directing and in most cases writing the screenplays for 49 pictures Woody Allen has always has a hand in the past reflecting on what was and would could have been. In "Cafe Society" during the first half, he looks atAs an old man after directing and in most cases writing the screenplays for 49 pictures Woody Allen has always has a hand in the past reflecting on what was and would could have been. In "Cafe Society" during the first half, he looks at Hollywood in the 1930s when the studios were experiencing the star of the golden age and names such as Barbara Stanwyck, Errol Flynn, Ginger Rogers and such were name dropped at parties, sought after by agents and movies were lived 24/7 both in reel and real life. In the second half it is to the clubs of New York with speakeasies rising out of the bootleg era and becoming the Stork club and 21 Club. In both cities people dressed to the nines in the evening and were always trying to impress someone else.

The film opens with Bobby Dorfman, (Jesse Eisenberg) a nerd, a word unknown then, coming to Hollywood hoping to get a job with his uncle, Phil, (Steve Carell), who is always making deals as a press agent. He is cheating on his wife with his assistant, Vonnie, (Kristen Stewart) who Bobby also falls in love with only knowing she has a boyfriend who is a writer and travels a lot.

It's a slight screenplay and if you look too closely at it it doesn't make sense but like many of Woody Allen's movies there are many pluses one almost always being the acting. Steve Carell is just annoying enough to be your idea of a Hollywood agent while Jesse Eisenberg is Woody's stand in giving more depth than usually brought to the role.

Blake Lively left me with the impression that this is an actress I would like to see more often while Jeannie Berlin, the stereotyped Jewish mother, brings something extra to make her a bit more substantial.Corey Stoll as Bobby's gangster brother and Marty Dorfman as their father, along with all the actors, just as the production aspects, make the picture feel authentic just as the period music always grabs your interest and fits what is happening on the screen.

Two things really make "Cafe Society" stand out and one is the beautiful cinematography by Vittorio Storaro that shows what color can do for/to a movie.

The other is Kristian Stewart. I vaguely remembered her from Jodi Foster's movie "Panic Room" but lost interest in her after seeing she was going to be in "The Twilight Saga" just as I didn't follow Daniel Radcliff in the Harry Potter series--yes, I admit it publicly! and became interested in him seeing the roles he took after showing that he wasn't a one note actor. After seeing Stewart in "Welcome to the Riley's" and especially "Clouds of Sils Maria" followed by "Still Alice" I started seeing her in a new light. This movie role, which make the film more interesting than what is written because of the way she plays Vonnie, made me think of stalwart actresses such as Mary Stuart Masterson, Parker Posey and Laura Linney, all so called 'Indie Darlings' and always bringing something extra to a role.

Now for Woody Allen's 50th movie how about Daniel Radcliff and Kristian Stewart?
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
LeZeeOct 4, 2016
A boy from the east, a girl from the west and their life choice over romance.

If you are a film fanatic or a film critic, then the year never comes to end without watching a film by Woody Allen. He's just a Takashi Miike of the Hollywood,
A boy from the east, a girl from the west and their life choice over romance.

If you are a film fanatic or a film critic, then the year never comes to end without watching a film by Woody Allen. He's just a Takashi Miike of the Hollywood, but the thing is he always delivers. He had created his own style of screen presentation like in the line of Wes Anderson and very few others. Uniqueness define his works and so this another romance twisted tale where the first half of the film sets in Los Angeles and the next half in the New York.

A young Jewish American wants to try his luck in the Hollywood seeks help from his uncle who's a popular an busiest agent in the film industry. He falls in love with his uncle's personal assistant, but she reveals she already has a boyfriend who's away now. After some twists in the tale, it becomes a romance-triangle. Who gets who and how it all ends brings the curtain to the film.

Like usual Woody Allen's background narration had an important role in the storytelling and all those romance troubles were quite nicely told. It opened so well, developed at its best in the middle, but it did not end on a high. I did not like the conclusion, or the last 10-15 minutes. But thankfully it avoided giving out the usual stuff and the end credits rolled up before clearing the situation in the story. That's one of the way to finish it off, which is obviously not clever like lots of films does that same trick. Whatever, still the film is worth a watch, because of the decent story and great performances, and obviously for Woody Allen.

6/10
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
AxeTAug 19, 2016
This is typical late model middle of the road Woody Allen. It's slightly amusing, slightly funny at times, and slightly involving. The story of a young man who moves to L.A. from New York is nothing new for the movies, but is of novelThis is typical late model middle of the road Woody Allen. It's slightly amusing, slightly funny at times, and slightly involving. The story of a young man who moves to L.A. from New York is nothing new for the movies, but is of novel interest as told by Allen set in the golden age of Hollywood.
Jesse Eisenberg is so similar on screen to a young Woody Allen it's surprising he didn't cast him a long time ago and regularly as other directors have done with young protege/archetypes who resemble their younger selves, but then again Mr. Allen is such a legend he has no problem assembling new casts each and every year from the endless well of name actors who want to be in one of his movies no questions asked. Woody is of course a lot funnier and more intellectual than Jesse though, and Mr. Eisenberg is that much more skittishly nervous in his demeanor. As for Ms. Stewart, the casting is right on the money. She is as enchanting and fetching a presence in this as one could ever want, and it is believable that any guy would fall for her no matter the complications or consequences. Too bad in real life we suspect the actress is quite a difficult little witch.

In one shot the modern downtown Los Angeles skyline is glimpsed. Not only did this skyline not exist in the 1980's, any skyline at all was non-existent in the 1930's. Sloppy mistake which should not have been in the frame to begin with, or should have been edited out or digitally fixed which is not too expensive for any legitimate movie nowadays. Small but surprising flaw from an artist of Allen's stature. Then again, all movies have flaws technical and creative and not even masters can achieve absolute perfection in something as arduous as making movies.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
potatoman222Jul 21, 2017
Café Society é um bom filme, tecnicamente impecável com atuações decentes e uma direção precisa, porém, perde o ritmo e peca ao interromper bruscamente o desenvolvimento do longa para dar lugar a uma espécie de filme quase diferente comCafé Society é um bom filme, tecnicamente impecável com atuações decentes e uma direção precisa, porém, perde o ritmo e peca ao interromper bruscamente o desenvolvimento do longa para dar lugar a uma espécie de filme quase diferente com outra locação e personagens. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
MattBrady99May 7, 2021
We live in a Café Society where Bruce Willis actual got fired from a film set (he was suppose to play Steve Carell's character). And yes this is becoming a Bruce Willis **** site now.

The film itself is fine. I mean, when you see one Woody
We live in a Café Society where Bruce Willis actual got fired from a film set (he was suppose to play Steve Carell's character). And yes this is becoming a Bruce Willis **** site now.

The film itself is fine. I mean, when you see one Woody Allen movie, you've seen them all.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
smiyamotOct 23, 2016
Another Woody Allen movie, frenetic dialogue (like Woody when he acted) by Jesse Eisenberg, a love triangle, unrequited love, all the themes presented on a backdrop of the Hollywood scene that Woody hates so much, with the promise of aAnother Woody Allen movie, frenetic dialogue (like Woody when he acted) by Jesse Eisenberg, a love triangle, unrequited love, all the themes presented on a backdrop of the Hollywood scene that Woody hates so much, with the promise of a wonderful life in Manhattan, which Woody loves. Is this a semi-autobiographic story? Hmmm, the kid is from a Jewish family in Brooklyn.... Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
knowmoviesnoseNov 5, 2016
With such a stellar cast, I was pretty disappointed. The dialogue with each of the main characters did nothing for character development whatsoever. It was the most shallow endeavor to display any single body that was on this movie thatWith such a stellar cast, I was pretty disappointed. The dialogue with each of the main characters did nothing for character development whatsoever. It was the most shallow endeavor to display any single body that was on this movie that I've ever seen. I would have to say my favorite Woody Allen movie is "The Curse of the Jade Scorpion" because it developed the main characters through each and every interaction, and a great deal of that was through dialogue, humor, and mystery. This failed short on every aspect to make something interesting just... blah. All of the wardrobe and landscaping for a Woody Allen film may have been there with a few quips and quotes, but the substance was most definitely lacking. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
lucbevibrasilSep 3, 2016
Café Society doesn't get to be one of the masterpieces of Woody Allen, but goes easy to several others that decade, once we feel a greater commitment in this film than in their latest projects. The art direction, photography, costumes andCafé Society doesn't get to be one of the masterpieces of Woody Allen, but goes easy to several others that decade, once we feel a greater commitment in this film than in their latest projects. The art direction, photography, costumes and more inspired performances bring a great personification of the 30's. Speaking of photography, Victorio Storaro delivers an exuberant work in photography. In the end, we found a regular film, but it gives feeling that you've seen it before. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
cnakhlaMar 14, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall this film had some enjoyable moments and was shot thoughtfully by Vittorio Storaro. However, the story felt un-original in its classic Allen 'young attractive girl with older man' framework, yet also satisfying the requisite of the nerdy young man also having the love of the attractive woman. My interpretation was that Allen split himself into two characters in this story. Jessie Eisenberg, so accurately it is annoying, plays the character of a young Woody like that of Annie Hall, he is an unappreciated and lovable 'boy next door' who gains the attraction of Diane Keaton/Kristen Stewart for no apparent or logical reason. While Carrel was playing the older more successful Allen, who is wealthy but loving, and also happens to end up with a beautiful young wife (leaving his older first wife who we never meet). If i didn't know who Allen was or hadn't seen any of his other films then perhaps i would have found this story more interesting. However the stripped down plot of the relationships portrayed were unoriginal and brought nothing new to cinema. For such a renowned film maker, i am still waiting for something more from Woody Allen. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews