Bananas (1971) User Reviews (132)

The title says it all

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 28 July 2006]

"Bananas" is just that on the surface - a crazy, off the wall movie written by, directed by, and starring a very young Woody Allen as a clumsy New Yorker who winds up as the leader of a small country. In the beginning, Allen plays a product tester whose parents are surgeons (in fact, he walks in on them at one point while they're performing surgery, and they have him take over the reins). He basically just wants to get laid, and when a young activist (Louise Lasser) appears at his door with a petition, he sees an opportunity. The two eventually break up, and in despair, he quits his job and goes to San Marcos, one of her causes. There he becomes a pawn in the revolution, later becoming their leader dressed like Castro but with a red beard.

Only Allen could have imagined this, and it's quite brilliant. Underneath the one-liners and crazy situations is a statement about the war in Vietnam and the way it was reduced to sports reporting on television. To make his point, Howard Cossell is on hand for a play by play of the character's wedding night before an audience.

Total Woody, with some hilarious moments. Highly recommended.

pretty crazy, not altogether successful, but it's also very funny

[Quinoa1984 · 8/10 · 30 June 2006]

Bananas is like a cookie-batter of all of those early Woody Allen jokes all plopped into a bowl and shaken around. It's a film loaded with political jokes, but without a direct focus aside from Cuba and dictators and the like. There are numerous sexual jokes, including one of Woody's funniest scenes involving a magazine (the buying and holding on a subway, very silent comedy-like). And even Howard Cosell becomes an iconic figure in Woody's comedy in the brilliant opening scenes. The plot is very loose, so if you're looking for that look elsewhere. Also, to put it mildly, some of the jokes may not work at all for some viewers of today. But it's the go-for-broke irreverence of the picture that has it still worth viewing today. Much of Woody's own verbal bits are very good, but it's also worth to note how the physical comedy- while crude and a little off-key- also has a good ring to it. Unlike the director's later films, you can still sense that he's trying to 'get' how to make a film, and so in trying to do anything he can think of to get a laugh, of course, some of it doesn't work. For example, in Cuba the gag where the gargantuan pile of dung is carried down the stairs with the Lain music in the background gives a grin, but not as big a laugh as might be intended. Indeed, this might be Woody's most 'immature' film, while still containing some of his more biting, satirical jabs at dictators and oddball politics. Woody would still have this wild, go-for-broke style of humor more akin to some of his quirkier short stories in other films of the early 70s. While this isn't as successful in that regard as Sleeper or Love and Death, I'd still watch it again if it was on TV; even the romantic subplot, undercooked in comparison with the rest of the more satirical stuff, is interesting.

Often hilarious comedy with a few dead spots.

[gridoon · 8/10 · 3 December 1999]

"Bananas" is one of Woody Allen's earliest films: a pure comedy, with some satirical and political overtones (which are about 100% on-target - like when the leader of the rebels becomes a dictator himself when he rises to power). It's a strictly hit-or-miss effort, but, fortunately, the hits are definitely more than the misses. It contains many laugh-out-loud scenes; the whole courtroom sequence, his military training, the scene where he tries to pass unnoticed while he's buying a pornographic magazine, and his reaction to the line "You're not tense, are you?" are among the many highlights. It does have its dead spots, though, and some rather too obvious jokes that can't match the level of the rest (the closing sequence does not work at all, IMO). Marvin Hamlisch's score is unbelievably catchy.

A Memorable Ahead-Of-Its-Time Classic

[artfiore1 · 26 March 2003]

I went to see "Bananas," in the early 1970s with three of my high school buddies, in our local theater. And, it remains -- three decades later -- one of the most memorable and one of my most talked about movie-going experiences ever. So much of it was comprised of absolutely hysterical scenes which I've told countless people about through the years, and still tell people about.

Watching this movie today, it seems as if it had been somewhat haphazardly written. I get the feeling that Woody Allen had kept a journal in which he noted the funniest sights he'd witnessed and the cleverest one-liners he'd heard, over a period of years, and then set about mixing all of these totally unrelated funny things into one script. It's like he was saying to himself, "I think I'll throw in the bit about the guy trying to discreetly buy a sex magazine in a quiet neighborhood store and getting embarrassed, and then the snake bite bit later on. But first before the next plot turn, I think I'll put in the bit in which a guy gets out of his car and falls into an open manhole.", etc. You feel at times like you're watching a Benny Hill-type comedy show, or a TV variety show with a series of comedy skits that have nothing at all to do with each other. Somehow, Woody blended it all together into a fairly coherent story. There are also a few scenes which feature "Airplane"/"Naked Gun"-style tongue-in-cheek humor. But, this movie had been made *long* before those were even thought of. There's a message in that: This movie was ahead of its time. There's a segment of "Bananas," early on, which is just one outrageously funny bit after another after another.

I guess the movie doesn't really have a point . . . except maybe that maniacal dictators are crazy, dangerous and should be driven from power . .. or maybe that freedom is worth fighting for . . . or maybe that some causes are worth laying down your life for. Obviously, there's relevance in all of that for us, today. Or maybe the whole point of this movie could simply be that Woody Allen knows how to make people laugh.

Later, Art

"You cannot bash in the head of an American citizen without written permission from the State Department."

[ackstasis · 7/10 · 29 December 2007]

When asked why he titled his third feature-length picture 'Bananas,' Woody Allen replied, "because there's no bananas in it." This, in a nutshell, pretty much summarises the general tone of the film. During the first ten years of his directing career, it's interesting to see Allen slowly developing his craft; as the years go by, from 'Take the Money and Run (1969)' to 'Sleeper (1973),' {and culminating in 'Annie Hall (1977)'} we notice how he learned to assimilate an unrelated collection of gags into a mature, cohesive narrative. 'Bananas (1971)' sits somewhere in the middle of all this, with a more developed story than its predecessors, but maintaining its roots as an anarchic comedy, much in the same vein as films like 'Duck Soup (1933)' and 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975).' Though I had not anticipated enjoying 'Bananas' very much, I must say that the film provided countless moments of immeasurable hilarity. Though slightly uneven in parts {as is often the case, some jokes hit while others miss}, the film delivers the promised laughs.

The storyline is characteristically simple and absurd. After a revolution breaks out in the small South American nation of San Marcos, a mediocre, unintellectual New Yorker, Fielding Mellish (Allen), travels there to impress his ex-girlfriend (Louise Lasser). After the fascist government tries to have him assassinated, poor Fielding falls in with the rebel gangs, somehow eventually becoming the President of the Latin American republic. This absurd plot line allows Allen to pile one gag on top of another, and, interestingly, the story itself never seems to lose its way or go off on any tangents. The film's satirical take on war, with the Vietnam War still raging in 1971, was very timely, and Allen also aims a few jabs at the media's handling of warfare – in the ridiculous and inspired opening, ABC's Wide World of Sports arrives in San Marcos to commentate the assassination of the current President. Later, Howard Cosell returns to host the consummation of Fielding's marriage, with an enthusiastic crowd watching the awkward couple tussling beneath the covers. 'Bananas' is a type specimen of one of Woody Allen's "early, funny movies."

"We're going to watch pornographic movies." .. "You need an usher?"

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 16 July 2016]

Woody Allen's second film as co-writer/director/star (not including "What's Up, Tiger Lily?") is a grab-bag of lunatic revue sketches, some of them hilarious. Spurned by his activist girlfriend, product-testing schnook in New York City quits his job and heads to a strife-ridden Latin American country to become a part of their revolution. Trenchant political satire must have looked outrageous in 1971, but time has made a few of these gags gruesomely topical and accurate (but no less funny). Targets include man-woman sexual matters (territory Allen was spot-on with right from the start), television commentary (sent up brilliantly), urban violence, Catholicism, psychiatry, assassinations, a Marx Brothers-styled courtroom, Miss America and...J. Edgar Hoover. The pacing seldom flags, but Allen's screenplay (penned with his "Take the Money and Run" partner, Mickey Rose) sags in the middle--perhaps he should have kept the action going in NYC a little longer. Terrific music score from Marvin Hamlisch, adept comedic work from the entire crazy cast (including deadpan Howard Cosell and Roger Grimsby as themselves). **1/2 from ****

Laugh out loud funny, with some dull spots

[RovingGambler · 7/10 · 19 July 2006]

This is one of Woody Allen's earliest movies, and I'd rank it probably 2nd out of his pre-Annie Hall movies, only behind Love and Death. It's certainly one of his funniest. The plot is pretty ridiculous (a neurotic product tester goes to the fictional San Marcos and ends up joining the rebels and eventually becoming president), but it's really secondary, and only serves to provide transitions from one comedy skit to another.

It's pretty much a hit and miss movie, but when he hits (which is more often than not), it's very funny. There are plenty of hilarious one liners throughout. The music is very cheesy as well, but it fits in well with the silly humor. Obviously, this isn't like Woody's later movies, just take it for what it is -- a silly comedy -- and I don't think you'll be disappointed.

Also of note, the opening credits are very funny and rivals Monty Python and the Holy Grail for best opening credits sequence.

Woody Allen's best comedy

[griess · 10/10 · 2 September 2003]

This is one of Woody Allen's earliest films -which should rank with the all-time greatest comedies. Although it was made back when the trial of The Chicago Seven was still fresh and Tobacco was still advertised on television, Bananas is timeless and still topical: J. Edgar Hoover in drag; the CIA sending US troops to fight on both sides of a revolution because they are afraid of being on the wrong side. One can usually recall a few scenes from a good movie, but Bananas is one of those great movies which one can replay in the mind from beginning to end. (Bananas is neatly bracketed at the beginning and end by Howard Cossell playing himself in bizarre Wide World of Sports coverages.) Allen has total control as writer, director and lead actor as in his later films, but in Bananas, the humor is broader and more cinematic. He plays the nebbish Fielding Mellish with less of the existential whining that mars his later films. There is a youthful resiliance like a toy punching bag that keeps coming back up. That is what made Chaplin's little tramp both comical and endearing.

Absurd heights

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 24 November 2020]

By the time he got to Bananas, Woody Allen was reaching new heights in absurdist comedy. The idea of covering a South American revolution as a sporting event certainly was original one. Even getting to the point of getting the voice of American sports Howard Cossell to join the fun.

Allen is refining his schlepp persona in Bananas. Although he divorced his leading lady Louise Lasser in real life the two worked well together here. Allen tries to get a relationship going, but Lasser is interested in social causes. She has a bleeding heart for the people of the South American country of San Marcos and gives Woody his walking papers.

So off Allen goes to San Marcos as the schlepp from Brooklyn mixes with all kinds of folks there from dictator Carlos Montalban right down to the Che Guevara revolutionaries.

So many absurd moments in Bananas to count. My favorite is ordering takeout for the revolutionary army from a South American version of a Jewish delicatessen.

Definitely a must for Woody Allen.

A Laugh fest, with Allen's unique vision and great one-liners

[inkblot11 · 8/10 · 23 February 2020]

In the film's opening, sports commentators report on the assassination of the leader of San Marcos, an obscure South American country. Then, the reporters document the takeover of the country by the top general. its tragic and its funny. Meanwhile, Fielding Mellish (Woody Allen) tests products for a leading Manhattan manufacturer but has a hard time getting a date. Unbelievably, an erstwhile and attractive political activist, Nancy (Louise Lasser) comes to Fielding's door, wanting a signature for the condemnation of the San Marcos situation. After many attempts, Mr. Mellish gets a date and the two start a relationship. But, all too soon, Nancy breaks Fielding's heart, insisting he has no leadership qualities. Eureka! Fielding sets off for San Marcos, where he joins the rebels. Will he become the person Nancy wants? This hilarious look at the truly tragic volatility of some Western Hemisphere countries has many wonderful moments and lines. Allen and Lasser are the stars, while a cadre of little known folks blend in nicely. Naturally, the scenery in Manhattan contrasts hugely with those of the "tiny country to the south" while Allen's script is as priceless as ever and his direction is sure-fire. Want to laugh, laugh, laugh? Get Bananas.

One-liners aplenty, and definitely worth a watch.

[glocksout · 6/10 · 24 August 2006]

At the recommendation of a friend, I watched Woody Allen's Bananas. Allen is often portrayed in the media and by critics as an albatross of Hollywood, and I really don't have a lot of experience with his films. Besides Bananas, I have only seen Match Point, which is one of the best films I've ever seen. Being made in 1971, Bananas touches on the activism culture of the time, and the USA's involvement in South American politics. Focused around the the fictitious country of San Marcos, presumably any number of nation-states the USA was involved in destroying. It opens with the president of San Marcos being assassinated and a general taking the reigns of power in the country.

Good afternoon. Wide World of Sports is in the republic of San Marcos where we are going to bring you a live on the spot assassination. They're going to kill the president of this lovely Latin American country and replace him with a military dictatorship.

A strong-handed dictator, a group of (apparently marxist) rebels ban together in opposition. Woody Allen's character is living in the States and falls in love with an activist who is looking for support of the people of San Marcos. They make plans together to fly down there in a show of solidarity, but his girlfriend breaks up with him (in one of the most humorous moments of dialog recorded on film). Because he already had plans to go, he visits San Marcos where he is unwittingly joined to the rebel cause.

This is a very funny movie, especially is you are a fan of Groucho Marx - Allen's influence is quite obvious through lines such as, "I object, your honor! This trial is a travesty. It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham." But Woody also brings his own spin, which is pretty political - "You cannot bash in the head of an American citizen without written permission from the State Department." Most of it is one-liners or character comedy, but there are also cleverly composed dialog sequences and wacky settings. The film making is somewhat weak, and the musical score is odd, but this is about on par with early 70s movies. The story was flimsy, but apparently most of the movie was filmed improv. It is definitely worth a watch if only for the last scene alone.

A Witty Joke with the US- Sponsored Dictatorships in Latin America in the 60's

[claudio_carvalho · 8/10 · 11 March 2012]

In the Republic of San Marcos, in Latin America, the president is killed in a Coup d'État promoted by General Emilio M. Vargas (Carlos Montalbán).

In New York, the products tester Fielding Mellish (Woody Allen) meets the political activist Nancy (Louise Lasser) and they have a love affair. Fielding has an unrequited love with Nancy, who believes that he is immature and without leadership.

Fielding decides to travel to San Marcos and General Vargas plots a scheme the assassination of Fielding to be supported by the USA against the rebels led by Esposito (Jacobo Morales). However the rebels save Fielding and train him in guerrilla warfare. General Vargas flees to the United States. Esposito deranges with the power and Fielding becomes the President of San Marcos. He wears a long beard and travels to USA seeking financial support to the country and he meets Nancy again, who falls in love with him.

"Bananas" is a witty joke with the US- sponsored dictatorships in Latin America in the 60's by Woody Allen. The story has hilarious situations, like when Fielding Mellish is buying the porn magazine "Orgasm"; or with the two subway thugs (one of them the uncredited Sylvester Stallone); or having dinner with the junta; or training with the rebels. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Bananas"

I Never Laughed So Hard

[mbrahms26 · 7/10 · 5 November 2019]

This is a very funny political satire that was very topical back in the 1970's but will probably seem rather unfathomable to contemporary audiences who have no idea who Howard Cosell, Roger Grimsley or even Fidel Castro and Che Gueverra were. I nearly collapsed with laughter in the subway scene featuring a then unknown Sylvester Stallone as a thug beating up an old lady sitting next to petrified Fielding Mellish pretending to be absorbed in his magazine. One thing I should note: every time this film appears in NYC, there is a publicity shot in the newspapers showing Fielding Mellish (the Allen character) interrogating a parrot at his trial (inspired by the Chicago Seven Trial a few years earlier). This scene was not in the film when I first saw it when it came out or any viewing since, and I have seen it many times.

Really awful from every perspective.

[Instant_Palmer · 3/10 · 26 January 2016]

Yikes! NOT one of Allen's finer moments - We did funnier improve skit comedy as kids in grade school.

Allen was fortunate to have continual opportunities to hone his movie making skills after this turkey. This is really rough to watch.

I mean really...how can any critic give this a positive review?

I admire Allen, love many of his movies, but Bananas was hard to like when I was 13. Seeing it again was painful.

Sorry, but my "3" rating is generous.

Not worth detailing all the reasons, but it has a basic film school effort feel to it - "promising" if it was done by a young film student, but a Fail on a professional level - my own Seventh Seal Bergman/Hitchcock mashup parody from film school is frankly better even with its ultra low production value (took 3rd place in a regional film festival) - that would be an embarrassment now, but still better than this mess, which is mostly a bunch of gags loosely patched together.

I'm going to watch Sleeper next to reinstate the Allen comic genius mojo.

Amusing Satirical Comedy

[JamesHitchcock · 7/10 · 13 September 2006]

When asked why this film is called "Bananas", Woody Allen is said to have replied "Because there are no bananas in it". Given that the action takes place in a military dictatorship in South America, the name is presumably a reference to the expression "banana republic", and possibly also to the phrase "go bananas", meaning to go crazy.

Woody plays Fielding Mellish, an early incarnation of the sort of character he was to play in most of his films, the perpetually worried, neurotic New Yorker (although in this case less obviously Jewish than some later Woody characters). Fielding, who works as a consumer products tester, gets involved with Latin American politics when he falls in love with Nancy, a political radical whose pet cause is supporting the guerrillas fighting to overthrow the dictatorial President Vargas of the small Republic of San Marcos. When their relationship comes to an end, he decides to visit the country for himself, only to become mixed up with the rebels. The film ends with Fielding himself becoming President of San Marcos after a revolution and then, on his return to the United States, being placed on trial as a subversive.

This film was made in 1971, near the beginning of Woody's career, and like most of his other early films such as "Take the Money and Run", "Sleeper" and "Everything You Wanted to Know About Sex……." it is a "pure" comedy, without the philosophical depth or analysis of human relationships that were to mark later films such as "Annie Hall" or "Manhattan". The film with which it perhaps has most in common is "Sleeper" from two years later, which also deals in a comic way with the theme of the little man getting mixed up in a rebellion against a dictator. Nancy has something in common with Luna, the character played by Diane Keaton in the later film.

The main difference between the two films is that "Sleeper", which is set in an imagined future two centuries hence, revolves around physical slapstick humour of the sort familiar from old silent comedies. Although there is some humour of that type in "Bananas", such as the scene where Fielding tries to demonstrate an exercise machine for busy executives, the style of humour is less physical and more satirical, particularly in the scenes set in San Marcos.

I particularly liked the scene where Vargas receives tribute from the peasants, each of whom has to present their President with his weight in dung on his birthday, so that he can fertilise his private estates- a farcical concept, but a suitably surreal and Chaplinesque comment on the politics of dictatorship (and there have been some dictators who have made their subjects do things that are almost equally absurd). Some of the satire is aimed at American foreign policy; during this period of history the State Department was prepared to support virtually any non-Communist ruler, no matter how oppressive (and even Communist ones, such as Tito, if they were anti-Russian), on the basis of "he may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch". The trial scenes (also very funny) can be seen as a critique of the American establishment's McCarthy-style intolerance of any political dissent.

This does not, however, mean that Woody is simply concerned to attach the political Right from a left-wing position. There is plenty here to offend the political Left as well. Nancy is a shallow character, a radical-chic fun-revolutionary whose support for foreign revolutionary movements owes less to idealism than to a need to bring glamour and excitement into a humdrum existence. Fielding is initially even more shallow- his interest in the politics of San Marcos is due to nothing more elevated than his hopes of getting Nancy into bed. Woody's also satirises the Left through the figure of Esposito, the Marxist guerrilla leader (modelled on Fidel Castro) who succeeds in overthrowing Vargas only to prove as power-hungry as the man he has replaced, and even more irrational. If there is a political message here, it is that there is little point in a revolution which simply exchanges one dictator for another; Castro was originally supported by many American liberals who became disenchanted when, having overthrown the dictator Batista, he failed to hold free elections and instead turned Cuba into a one-party Communist state and a launch-pad for Khrushchev's missiles.

I felt that the film started off rather slowly, although there are some good scenes even in the early part, such as the one where a reporter gives a commentary on the overthrow and assassination of the President of San Marcos in the style of a sports commentary. It soon, however, picked up and turned into an amusing satirical comedy. It doesn't, however, have the depth of some of Woody's later films or quite the same biting verbal wit. 7/10

Fun satire , being compellingly written , played and directed by Woody Allen

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 9 January 2023]

This attractive movie is intermittently hilarious , considered to be a spoof of the Cuban revolution and Fidel Castro . It deals with a botcher New Yorker called Fielding Mellish (Woody Allen) , he's a consumer products tester , as his life is like a guinea pig . Along the way, he becomes infatuated with Nancy (Louis Lasser) , a political activist . But he is dumped by his independient sweetheart and although both of whom take two divergent ways in their lives, those paths cross once again. And Fielding runs off to San Marcos where he joins the rebels , as the coward soldier is forced to enlist the Castro-alike revolution and eventually becomes President of the country. The Revolutionist That Shook the World With Laughter !. More Moving Than Prunes!

Amusing picture fable is plenty of the filmmaker's signature angst-ridden philosophical comedy . Hilarity slips into vulgarity rather too often in this usually in-and-out early Woody Allen comedy which embroils the little man to travel a tiny Latin American nation and becomes involved in its latest rebellion . There is a lot of parody and even ¨Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin¨and other jokes for moviegoers . Allen is known to be inspired and influenced by Russian filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein as well as Ingmar Bergman. The picture turns out to be an ironical and tongue-in-cheek look at South American revolutions . The majority of the scenes and some set pieces in Bananas were improvised , permitting actors play freely, at times. As Woody Allen felt he had filmed the right shot , he would move to capture on to the next one. Nice and hilarious acting by Woody Allen at his best , as a jilted adventurer who goes into revolution , resulting in fateful consequences . His comic style paid homage to a number of classic comedians which included Bob Hope , Charles Chaplin and The Marx Brothers . Being competently played/directed by Woody Allen , showing his own wistful sense of intelligent comedy . Co-stars his then wife Louis Lasser who gives a likeable acting as his activist girlfriend , along with Carlos Montalbán , Nati Abascal, Miguel Ángel Suárez, René Enríquez and Jacob Morales , the latter has many of the best moments when , drunk with power , he declares Swedish to be the new national language . And you'll have to keep your eyes peeled to spot Sylvester Stallone in his second movie performing an henchman.

Witty as well as lively musical score by Marvin Hamslich contributes much , including South american songs . Colorful as well as evocative cinematography by cameraman Andrew M. Costikyan , being shot on location in Puerto Rico, Playa de Cerro Gordo, Puerto Rico (Fidel camp), Wall Street, Manhattan, New York City. Lavish and stunningly produced by Charles H. Joffe , Allen's ordinary producer . This enjoyable motion picture was vigorously directed by Woody Allen , being his third film as a director. Made during a prolific and clever period in which he acted/directed various really hilarious films , such as : What's Up, Tiger Lily?, Take the money and run , Pussycat, Pussycat I Love You , Sleeper , Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex but Were Afraid to Ask , among others . Subsequently he made several masterpieces. Including a series of movies in which he provided nice direction, investing care enough, wit and warmth, such as : Crimes and misdemeanors , New York stories, September, Radio Days, Hanna and her sisters , Broadway Danny Rose, Zelig, Stardust memories , A midsummer Night's Sex Comedy, Interiors, Manhattan and Purple rose of Cairo. Rating 7/10. Better than average. The movie will appeal to Woody Allen enthusiasts. Woody Allen has said that this movie was "my funniest picture to that time".

Bananas (1971)

[fntstcplnt · 7/10 · 6 January 2020]

Directed by Woody Allen. Starring Woody Allen, Louise Lasser, Jacobo Morales, Carlos Montalban, Miguel Ángel Suárez, René Enriquez, Howard Cosell, Stanley Ackerman, Charlotte Rae, Natividad Abascal. (PG-13)

Scattershot comedy (typical of early Woody) filled with one-liners, sight gags and slapstick, disorderly and in bad taste, but that's part of the charm. Allen romances a women's libber (Lasser) canvassing for petition signatures against a banana republic dictatorship; after the relationship fizzles, he finds himself hightailing it to the tiny country and inadvertently getting swept up in the revolution. Awfully spotty at times, especially the courtroom scenes, but has enough laughs to hold interest throughout, and its compact running time ensures that miffed jokes are forgotten quickly. Considering its content and setting during the middle episodes, the final product is refreshingly low on political statement, and even lower on poignancy. Several figures appear as themselves, including Howard Cosell; Sylvester Stallone has a bit part as a subway hooligan.

69/100

Allen's funniest movie ever

[lee_eisenberg · 10/10 · 9 July 2005]

"Bananas" shows why Woody Allen's early movies were far better. He plays Fielding Mellish, a products tester who is wishing that he had stayed in college ("I was taking black studies. I could be black!") After a brief fling with political activist Nancy (Louise Lasser), who is trying to restore democracy in the Latin American country of San Marcos (the movie begins with Howard Cosell hosting a "live, on-the-spot assassination" there). After she leaves him, he decides to go to San Marcos, where he gets involved with the revolutionary forces. Following the revolution's success, the leader installs some loony policies, and the US arrests Mellish for aiding the revolution. What follows shows the meaning of the expression "trial and error"!

Allen truly reached his apex with this movie. It's just one crazy thing after another, namely when Mellish and the revolutionaries buy lunch. Sylvester Stallone, in an early role, plays one of the hoodlums on the subway.

Early Woody Allen, His Nebbish Years

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 11 November 2014]

When a bumbling New Yorker (Woody Allen) is dumped by his activist girlfriend, he travels to a tiny Latin American nation and becomes involved in its latest rebellion.

Woody Allen's third film, as well as his third and last with co-writer Mickey Rose. Although Allen may be the more familiar name of the two, Rose actually had a very impressive career: after this film, he became a regular writer for the Johnny Carson show.

This is the young, energetic Woody, the one who is a bit more zany than he went on to become, with more stuttering and not quite the level of verbosity he achieved by the 1970s. Definitely some golden years for the man, and a period his fans love.

What is interesting is how this film predates the Reagan years by quite a bit, and even predates most of the 1970s. Were people in 1971 thinking after left-leaning revolutionaries in South America? Perhaps not, but it is something that has only grown in years, making the film somehow more relevant.

Funny

[elision10 · 10/10 · 7 February 2021]

Twenty minutes of Woody Allen circa1970 offers more laughs than two hours of the so-called best comedies today. It's unpolished but brilliant. In today's atmosphere, you'd have a half a dozen groups demanding it be censored. Thank god for that brief period of freedom between the early Sixties and around 2000 when people didn't go nuts over every perceived outrage.

Sporadically funny but messy film that is too hit and miss to deserve its high reputation

[bob the moo · 4 January 2009]

Fielding Mellish is a product tester who is unlucky in life and in love. When a beautiful woman turns up on his doorstep seeking signatures for a petition to the US Government to support the rebels in a small South American country, Fielding falls for her immediately. They date for a while but ultimately Nancy is put off by his lack of passion for political suffering and breaks it off with him. As part of his rebound, Fielding heads to the military dictatorship of San Marcos and manages to find himself embedded amongst the rebels as they prepare to storm the capital from the mountains.

Watching some modern Woody Allen films put me in the mood to go back to the start and watch some of his earlier films that I hadn't seen for ages or had never seen. Bananas was one of these as I don't think I had ever seen it but I had heard good things about it as it is considered one of those captured by the phrase "earlier, funnier films". Loving Love & Death and other of his films from this period, I had no reason to suspect it would not be as good as others have said, but sadly it is not. The plot is a doozey of an idea and offers so much but it is only here and there that Allen's script manages to hit this target. Outside of thee moments a lot of it is more hit and miss and a lot more sporadic in terms of the type of humour it is. We have plenty of good lines that are quite funny but too much of the film that isn't. The silent film-inspired physical comedy is a bit too obvious and relies heavily on Allen pulling faces rather than delivering inspired sequences. The film is best when it is built on smart lines but the messy plot development does keep it messy and prevents it being consistent.

Allen himself is good and does deliver some great moments as writer but ultimately he doesn't pull it together to be as roundly satisfying as some of the films he would do later. Lasser doesn't have much in the way of chemistry with him, which isn't a massive problem because she is not in a lot of the film but does limit her scenes. The rest of the cast are OK and I did enjoy the use of sports and news casters covering the action at the start and end of the film (although their dialogue is not funny enough to support the joke going on for as long as it does).

Bananas is amusing but it is far from being the classic comedy that collective wisdom will tell you that it is. It is sporadically funny across the running time but too hit and miss to really satisfy. Some random parts are funny but it cannot deliver consistent laughs – this will satisfy those who love Allen to the point that they love everything he does but for the casual viewer it will be far too messy and hit/miss to satisfy and be anything other than an amusing film – not a great or hilarious one.

Not bad early Woody

[The_Void · 7/10 · 13 December 2004]

Woody Allen's Bananas is a comedy of hits and misses. When it's funny, it's very funny and the film features a number of real stand out moments, such as the power mad general dishing out the new laws he's made, and of course Allen's neurotic dialogue, which is always a treat. However, at a number of moments; you get the impression that Woody Allen is trying to be funny, but he's failing miserably, which only serves in being annoying. This is Woody Allen while he was still in his rather immature phase (everything before Annie Hall), and it shows by way of the rather ludicrous plot, which sees Allen losing he girl he is infatuated with, on the grounds of him not having leadership qualities. So, he goes on the holiday to San Marcos that the two of them were meant to go on, and somehow gets caught up with a group rebels there that are trying to provoke a revolution, and eventually becomes president. Hey, I told you it was silly!

In Woody's immature period, he had several hit's and misses, with Sleeper being at the foot of his filmography, and the wonderful Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex at the summit. This one is more hit than miss, but to call it an actual 'hit' would be lying. Basically, Woody doesn't capitalise on the more interesting parts of the story, and instead seems all to keen to show us some slapstick humour. Although this is funny at a number of times, this film could have been a biting political satire on how America deals with other nations, or maybe even how rebels fail once they come to power. It could have even been an interesting commentary on the superficiality of love. Maybe Allen could have outdone himself and gone for all three! Basically, this is a 7/10 movie where a 10/10 one could have been. Don't get me wrong, this is definitely a good film and well worth watching, particularly for the Woody Allen fan; it's just unfortunate that it came at a time when Woody was still a clown.

This goes BANANAS....!

[Bryan6734 · 9/10 · 7 December 2020]

There is nothing more for me to say to you than just to watch it. It's funny, comedic, and takes a humorous realistic approach to the protagonist's love life that can be considered still relevant to us today!

Bananas is subtle in my opinion, but it WRECKS HAVOC when it comes to the laughs that it can produce in a room with an 80 year old ecstatic woman, a 17 year old boy, and me...

Well deserving of 9 stars. Hope to see more of your movies, Woody Allen!

Talking silent movie comedy

[jellopuke · 6/10 · 7 September 2021]

This is occasionally fall over hilarious but other times just meh. Lots of broad comedy and verbal gags with an almost silent movie style, this is still worth seeing, but it's not his best work. Some great gags hidden inside, so pay attention.

Probably funny when fresh, now very dated

[smatysia · 5/10 · 29 September 2010]

I suppose this was very funny when it was new. And I do get it, how fresh and new and different this humor was at the time. But this is not that time, and this film has not aged well. All of the funny things that had some (or a lot) of originality back then, have now been done to death. Like the Howard Cosell scenes. I'm sure that was a scream, then, but now it's old hat. I suppose I should judge the film from its own time, but I didn't see it then, I saw it now. Woody Allen's tiresome New York angst shtick has palled over the decades, and that's not new, or fresh, or funny anymore. I would probably suggest taking a pass on this film, unless you have some interest in it as film history. It won't work as comedy.