MJB784 This is my favorite Woody Allen movie! It's heartfelt, artistic, creative, funny, thoughtful and nostalgic. It's basically a love letter to movies about a waitress who is unloved by her husband, unhappy at work and only finds love in the movies. One day, she watches the latest movie The Purple Rose of Cairo and after watching it the fifth time, the main character literally leaves the screen of his black and white movie and enters reality in technicolor. Soon, the black and white actors are up on the screen screaming for him to return while the movie theater is in panic and the actor playing the character who left the screen tries to get him back on. What an exciting story told with art, thought and entertainment!

sharky_55 Haven't we all at some point wanted to reach out and just step into a movie world? Well in The Purple Rose of the Cairo someone is granted that wish, only it is the other way around - the archaeologist character in the movie has had enough of reciting the same lines and playing the same role over and over and wants out. Allen establishes this subtly - again and again we see him addressing his adventure on screen, like he just can't believe that 24 hours ago he was still in Egypt...and there is a hint of weariness that goes along with each repetition. And then he falters one night, because someone has caught his eye...so he does the only thing that seems logical and steps off the screen.What's funny and wonderful about Purple Rose is the way it treats this little incident with an air of mild surprise and absurdity. "How is that possible???" they question, before quickly accepting it and descending back into their daily lives. Some complain for their money back. Others are intrigued and sit in the theatre for hours on end, studying the rest of the cast like some science experiment. And the executives treat it like any mini fiasco - telephoning each other in panic and hoping to shush it up while elsewhere ("The press is on our side!"), another Tom Baxter is beginning to forget his lines. The cherry on top is the self awareness in the humour (Pleasantville took a leaf out of this section) - the endearing way that Tom questions everything about real life, and how he is idealistic and innocent without any real cause. We see the signs that this relationship can't actually last, but oh, what if it could?And of course Cecilia falls hard for him, because he has been played excellently by Gil Shephard, so he is programmed to be romantic, chivalrous, poetic, charming and passionate all rolled into one. The cartoonish way he and Monk swap sides in their fight and how his nobler intentions lead him to get sucker punched. It's a far cry from her real life, after all. The vicious cycle of her waitress job, the abusive husband who flaunts his affairs in her face, and she of course cannot do what a movie character would; she makes a big show of this being the last straw and packs her things to leave him once and for all, and she is back the next day. We feel that this whole charade has been played many times. Farrow is without a doubt adorable - one of her less glamorous appearances but she brings a vulnerable, naive quality to Cecilia. She is most comfortable in the theatre and it shows - the polite usual pleasantries to the workers, her eyes lighting up in delight during the whole runtime, and the way she absent-mindedly shoves popcorn into her mouth, so engrossed that it hardly matters what she is eating. And then out of the building she is flustered and stammering, daydreaming about the last story, fan-girling when she meets an idol. Oh, so fetching. The main objective of Allen, I think, is to have us empathise with Cecilia - to have us clutching the ukulele and stare at the screen with those wide, desperate eyes, seeking solace in an imaginative world. He would later revisit this sort of longing in Midnight in Paris, but I think it works better here because it doesn't telegraph that neat, emotional ending. Cecilia doesn't have anything left except her movies, and it's like she is trying to prolong that realisation and that tragic ending. Of course in real life, the happy ending isn't always around the corner.

JLRMovieReviews Mia Farrow lives in the world of make-believe, the world of old Hollywood. Her neglectful husband, played by Danny Aiello, doesn't help at all. She watches movies every chance she gets, even watching the same film over and over. The images blend, the thin line thins. In yet another viewing of an old musical/adventure tale, one of the characters, played by Jeff Daniels, turns to her and starts talking to her, even coming out of the celluloid projection. He has come to life. What's so extraordinary is that others see this, too! It's not like only Mia can see him. Jeff's real existence creates havoc. People want their money back. The movie moguls in Hollywood get wind of it, hoping against hope for no lawsuit. But most importantly, the cast left behind has nothing to do because they can't go to the next scene without him. But Jeff Daniels doesn't want to go back in the film. He is having too good a time with Mia. Jeff Daniels plays two roles in this Woody Allen film. Don't get confused. The character who jumped out of the movie screen and the actor who played him, who is asked to go this town to get him to go back into the film. Even if "The Purple Rose of Cairo" contains flaws and is not perfect, it proves one thing – Woody Allen can really tell a tale, can really wrap you into a world of fantasy. He is a master of his craft, as he spins a web of tall tales come to life with zany results. Van Johnson has a role in the film's film that goes on and on. This has much ingenuity and charm, and Jeff Daniels may have his best movie role/roles of his career with this experience. But what becomes of the movie character Jeff? More importantly,what becomes of Mia! Is she destined to a part of the theater's atmosphere, to live there, to breathe there? Does she get a chance to live, to branch out, to be her real self? Sometimes what we want can be detriment to (or be in direct opposite to) what we need. The real world vs. fantasy! Only the purple rose knows….

sablja-kaji This was my first Woody Allen movie. I think there are 4 aspects I can judge a movie on. First one is directing. This movie was directed simple but very effective. In my opinion it is the best kind. The second thing is writing. First of all this is a very interesting concept to me. It deals very well with its themes. I like Woody Allens weird sense of humour but I don't understand what is he about. The third one is acting. This is the one of the first Jeff Daniels roles. He is very kind but nothing spectacular. Music was typical and cliché but I understand that that is the point. If you like movies about movies this is one good, interesting and short (82 minutes) movie you should check out.