Midnight in Paris was a fun film with interesting side characters, especially if you knew anything about them from their works (art, books, photos, films). So you had an immediate understanding of these additional characters without requiring the film to fill in all the details. The audience wasn't spoon fed info and each character had their own quirks.

You're taken on a pleasant journey whereas many summer films you're taken on a roller coaster that tries to push everything in your face. It's nice to have the option and to have somethiing different.

Jesus, a PR firm buying up ads on broadcast TV is calling itself guerilla.

As a self-professed disciple of all things Woody Allen, this, of course, was a lock even before it hit the screens. Even on his worst outings (Curse of the Jade Scorpion, Hollywood Ending), he's still miles above what most are doing.

This was a treat, though. Kinda' reminded me what he did with Radio Days... took a little piece of history and ladled it thick with magic realism.

And enough can't be said about Owen Wilson's performance. Many have tried to be the "Allen stand-in" from John Cusack to Branaugh (which you showcased in that cool mash-up vid a few weeks ago here) but Wilson just nailed it.

Thumbs way up. Inventive concept, simply yet sweetly executed to let the world of the story do the heavy lifting. You wanted to be the protagonist, in the car, in the cafes, in those conversations, and...[SPOILER ALERT]

...at the end, walking in the rain, in Paris, with the right girl.

If pressed to explain why it all works, in one word, likeability gets my vote. Owen Wilson's character delivers it in every frame. The way he handles the characters and situations around him is the way WE'D like to be able to deal with people and circumstances like that in our own lives...if only we were as wry and witty and honest and resilient as OW/Woody Allen or __________. [Insert here the name of your favorite wildly successful, yet still grounded in artistic integrity screenwriter.]

Just great storytelling, made to look effortless.

I liked it a lot. Very entertaining. He captured Paris beautifully. Corey Stoll who played Hemingway stole the show, though, he was hilarious. "Have you ever shot a lion in the face? Would you like to know how that feels?"

The best thing about the marketing was how they didn't reveal the "magic." Kudos for keeping that a secret. It also had a very classy one-sheet that captured the essence of the film. Great choice to keep it simple and only feature the protagonist instead of the whole cast - that would have ruined it.

I loved it. My review here: http://timessquare.com/Film/Film_Reviews/Midnight_in_Paris_/

It amuses me to no end that when a superhero movie tanks (comparatively) excuses are thrown about in every direction as to why it didn't work, but no one ever seems to point the finger at it being a bad movie.

Then, when smaller, good movies come out and succeed, everyone just says "fluke" and moves on like it isn't worth investigating. That somehow BLACK SWAN making $300mil at the worldwide box office had absolutely nothing to do with the quality and intelligence level of the product.

@F. Scott: And you can be sure that there is still a lot of "fluke" chatter about not only Black Swan, but The King's Speech, The Fighter, True Grit (the top grossing Coen brother movie of all time), all of them hits, all of them minimal budgets, all of them big ROI, and all of them adult dramas (which were supposedly dead as recently as 2 years ago).

You'd think Hwood would make two connections: (1) Unlike current teenage males, who evidently have little allegiance to seeing movies in a theater, Baby Boomers have had a lifelong love affair with movies; (2) If Hwood produces a good movie with a good story, we will show up. In droves. Hell, there's like 80 million of us, that's a mighty big-ass target demo.

But no, Midnight in Paris is a fluke, based on a savvy "guerilla" marketing campaign.

Now pass me the comic books and CGI. We've got a franchise to develop!

@Scott

And I hope it continues, because one of my projects is an adult drama (granted, it has action, but it's not an action movie, not when compared to something like Transformers) and it would be nice to personally be involved with adding more proof to the pile ;)

@F. Scott: As they say in Hollywood, "From your lips to God's ears."

The reason it worked for me was because the summer is generally a dead zone for those seeking intellectually stimulating movies and this one just so happened to be the only one offered. If it had premiered in November, it'd be crushed by critics. The movie really had no third act. It wrapped things up with the main character a little too neatly.

I used to work at a landmark theater in Boston, and summertime did used to feature a lot of counter programming with the adult dramatic fares. But the indie genre has died. Still, everyone should go see Submarine - it's quite a spectacular indie flick from Britain.
Re: summer blockbusters for teenage movies - this has been a shit summer in general though, I mean, there really isn't a well-executed action flick. The smart studios should've realized that special forces are the new Superheroes, but no, we'll have to wait another summer or two before every summer movie features a fancy tactical advisor teaching movie stars to hold guns convincingly.

I think the last lull in American summer action movies was like '93.