This is a fantastic movie. Critics can have their opinions, but they can't change the fact that I not only enjoyed this more than any other late Woody Allen film, but I was deeply touched by it. It reached into deep places. I laughed at it more than other films. The laughter and the delight the film evoked in me can't be mistaken. That's how it affected me. What better criterion can we have for a film? If the same film touches some people and not others, is it more likely due to a limitation of the film or the people AKA critics? Other Allen films are funny. Other films dissect our collective hypocrisy, self-centeredness, and inhumanity. This one stands out because it sounds notes of hope and love, the importance of ephemeral moments of beauty accessible to everyone willing to pay theprice for them. It's about a young man searching for his way in life, what life has to offer that's has genuine value. It rings the bell of the different things he loves, that lift him above the daily grind. THe movie manages to invoked moments of these magic spells for us, too. It's also about the foibles of film makers. Funny, and pitiful. Allen is well qualified to draw those portraits. Particularly impressive is the charm and presence of Solena Gomez. Her character radiates warmth, honesty and aliveness, profound depth of feeling combined with social adroitness. Timothee Chalamet does a good job of presenting a character that captures the features of Woody Allen without being a parody or imitation. Allen invoked the feelings and came up with the words. It's inevitable that Gatsby will remind us of Woody Allen himself, as he is on screen. Chalamet gives us an original refreshing character. People who demand a brand new original plot line are ignoring literary history. Sec comedy has used the same plot twists from ancient Rome, through Shakespeare, down to the present. This does film have insights into the meaning of life not found in many films. P.S. As far as the rejection of the film on the grounds of the accusation against Woody Allen, this is just my opinion. I respect other opinions. This is an unproven allegation based on the memory of a child from many decades ago. It's known that such allegations can turn out to be untrue, for many reasons. As I understand it, three different official agencies investigated the claim. One of them, an expert in such allegations, exonerated Allen. The other two found no credible evidence. Do we want to be a society that destroys the career of a great American artist on the basis of a single, unproven, contested allegation? I don't think that is justice.

See other user reviews