It's very easy to assume Woody Allen is more talented than Steve Martin. Woody Allen is, stylistically speaking, very obvious and in your face and hard to forget. Steve Martin is much more subtle and has had a great number of truly beautiful films that have flown under the radar. Woody Allen has no where near the range of Steve Martin. All of Woody Allen's movies are very "Woody Allen" in that they are all, stylistically and thematically, the same. They are filled with the same socially relevant criticism, the same awkward, egotistical sense of humor. Steve Martin, while not all his films have been gems, has at least varied from the ridiculousness of "The Jerk" to the serious, and very quiet/understated, film "Shopgirl." He has played around with converting tragedies to comedies ("Roxanne" is based on "Cyrano De Bergerac"). He tells a story like "Bowfinger" (a very harsh criticism on the workings of Hollywood) with a mix of satire and slapstick comedy and then goes on to write the novel "Shopgirl" and make the movie, approaching it with a skillful, very subtle and somewhat heartbreaking sense of humor and tragedy, intermixing them seamlessly and thematically confronting the difficulties of accepting and loving another human being for everything they are. Add to this his approach to stand-up as widely varying as his films, incorporating brilliant literary humor with ridiculous slapstick. And of course, then there is his music. The fact that he can hold his own on the banjo with Ricky Skaggs says enough. Woody Allen is so much more limited and while he has made several very good movies, he has also made many mediocre movies that were, essentially, a shadow of those good movies, often incorporating almost all the same elements. When Steve Martin goes wrong, he goes very wrong, but he has explored so many more themes, styles, stories, etc, than Woody Allen, that even at his worst, he has managed to accomplish far more than Woody Allen ever can.