The Ladykillers - The Coens Go Gospel

Despite my love of the Coen Brothers, there are a number of their films I’ve been dreading writing about to the point that I almost decided against doing this series. The Ladykillers, along with Intolerable Cruelty and Burn After Reading, make up a trilogy of Coen comedies that I simply don’t have much to write about (yet I’ll still stretch this out to nearly 1,000 somehow). Though I’m still holding out hope for Burn. 

The Ladykillers is unique in their filmography for a few reasons, though. First, it is widely considered their worst film. I don’t like thinking about any of their movies as the “worst” because it makes it sound like a bad movie, and I don’t think they’ve made a bad film. Even with that qualifier, Ladykillers is not my least favorite Coen film. And when we add in the solo efforts, I’m not sure this is even bottom five for me. 

Your enjoyment of this, much like any comedy, depends on what you find funny. If you find Tom Hanks really going for it, speaking verbosely as some kind of sinister Colonel Sanders, then this might be for you. Or maybe you like Marlon Wayans and J. K. Simmons telling each other to fuck themselves multiple times. Or maybe you just like dark comedies. If that’s the case, as it was with me, then you might like this. It’s unlikely to be a favorite, but there’s fun to be had with it. 

Tom Hanks deserves quite a bit of praise because he is truly going for it. His interactions with Mrs. Munson (Irma P. Hall, carrying the film in her own right solely in her flummoxed reactions to Hanks’s bullshit) are great, and there’s a musicality to all the nonsense he spouts throughout. He even gets one of the great Coen waffle/pancake lines: “We must all have waffles forthwith!” And that’s saying something. It wouldn’t be saying something for any other filmmakers in cinematic history, but it’s something for the Coens. 

Wayans and Simmons worked the most for me, however. Simmons alone is great (“Easiest thing in the world!”), especially anytime his beloved Mountain Water…I mean Mountain Girl is brought up. But when he and Wayans start going after each other, it’s hilarious. They devolve to “fuck you”s so fast I can’t help but laugh. 

Aside from the wacky characters and dark humor, the movie looks great (Roger Deakins). And the Coens were trying something with the use of gospel music in the film (more on that later). So why is this so hated? Partly, it was despised at the time of its release because it’s a remake. I remember many reviews condemning it for being much less funny than the superior British original. I get this mentality, and god knows I’ve bitched about remakes plenty of times throughout the years. But that didn’t matter to me at the time or now. For one thing, I had never seen the original, and even after I watched it soon after seeing this, I didn’t find it all that amazing. I rarely find old comedies truly funny; I just prefer more modern humor. 

Other than the remake aspect, I can understand the humor not working for most people. But the fact that it’s the most hated in their filmography gives it a dubious honor for me personally because this was the first film of theirs I saw in theaters. But it wasn’t the first Coen film I bought a ticket for. As I recalled in my O Brother article, I bought a ticket for that film but snuck into Blow (only to get kicked out). I do like this movie, but I wish I could claim Big Lebowski or something as my first theater experience.

Finally, the Coens seemed to be trying to recapture the magic of the O Brother soundtrack phenomenon with this film. The only special features on the DVD are about the gospel music in the film, and there’s even a mid-credits sequence (a first and only, I believe, for them) featuring a performance at the church. Obviously, nothing about this film took off, so the gospel music fell on deaf ears. 

I’m not a big fan of gospel music, myself, but I am a fan of Bob Dylan, and there is a bit of a connection there. First, Mrs. Munson talks about a young Jewish man with a guitar who visited her church years ago. This could possibly be a reference to Dylan, who famously went gospel for three albums (Slow Train Coming, Saved, Shot of Love). That phase, much like this film, was met with disappointment and anger. 

As the years have passed, however, some people, myself included, have come around on Dylan’s gospel era. Perhaps others will eventually do the same with The Ladykillers. Sure, Dylan’s gospel stuff isn’t my favorite, but there are a few songs I enjoy immensely from those albums. Much in the same way, Ladykillers isn’t my favorite Coen film, but there are plenty of elements that make it a fun one. And some could argue The Ladykillers is like Dylan’s gospel era; in other words, his worst (I would argue his worst era is the Great American Songbook era [though I don’t know that it’s technically considered an era]). But if you give it some time and another chance, you might find a few bright spots, like Tom Hanks demanding waffles, or J. K. Simmons telling Marlon Wayans to go fuck himself.

One Battle After Another - Time Doesn't Exist, Yet It Controls Us Anyway

I’m dabbling with submitting reviews for a local newspaper again, so the first part of this is my spoiler and vulgarity-free thoughts on One Battle After Another. I’ll go free-form in the Random Thoughts section. 

As a huge fan of Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood is one of my favorite films of all time), One Battle After Another is easily the most anticipated movie in recent memory. That anticipation coupled with the nearly universal early praise for the film worried me: could this film possibly live up to its expectations? To be brief, yes. But I’ll give you the long-winded answer, too.

One Battle is one of those special films that can be entertaining completely at face value, but you can also apply theories to it. The basic storyline of an ex-revolutionary-in-hiding forced to come back to action to try to save his teenage daughter is enough to make the nearly three hour run time feel brief. But there’s also a metaphor for parenting in general to appreciate.

The film never stops. An extended prologue introduces us to the French 75, a group fighting against the immigration policies of the country. They attack detention centers and blow up government buildings. This aspect of the story will undoubtedly trigger some viewers, but I promise this is not a preachy film. There are white supremacists and revolutionaries and detained immigrants and that might offend some viewers, but that’s also the world we live in, so I don’t know why it would. And that’s the point of the film, in a way. This world is one battle after another, and things don’t change that much. That is why it isn’t preachy; it’s simply stating that it is what is, and this is a story about people fighting those battles.

Maybe I’m wrong and no one will care (so far, I haven’t seen much outrage about the film, but then again, I don’t think the people it would anger even know it exists, much less want to watch it). I found the setting effective as it puts the immigration crisis in the background of the film as this tense spectre surrounding everyone involved.

Tension is one of the strengths of the film. Leonardo Dicaprio (the aforementioned ex-revolutionary) spends pretty much the whole film flailing and failing to find his daughter. He is constantly moving even though he doesn’t seem to be aware of where he is or where he is going at any given moment. That, coupled with Jonny Greenwood’s predictably great score, give the movie a constant sense of unease as anything can happen at any moment. But it’s also funny because Dicaprio has become so inept and burnt out over the years that he can’t even remember the codewords and phrases necessary to get information from his former group. The comedy is the lifesaver of the film, otherwise it would be an exercise in tense misery.

Dicaprio’s inability to accomplish much of anything for most of the film presents the metaphorical aspect: parenthood. You don’t need to be a parent yourself to understand Dicaprio’s struggle in the film. His sole goal is to protect his daughter, but he’s unable to both because of his own failings and a world he can’t control. That’s parenting for everyone, even people who aren’t former revolutionaries. You want the best for your children, and you want them to always be safe. But, especially as they get older, things get out of hand. You can’t be with your kids all the time, and even if you could be, you can’t stop every bad thing from happening to them. But you can try. As the film title states, it’s one battle after another.

This wasn’t at the forefront of my mind while watching the film, however. It’s far too fast-moving and entertaining to give you time to dwell on deeper meanings (all that came later, thinking about what I had just seen). It’s cliché to call a film a “ride,” but it truly is, sometimes literally. There’s a uniquely filmed car chase near the end of the film that was one of the best in recent memory, accentuated by the IMAX presentation I saw the film presented in. 

One Battle is easily the most action-packed film of Anderson’s career, though that’s a low bar to top. But it’s not just car chases and shootouts. There’s a propulsion to the film that Anderson’s previous films lack (that’s not a dig at his other movies, it’s just that his later films are more meandering). Every character in this film is constantly moving to some goal with no time to think about it. The villain of the film, Sean Penn (weirding it up to try to get another Oscar), is like a creepy Terminator constantly moving in on his target. 

Penn is equal parts unnerving and goofy, and is likely to gain the most awards season attention. But everyone in this is great. Dicaprio has perfected his neurotic rageaholic character at this point. Benicio Del Toro provides plenty of comedy as an aloof sensei. Teyana Taylor fully embodies a revolutionary. And Chase Infiniti handles the tricky job of portraying someone both vulnerable and capable. 

It all adds up to one of my favorite films of the year. And the more I dwell on it, the more I like it. Perhaps one aspect will put it over the top for me: this is possibly the only film of Anderson’s that made me tear up. I'm a sucker for parental stuff in movies these days, but I don’t think it’s just that. He created this relationship between Dicaprio and Infiniti that feels real. I didn’t just want things to work out for them because they were the “good guys” of the story; I wanted these characters to make it because they earned it. Anderson detractors often accuse his films of being cold, but I can’t imagine that argument being made for this film.

One Battle After Another lived up to the hype for me. It’s 161 minutes of humorous tension, and I immediately wanted to watch it again when it was over. I can’t think of higher praise than that.

Random Thoughts

Still not seeing much in the way of MAGA outrage at this movie (once again, I think it’s simply flying under their radar since it doesn’t star Dean Cain or Kevin Sorbo), but I am seeing a few IMDb reviews that claim they are posting simply because the movie is too hyped up, and they want to bring the score down because the movie is just good, not great. I can understand that, and that’s partly the point of my review. Yes, movie people are high on this, maybe too high. And maybe I am, too. But I don’t think so. The only evidence I have for this is the fact that my wife dug this movie, and she doesn’t know who Paul Thomas Anderson is. Every aspect of the movie worked with her because it’s a good movie, not because she “wanted” to like it because it’s big on Letterboxd. I guess time will tell.

On that same note, a lot of folks are ranking PTA or at least alluding to where this would rank for them. I’m not doing a ranking on him any time soon, but I will say at the moment that this would probably be top five. I’m thinking maybe: 1. There Will Be Blood 2. Boogie Nights 3. The Master 4. One Battle After Another 5. Inherent Vice …fuck it…6. Magnolia 7. Punch-Drunk Love 8. Phantom Thread 9. Licorice Pizza 10. Hard Eight (but mainly because I haven’t seen it in years). 

That’s just off the top of my head, and it would probably change if I did a complete rewatch. But this movie’s place in a PTA ranking has nothing to do with how good it is. So a movie not being as “good” as Boogie Nights or There Will Be Blood is disappointing? If so, then might as well stop making fucking movies because that’s a high bar. 

I think this movie is getting hyperbole because it resonates with the world we currently live in more than any other PTA film ever has. His contemporary movies (Hard Eight, Magnolia, and Punch-Drunk Love) haven’t been tied to the moment they were made in. This is a movie of the time, and people wanted it, and maybe they even wanted to like it. The fact that it’s also funny with some action and excellent performances elevates it that much more. I kind of wish I could be a contrarian and tell everyone to calm the fuck down about this one, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. And more importantly, I like when I enjoy a movie. I don’t want to hate shit or be disappointed in it. I love movies, and when a really fucking good one comes out, I really fucking like it. All I’m saying is it’s okay to like something even when it’s overhyped. There are plenty of killjoy dildos in the world; no need for another one.

All that written, it’s okay to not like this movie. But if you’re only reviewing it or scoring it in response to other people’s thoughts on it, then fuck off and come up with an original or personal reason for your opinion.

I only made it about halfway through Vineland before I watched the movie, but I can still confirm this is a loose adaptation, and I’m glad. I’ll finish it, but I find Vineland very hard to get into. I just need to be in the right mood for Pynchon, and right now I’m just not in it.

Concerning Pynchon adaptations, this is wildly different from Anderson’s work on Inherent Vice. That film, which I’ve grown to absolutely love, is probably too faithful to Pynchon’s text. Characters mumble a lot, and much of the dialogue is taken directly from Pynchon, including all the “ums” and “uhs” and generally odd wording. It can be tough to decipher while reading and impossible to parse while watching. But there’s a musicality to it that worked in Inherent Vice. Here, Anderson admittedly cherry-picked elements he connected to and crafted his own story out of it, and the film is ten times more accessible than Inherent Vice because of it. It doesn’t make it automatically better, but just different and more audience-friendly.

I loved seeing Kevin Tighe in this. Of all the great casting choices in this, I never expected to see the bar owner from Road House in this, especially since I thought he was long dead.

Seeing Sean Penn survive the gunshot and car crash cracked me up so much. Then for him to show up all disfigured to still apply to the Christmas Adventurers Club with a “semen demon” story floored me. That stupid look on his fucked up face as he died was the chef’s kiss. 

So great to have Jim Downey deliver the “semen demon” line.

What a fucked up weird room for the white supremacists to meet in. It’s like a wildlife exhibit in a suburban tunnel system. Truly evil.

Del Toro saving Bob but getting busted for a DUI is great. It just shows how relaxed he is with this whole revolutionary thing, and it's further evidence that there is nothing really to be won here, just keep fighting. And fuck it, have a beer or two while you’re at it.

I’m not a big car chase guy (I mean, I’ll suck Ronin’s dick like any other good little cineaste, but it’s not something I look for in a film), but Anderson’s use of car POV and hills made this one special. And watching it in IMAX almost made me a little sick to my stomach…in a good way. 

I guess it’s kind of a good thing that this movie is doing just okay. That way, it hasn’t become the subject of a political debate like I thought it might. Yet. If this wins Best Picture, or even just gets a ton of noms, I’m sure it’ll still be used by morons as evidence that the Hollywood Elite hate America and want violence across the nation. 

All the out of touch white supremacists had some nice old-timey vocabulary peppered in: teeny-boppers, reefer, etc. These pieces of shit still use 1950s terminology because that’s what they want America to be.

I could have used more French 75 stuff. There’s not nearly enough Wood Harris in this. Or Junglepussy.