Showing posts with label Coen Brothers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Coen Brothers. Show all posts

Sunday, December 28, 2025

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs - "All the Meanness in the Used-to-Be."

As I reach the end of the Coen filmography (as a duo, and hopefully not the true end), I have started to consider my Coen fandom. Before I started this rewatch, I would have put them up there with my favorite filmmakers of all time, and that’s still the case. But the tail end of things did give me a little doubt, and that’s bullshit. My love of the majority of their filmography put my expectations far too high. So when I see something like Hail, Caesar! and The Ballad of Buster Scruggs, I come away liking them and even appreciating how others can find them to be masterpieces, but I’m disappointed that I didn’t love the films.

This is obviously my own problem and no fault of the Coens. With Scruggs specifically, I think my issue was how much I loved True Grit upon this most recent re-watch. That movie just gets better every time I watch it. The first time I watched Scruggs, I don’t think I was expecting another True Grit, but the episodic nature of it threw me, and the Netflix release of it bothered me, as well. I’ve gotten more accepting of streaming releases, but there’s still this ‘90s kid in me that thinks of them as direct-to-video releases that are inherently lesser than theatrical releases.


Ignoring the streaming aspect (though I still think it’s bullshit that this doesn’t have a physical release), the episodic formula made this feel more like a limited series than a movie. I prefer longer stories from the Coens, not vignettes. Of course, all of this depends on how much you like the vignettes.


For the most part, I enjoyed them all. The titular “Scruggs” is my favorite just for the morbid fun (nothing beats the Kurgan shooting himself in the face three times) of it all. And I could watch a whole movie of Tim Blake Nelson singing and murdering his way through the Old West. The James Franco segment is better than just the meme it spawned. I’ll take Stephen Root yelling “Pan shot!” over “First time?” every time. And the Tom Waits prospector segment is simply beautiful. 


While my favorite segments feature plenty of death and misery, I still find them mostly fun. The other three segments bum me out. The wagon train segment is fine, and I appreciate how shitty it presents the reality of the world (and it confirms that Grandma Turner from True Grit is still kicking, or was, if it takes place before). But that ending is a bit of a gut punch. “The Mortal Remains” is my least favorite segment. I just don’t enjoy Sartre-type shit, even though all the acting and dialogue is top-notch. I especially enjoyed Harris from Major League (Chelcie Ross) as a fur trapper even goofier than the dentist with the bear hide from True Grit


Those two segments are downers, but nothing compares to “Meal Ticket,” with Liam Neeson and Harry Melling. Nothing in the entire Coen filmography bums me out as much as this segment. It’s to the point that if I ever watch this again, I plan on skipping this part. And that’s my biggest “issue” with the film; it bums me out. It’s just not something I want to return to, whereas films like Llewyn Davis, Raising Arizona, Miller’s Crossing, The Big Lebowski, Fargo, True Grit, No Country for Old Men, A Serious Man, and The Man Who Wasn’t There create worlds I want to revisit and spend time in, year after year, even if they contain some terrible things, as well. And I truly cannot explain what it is about those movies compared to the others that click with me, but I’ve seen some wildly different rankings of their films all over the internet, so I know I’m not alone. When one person’s bottom film can be another’s favorite, then you know you’re dealing with some of the best filmmakers of all time.

Friday, December 19, 2025

Hail, Caesar! - "Would That It Were So Simple."

 


When I started working through the entire Coen filmography, I immediately regretted it. Not because it’s too many movies, some of which I don’t have strong opinions of (though that is also the case), but because the end was going to coincide with screener season. Every year, I think I’m going to stay on top of the nearly two hundred screeners I get sent for the IFJA Awards, and every year I end up in a fugue state, churning through endless awards fodder, unable to allow myself time to watch anything else, much less write about it. It’s a weakness, and I’ll likely never get over it. This is just to say I’m still going to get through all of these movies, just later than I would like, but what else is new for me?


It’s fitting that the first movie I write about after awards exhaustion is Hail, Caesar!, the Coens’ love letter to old Hollywood. This was their excuse to make a snippet of their favorite genres from childhood; a time when there were simply types of movies. Here’s the new Western, and the costume drama, and the song and dance picture, and the Biblical epic, etc. Whereas now I’m watching documentaries about Hamlet being performed within Grand Theft Auto Online and Timothée Chalamet ping pong movies set in the 1950s with music from the 1980s and co-stars like Mr. Wonderful, Abel Ferrara, and the homeless dude with the great voice from a few years ago (for the record, I liked both movies). These were simpler times.


But I didn’t grow up in those times. My nostalgia is all about Ninja Turtles, Indiana Jones, and Darth Vader, not Fred Astaire and Clark Gable. Because of that, I simply enjoy this one and consider it a lesser Coen film. In fact, it was only one of two of their films I didn’t own on physical media until I bought it in anticipation of this article (the other is Scruggs, which has not been released on physical media since it's a Netflix movie). I get why some consider this an underrated masterpiece, but it doesn’t hit the same way for me. For instance, I know that the Channing Tatum scene is amazing, but it doesn’t hold a candle to literally any moment from Miller’s Crossing for me. 


Perhaps it’s the same issue I’ve been writing about for the past few movies in their filmography: straight comedy. This is a very silly movie, and I’m particular about Coen silliness. I love all the wacky shit in Raising Arizona, but Scarlett Johansson complaining about a “fish ass” in a New York accent doesn’t do much for me. 


This is all sounding too negative. I do like this movie, and I like it more with each rewatch. Clooney is doing great dumbass work. The Kurgan and the Highlander are in this! Dolph Lundgren has a silent cameo. Brolin is perfect, and that scene with him listening to Clooney’s Communist ramblings as he grows increasingly enraged is hilarious. And Alden Ehrenreich steals the show. His catastrophic first scene in the costume drama with Ralph Fiennes is funny on so many levels.


But like his character says, or can’t say: “Would that it were so simple.” Simply put, this should be one of my favorite Coen Brothers movies, but instead I often forget it exists. As the Coens drift further and further away from their classic collaborations, perhaps I’ll look back on this as their final masterpiece before splitting up. (I know Scruggs came after this, but as I’ll get into next time, that felt less like a movie to me and more like a streaming experiment.) Still, after sifting through the best cinema has to offer this year, it is nice to step back in time to a simpler, sillier time, and Hail, Caesar! is perfect for that.

Tuesday, November 18, 2025

Burn After Reading - "League of Morons"

I’ve finally reached the end of the trilogy of Coen Brothers movies that I like to varying degrees but have very little to comment upon with Burn After Reading. When it first came out, I was quite disappointed with this. Sure, the dildo sex chair thing Clooney makes was funny, and that Brad Pitt death scene is amazing, but overall I just didn’t like the pointlessness of it all. And worse, the characters were classic Coen stupid/evil, but they weren’t fun to be around. 

Years later, I enjoy Burn more, but it’s not one I’m interested in watching again any time soon. The characters are still too unlikeable for me, but the pointlessness of it worked this time around. In fact, the final scene with J. K. Simmons basically laying out how all of this was stupid and meaningless was my favorite moment of the entire movie. 


It took me three Coen comedies, but the ending of Burn After Reading made me realize that my issue with these three films isn’t so much that they are comedies; it’s that plot is not important. In my favorite Coen films, there is comedy, but it happens as part of a story. In Intolerable Cruelty, there are so many marriages and divorces that they become meaningless, and the film is more about wacky humor and Clooney discovering love. With The Ladykillers, there is a heist story, but it’s actually mostly happening in the background as the focus is on the idiosyncratic characters. In that film, they all seem so inept you almost forget that the robbery is actually successful. And then there’s Burn After Reading, which is almost a spoof of spy movies in that no one ever seems to precisely know what’s going on, and the plot is just there to show how stupid everyone is in this “league of morons.” 


But in films like Miller’s Crossing, Raising Arizona, and even The Big Lebowski, the story is given more focus (even if it’s convoluted as it is in Crossing and Lebowski), so the characters, dumb or evil or otherwise, are on a mission in which comedic things sometimes happen. It certainly feels like I’m splitting hairs here, but I believe this is why some of their films hit more with me while others fall a little flat. 


Burn After Reading is my favorite of this trilogy of comedies because it acknowledges that the story is largely pointless. And, after years of watching spy movies, I often stop and think during them that none of it matters, and it seems like each side is going through the motions to justify their existence in the intelligence community. So even if Simmons didn’t learn anything by the end of this movie, I did.


Special Features


There isn’t a ton of stuff with this release. But I did enjoy a moment from one of the behind-the-interviews with the Coens. They talk about their actual first film about Washington, a remake of Advise & Consent they made on Super 8 when Joel was 12-13 and Ethan was 10. Ethan says it's “underrated.” By whom?

Saturday, October 4, 2025

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.

Thursday, September 18, 2025

Intolerable Cruelty - ...

I’ve been dreading this one. Not because I dislike it, but because I couldn’t imagine I’d have much to say about it…and I was right, which is why I kept the ellipsis for a title of this article when it was originally meant to be a placeholder.

Intolerable Cruelty isn’t a bad film, and it’s not even a Coen-for-hire film (which it sometimes gets saddled with), but it’s just not my thing. I can appreciate the acting, the comedy, and some of the weird Coen touches, but I just don’t enjoy this one all that much, and I don’t plan on ever watching it again. 


It all comes down to comedic taste, and I am not a screwball comedy guy and, despite this being one of the only Coen films to take place in the present, this is a straight up 1930s/40s screwball comedy. It’s the type of comedy I can appreciate but doesn’t make me laugh. The interaction about Kirshner, the “have you sat before her before?” scene, the silly names, etc. It’s all very amusing, but I find it more tiring than funny. Once again, this is just my taste in comedy; I can understand plenty of people finding this to be their most underappreciated film.


I truly have nothing else to add beyond some DVD special feature stuff and random thoughts, so I’m not going to make myself pad this out to a thousand words when a couple hundred will do it. Intolerable Cruelty just isn’t for me.


DVD Special Features


This is a relatively bare bones release featuring standard making-of doc, which was interesting just because it mentions that the Coens weren’t originally going to direct but it just somehow happened. 


There’s a short segment on the fashion of the film. Okay.


Then there are the “Filmmaker Approved and Arranged” deleted scenes and outtakes. By far the most interesting aspect of the release. Not because the scenes are interesting, but because of the ones the Coens apparently approved. First up is a supercut of Paul Adelstein saying “Everyone eats berries.” Then a George Clooney and Catherine Zeta-Jones outtake compilation. And, finally, the train footage Rex Rexroth watched while bouncing around with women. This was definitely them just fucking with the DVD people when they came to them for input.


Random Thoughts 


Were pool guys just plowing through Hollywood housewives in the ‘90s and early ‘00s? Between this and Airheads and Extract (just off the top of my head; I'm sure there are a lot more), it seems like more of a common problem than it probably really was.


“That's my Daytime Television Lifetime Achievement Award!”


The “gizmo,” or “Intruder” has to be a predecessor for Clooney's device in Burn After Reading.


“When Marilyn and I first met, we were crazy about each other. Not emotionally, of course.”


I want a subscription to Living Without Intestines Magazine.


The senior partner is easily the most Coen element in the movie.


Billy Bob Thornton is playing such a wildly different character than he did in the Coens’ previous film. It's funny that he went from a character who barely talked to one who wouldn't shut up. I'm sure the casting was a little in-joke for them.


Sunday, September 7, 2025

The Man Who Wasn't There - The One and Only Coen Commentary


I own almost every Coen Brothers movie on physical media, and something that is immediately clear is that they are not very interested in talking about their movies. They show up for the occasional special feature interview (mostly for the Criterion releases of their films [Blood Simple, Miller’s Crossing, No Country for Old Men, and Inside Llewyn Davis]), but for the most part, they leave their movies to the viewers. So a director’s commentary is most likely out of the question. In fact, it’s so abhorrent to them that for the DVD release of Blood Simple they made up a film historian character and wrote a script for him for the commentary. That’s a lot of work to get around having to talk about your own movie. After that, there’s just the Roger Deakins commentary on the Fargo disc. So imagine my shock when I saw that there was a commentary for The Man Who Wasn’t There featuring Joel and Ethan and star Billy Bob Thornton. To date, it’s their only commentary. So I felt it necessary to check out, along with the other special features, and report on. But before I get into that, I wanted to share my personal interpretation of this forgotten, beautiful Coen Brothers film.

UFOs and Gullibility


Thornton’s Ed Crane is one of the quietest characters in film history. Without his narration, he comes across as nearly mute. Silent characters, and people in general, are sometimes perceived as smarter than the “gabbers” (as Ed calls chatty people). But I’ve always taken issue with this. It’s an asset to hold your tongue when you don’t have anything to say, sure, but that doesn’t mean you’re automatically some deep, philosophical type. Ed, however, fancies himself as such. But I disagree.


While Ed might seem to be a bit smarter than all the people chattering away around him, he actually buys into a lot of bullshit and makes plenty of mistakes. In his defense, everything he does is part of his quest to find meaning in life, but he’s too gullible about it. 


Ed buying into the dry cleaning scheme sets everything in motion. Jon Polito isn’t even selling him on it that hard. He’s just another customer gabbing away during a haircut. But something about this futuristic new laundry method sparks something in Ed. Knowing his wife, Doris, was cheating on him didn’t spark anything, but dry cleaning did. 


It’s impossible to know if the dry cleaning investment was a scam since Big Dave killed Polito. But regardless of that, it’s still a foolhardy investment that upends Ed’s world all done over a traveling salesman’s soft pitch in a barber’s chair. 


The events set in motion by that investment through blackmailing lead to Ed killing Dave, and Doris killing herself in jail. But none of this brings him meaning, and he seems to just be drifting through everything. Two things snap him out of it: Birdy (Scarlett Johansson) and Ann Nirdlinger (Katherin Borowitz). 


Birdy playing the piano skillfully sparks something again in Ed. He thinks he’s witnessing a prodigy that her drunk father (a great Richard Jenkins) is oblivious to. Ed takes it upon himself to take Birdy to music teacher, who breaks Ed’s spirit by explaining that Birdy is certainly capable, but she lacks the heart to make a musician. Ed is further crestfallen when Birdy admits that she doesn’t even care that much about music, and things literally spiral out of control when Birdy misinterprets Ed’s attention as sexual in nature and attempts to give him blowjob on the ride home, leading to a car wreck.



After the car crashes, a hubcap that looks like a flying saucer rolls along the road, bringing us to Ed’s final attempt to find meaning. The UFO stuff can appear as some Coen randomness on a first watch, but of course it’s more than that. It’s first brought to Ed’s attention when Ann, looking straight out of Plan 9 from Outer Space, shows up to tell Ed that she knows Dave’s death was all about an alien encounter they had while camping a year before. At first, Ed, rightfully, thinks Ann is having a breakdown over Dave’s death, but the seed is planted.


Once Ed is put on death row, his need for meaning brings back the UFOs. He has a dream in prison in which a UFO shows up. He goes out into the yard, sees the spotlight of the UFO, then it just leaves him there rather than saving him from prison and showing him another world than the one he knows. Ed then goes to his death, staring at haircuts and wondering what will come next, if anything. If not for Ann, he wouldn’t have even considered the possibility of aliens. 


Just before his death, however, there is a seemingly mundane flashback. A tarmacadam salesman (Shooter McGavin himself, Christopher McDonald) approaches Ed, going into his spiel. Ed doesn’t seem too interested, but he’s also not getting rid of the guy. Then Doris pulls up, immediately rips up the salesman’s pamphlet and sends him on his way. As she walks past Ed, she seems disgusted that he had let the salesman get that far. Inside, they sit silently until Ed starts to try to say something, and Doris stops him. This is their marriage, and this is how Ed has been kept in check all these years. 


This scene, or variations of it, has probably happened dozens of times in their marriage. Some salesman or con artist approaches silent Ed, then Doris swoops in to stop it. Without Doris to stop Ed with the dry cleaning plan, everything fell apart. Doris knew that Ed was gullible and couldn’t help himself when someone approached him with something new and seemingly meaningful.


Ed is definitely a deep thinker, as evidenced by the hilarious “You ever wonder about it?” conversation he attempts to have about how hair just keeps growing. But as Freddy Reidenschneider (the always great Tony Shalhoub) points out, paraphrasing Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle: “The more you look, the less you really know.”


Trying to find meaning in life may seem like the smart thing to do, especially in the face of constant nonsensical chatter. But the more you search for meaning, the less you find as you miss what’s right in front of you. I’m not saying the film is suggesting that Ed just needed to pay more attention to his wife (though that would have prevented a few deaths). But it’s certainly suggesting that searching for meaning is pointless and, in fact, destructive, especially when you’re gullible enough to try to find meaning anytime someone approaches you with something as banal as dry cleaning. 



Special Features


Aside from the commentary, there are deleted scenes, an extended interview with Roger Deakins, and a behind-the-scenes featurette.


The deleted scenes are hilarious. One is just Shalhoub’s opening argument minus the Thornton narration.


The rest are three haircuts given their own listing as a “scene”: the Timberline, the Duck Butt, and the Alpine Rope Toss. Literally each one is a three second shot of a haircut.


Then there's the pivotal “Doris’ [sic] Salad,” which is a shot of a wedge salad being placed on a plate. 


When shit like this happens on one of their physical releases, I assume it's a joke, then there’s this line from the behind the scenes featurette from Ethan Coen: “The whole barber thing was really just a backdrop. The story didn't sort of catch fire [Joel starts laughing next to him] until we added the dry-cleaning to the mix. Then we knew we had something we could take and pitch to all the studios.”


These guys will do interviews and whatnot, but they’re going to drop in some deadpan jokes like that.



The One and Only Commentary


It’s shocking how normal of a commentary it is. Though it does have the rare problem of the film being a little too loud making it hard to hear the commentary at times. I was hoping for a full on performance featuring clearly made up stories and jokes. But it’s pretty straightforward. It is nice to watch a movie along with them, because you hear them crack up at their own movie, and it’s infectious. Watching this with the commentary definitely made me see this as more of a comedy. Aside from that, here are some highlights I came across:


Billy Bob Thornton claims he was smoking real unfiltered cigarettes during the shoot, then he would go to his trailer and smoke more, and he even smoked while doing the voiceover sessions. He claims this experience helped make him quit smoking. Though I don’t know it it stuck or not.


They joke about making an Ed Crane talk show 


The soldier being eaten by the Japanese story came from Barry Sonnenfeld's dad. No telling how long they were sitting on that one. 


“I love the dialogue you guys wrote for this movie.” - Billy Bob

“None of it for you!” - Joel, I think


Good for Billy Bob remembering that Abraham Benrubi was also in U Turn.


There was a deleted scene (unfilmed) in which Ed, the night he kills Dave, wakes up to a flying saucer being outside and tiny ant-like aliens come out. They opted for the Ann UFO story. If they had gone with this route, then my gullibility theory goes right out the window. Its existence even as a deleted scene still messes with it, I guess, but I’ve always found that movies can have multiple interpretations, so I’m sticking with it.


Ethan says they did a take of the police officers telling Ed about Doris being arrested in which “Ed fled the interview.” I just like that he used the same terminology as in Fargo.


This commentary was recorded on January 8, 2002. I know this because Thornton mentions that Dave Thomas died that morning.


Thornton fluffed his pants up to make it look like he had an erection while watching Birdy play the piano.


The commentary loses some steam in the back half, with multiple moments of them just watching the movie. You even hear them shuffling around in their seats during these quiet moments.


But it picks up during the credits with Billy Bob claiming he met Roderick Jaynes, the Coens’ fake editor. The Coens play along, referring to Jaynes as kind of a rough character.


They finish talking about a dude interviewing them at Cannes named Guy Pines, but “Pines” is pronounced “penis,” and how ridiculous it is to go with that pronunciation.