Less than a year after the release of No Country For Old Men, perhaps the best movie of 2007, the Coen brothers are back with Burn After Reading. The last time there was such a short lapse between films, Los Bros Coen gave us their worst film,The Ladykillers, so there is reason to be concerned that their latest endeavor might leave something to be desired.
The parallels between Burn After Reading and The Ladykillers do not end with the time they took to film. Both movies feature casts with much more star power than many of the Coen Brothers’ previous efforts. This is a shame, because part of the charm of their movies is their use of actors like Jeff Bridges, William H. Macy, or John Turturro. They are actors whose public persona and celebrity don’t overshadow the characters they play on screen, which cannot be said of Brad Pitt or Tom Hanks.
This is Burn After Reading’s biggest flaw, its overblown cast. Regardless of whether you take Brad Pitt’s performance as a nice, lighthearted departure from his usual roles, or as a horrible case of a pretty boy actor winking at us as he plays a fool, there are just too many big personalities to fit into one movie.
Brad Pitt’s Patented Smoothie Suck.
The whole thing is practically bursting at the seams. While Pitt overdoes his gym bunny role, you have John Malkovich, yelling and being John Malkovich, George Clooney being sexy and a little sleazy, and Frances McDormand falling for George Clooney. All the while, the usual set of character actors swirls around in the confusion, including J.K. Simmons as the J. Jonah Jameson of the CIA, making the whole thing so loud, it almost drowns out the comedy and craft the Coens have made their career with.
No matter how over-stuffed the cast is, Joel and Ethan Coen have not lost their considerable talent for writing funny and ridiculous scenes to go along with their bizarre and idiotic characters. The dialogue is still sharp, the scenes are tight, and the narrative flows from all directions, but still feels structured and natural. They’ve staked their career on making movies about populations of bumbling idiots that, despite their ineptitude, make a compelling story, especially as the merciless invisible hand of fate (not sure if this is Ethan or Joel’s hand) makes their lives more difficult at every turn.
Hello, Brad Pitt, this is George Clooney, Tilda Swinton, Frances McDormand, and John Malcovich. Let’s make a movie.
The thing is, there is not a single character, save perhaps for Frances McDormand, that the audience can really sympathize with. Not only are the people unlikeable, but their tragic bumbles fail to generate a modicum of sympathy for their characters. Burn After Reading’s characters are such disgusting caricatures of humanities worst traits that while you can laugh at them, you neither care if the good ones succeed or the annoying and evil ones get punished.
Despite these flaws, this is still an above average comedy with smart dialogue and good laughs. The characters may not be top notch, but the story pulls them through it all with a wink and a nudge that may not be amazing, but is at least satisfying.
Disclaimer: Josh Leichtung has not seen this movie. Everything written in this pedestrian review is purely speculation, but is nonetheless 100% accurate.
Burn After Reading opens in theaters this Friday, September 12.
GCCMD: George Clooney and the Coens making dollars
|
6 responses so far ↓
1 anthony // Sep 15, 2008 at 1:42 pm
was this preemptive? it reads like you seen the movie, already
2 Josh Leichtung // Sep 15, 2008 at 1:45 pm
No, and I still haven’t seen it, but I know everything I said is true.
3 Jake Mix // Sep 16, 2008 at 11:49 am
I can confirm, as someone who saw it, that Josh was a bit of an oracle here. This movie was terrible, and his article is right on the money.
4 Rich Bunnell // Sep 16, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Well, he did call it “above average.”
5 Josh Leichtung // Sep 16, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I would argue that “terrible” can still count as above average for comedies. Of comedies in theaters, I’m sure it’s better than Disaster Movie or The Women or The House Bunny.
6 Krishna // Sep 22, 2008 at 3:15 pm
COUNTERPOINT!
Bah. Jake is needlessly harsh. As a comedy, I think it’s not too far off the mark. There are number of shockingly funny moments. Perhaps it helped in that I went into the movie with no idea about anything, other than that it had George Clooney in it, and that the Coens were responsible for it.
Brad Pitt’s continuing tendency to play oddball characters is one thing I can say he has going for him here (for other examples, see, e.g., Snatch, 12 Monkeys, Meet Joe Black, and Ocean’s Eleven). The other is his looks.
Frances McDormand’s performance is muted to the point that her trademark intelligence and depth of emotion are both stunted. Unfortunate, as when she first appeared on screen, I anticipated enjoying watching her performance, but was instead left flat.
George Clooney’s performance is pretty solid, and I don’t give a damn what anyone in the universe has to say, he is the best thing Hollywood has going for it. Fuck you if you disagree, man-hater.
The CIA-as-Keystone-Kops motif is enjoyable, in a time when we are all in fear of what the real CIA is doing to abrogate our civil liberties. Simmons is hilarious as ever. There is nothing I have seen that has not been enhanced by his participation, and this film is no exception.
John Malkovich, I would argue, is the sympathetic character. He is a bit of an ass, and he really should have divorced that cold bitch of a wife, but he isn’t cheating on anyone (perhaps only because he couldn’t get anyone else?), and doesn’t wander through the movie attempting to steal others’ happiness.
I suspect that had I seen even a preview of this, I wouldn’t have enjoyed it half so much, so I’d give it three stars, as a somewhat-above-average comedy, and be done with it.
-K
Leave a Comment