Rating: 
Summary: The Coens -- Out of Gas?
Review: One can only surmise that the Coens were contractually obligated to produce a film and had no choice, 'cause they sure had no script and no imagination. A dreadful, tedious little film, in the worst sense of "little". I liked the set decoration, makeup, and costumes; the houses, rooms, barber shop, etc., seemed exactly right for 1949. I liked little else about the film. The cinematography is especially a real disappointment, the supporting characters have little to do, and it's one of the few Coen films that is a complete waste of time. Only for their fanatic fans.
Rating: 
Summary: Best movie of the year, Best Coen Brothers yet
Review: What else can I say? I absolutely love this movie. It is flawless. Every aspect is great. Acting, great. Cinematography, great. Writing, great. Directing, GREAT!!!I was a tad disappointed with Oh Brother (not that I didn't like it, it just wasn't up to par with some previous efforts), and this film completely redeemed the Coen Brothers for me, and then some. I'd put them at the very top of a short list of great filmmakers today, along with John Sayles, Jim Jarmusch, and Wes Anderson. I'm not going to go in deep on this one. Just go see it. If you like great movies, you'll love it.
Rating: 
Summary: A funny film about alienation and aliens.
Review: The 'straightest' Coen Bros. movie since 'Fargo', 'The Man Who Wasn't There' is also their most slyly playful. Many critics have called it an anti-film noir, but it may be more correct to call it schizophrenic. Where most films noirs are black and white with the heavy emphasis on black, 'Man' is illuminated by a phantasmagoric white, narrated by a man who not only feels like a metaphoric ghost (so alienated from his self, life, society, this story, that he is unseen by others, and can't see them as people), but may actually be a real one (quite literally the man who wasn't there, because the film's world doesn't exist). It is a film about conflicting voices - Ed Crane floats through a world in which everyone talks too much except him, a balance redressed by his montonous voiceover. It is a film about action and reaction - Ed's aloof passivity preserves the status quo; when he actually instigates something (the blackmail plot; his encouraging Birdy's piano-playing - the murder is immediately linked to her Beethoven, both perceived by Ed as means of escape), awful accidents occur. 'Man' has been compared to everything from Camus and Kafka to Antonioni, but this is to take the film's surface existentialism at face value. We can't neglect the tension between Ed's narration, coloured by the extraordinary cinematography (which evokes religious associations as much as Absurdist iconography), the narrative we see, and the film's complex, shifting structure (every film noir is coloured by its narrator's subjectivity, but we believe their story to be essentially true. There can be no such belief here). It misses the great wit of the film, not least the absurdity of Ed's Absurdism - his problem is not that he is Modern Man, weighed down by inexplicable anguish, post-war alienation or masculine crisis, but that he is not Modern Man, he is indifferent to the desires of everyone else - he is out of the economic and sexual (the MAN who wasn't there, i.e. impotent) loop. Although set in 1949, this is more of a 1950s world - about money, family, status, conservative respectability (with homosexuality as the major taboo - perhaps the title, like 'Rebel Without A Cause', truly refers to the gay character, Tolliver?) - than an angst-ridden film noir. After all, a plot driven by the protagonist's desire to enter the dry-cleaning business is not to be taken entirely seriously (another joke is the connection between alienation and aliens). What this film does share with the European modernists is its in-built enigma, its refusal to be tied down and interpreted, its demand to be rewatched again and again. With these images, the darkness bleeding light; and these performances, in which every character, as in Dickens, booms with caricatured life, such a demand is really a gift.
Rating:
Summary: Another V. Good Movie from Coen Brothers
Review: A stylish glimpse of small town America of 50 years ago, Santa Rosa county in California. Excellent acting and a screenplay that steers clear of the industry predictable standards. These are two principal strengths of all Coen movies I guess. The starting point of the plot reminiscent of Fargo: a regular small town guy causes a pandemonium by attempting to earn an extra dollar. Thornton's composed performance leaves a lingering impression. Not quite as strong a movie as Barton Fink and Fargo, but way better than 90% of last year production and well worth a visit to the cinema.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Quite There
Review: There has always been a certain glibness about the work of the Coen brothers which never seems to bother their many admirers. Their films are superficial, easily forgotten and harmless. In the case of The Man Who Wasn't There all this is complimented by superb performances from Frances Mcdormond, naturally, James Gandolfini and Scarlett Johansson in supporting roles, great black and white camera-work and a pleasurable soundtrack that never intrudes on the visual experience. The film however revolves about Billy Bob Thornton who appears in every scene as Ed Crane, a small-town barber, who in his own words 'has it made', that is until he attempts to blackmail Big Dave (Gandolfini) who is having an affair with Ed's wife (McDormand). Ed doesn't talk much, probably because he smokes constantly, and is not very bright. Indeed he seems too slow witted to ever get into such a series of predicaments as now ensues. He doesn't have sex with his wife, doesn't seem to mind that Big Dave does and plans on using the money to go into the dry cleaning business with a fly by night 'entrepeneur' who has failed to entice Big Dave with his scam. None of this is too hard to follow nor is any of it particularly interesting or surprising. Ed Crane really isn't there and perhaps this is the whole point but Thornton seems wasted as a cardboard cutout with little to do but face the camera. The plot takes one somewhat surprising turn, but almost immediately slips back into a highly predictable pattern, and ends with a somewhat updated but classically "noirish " finality. This film did not annoy me, impress me, nor have much effect whatsoever. Some in the audience seemed to find it amusing and perhaps that was the intention. Whatever the case I would not dissuade anyone from spending their money. I would though, advise seeing it in a cinema preferrably from the front row. I simply cannot envision this passing for entertainment on a small screen in the living room with even the slightest of diversions. One may become distracted by a spider crossing the rug.
Rating:
Summary: Dark And Moody Masterpiece!
Review: This is another movie classic from the Coen brothers.Once again they have shown that they are probably the most innovative pairing when it comes to modern cinema.This film certainly fits into the film noir genre which sort of heralds back to a bygone era.The lighting and pace of the film is just amazing and it all enhances this story and adds to the mystery of the characters and the plot of the movie.
Billy Bob Thornton plays the totally disenchanted barber in a most understated way.It's one of the best performances I've seen in years.I found myself constantly changing my opinion as to whether I had sympathy for his character or just found him too cold and disenchanted that I didn't really care what his outcome would be.The great thing about this performance is that you get the impression that Thornton's character doesn't really care either.The supporting cast are also terrific-especially Frances McDormand-who plays his scheming,disillusioned and callous wife.James Gondolfini is tremendous as her partner in an adulterous affair.He's a very much larger then life character,who not only appears to be quite menacing but also quite good at spinning great yarns about his own life.Tony Shaloub really dominates the scenes as a fast-talking,arrogant,hot-shot lawyer.He seems to sum up the Thornton character best in his condescending assumptions that he's just a 'simple barber'.
The story is set in the fifties in small town California.The sort of place where outward high morals try to cover up a seedy undercurrent.It's the sort of place where how you're perceived is the most important thing as everyone seems to know your business.Thornton plays Ed Cryan who is probably in his late forties and from the first minute you get the impression that this guy isn't or hasn't been the most dynamic in the world.He tells us that all he is,is a barber's assistant to a much younger and obnoxious relative.He also tells you that he pretty much doesn't really like his job.Everything about him is so disenchanted and understated-his delivery is slow and ponderous that you find yourself getting quite frustrated listening to him.His mood never varies even when he's with the man who he knows is having an affair with his wife!It's always dead-pan.A chance meeting with a shady entrepenurial salesman makes him realise that he has a chance to actually do something with his life.The story then twists into the main plot of blackmail and murder.To give away any more details on the story would ruin the film for those that have yet to see it.Needless to say-being a Coen film this story develops in a way the viewer could never have imagined.And despite it's slow pace and pedantic delivery you're totally engrossed in the whole story.Add in references to fifties U.F.O. paranoia and uncomfortable Lolita scenes it's just a constantly gripping story.Some of the dialogue is also hilarious and yet very sad at the same time.
I'm not sure how I felt about the ending.I sort of felt that this movie could have ended several times-but then another twist occurs.I wasn't sure if the ending left me totally cold as it has it's bizarre moments.One thing is for sure though this movie is worth seeing and leaves you thinking about it for quite a while afterwards.
Rating:
Summary: The nerd lingers
Review: The Man Who Wasn't There finally made it across the North Channel this week and I went to see it last night. It is less immediately appealing than either O Brother, Where Art Thou? or The Big Lebowski and the Coens' refusal to play to the gallery this time was evidenced by two people leaving the cinema before the end. I can't criticise them too much (though I trust that they were beheaded on the way out for daring to have a different opinion to me): I would have hated it when I was 15 too. The film certainly an exercise in ponderous slowness, acknowledge in the scene near the end where the narrator apologises for taking too long to tell the story but offers the excuse that he's being paid 5c per word. I looked at my watch at the end and was astonished to see the film had come in at just under 2 hours: it felt like almost three. But I was never bored. The Coen brothers don't allow that, with the usual application of their perfect pitch to absolutely every element of the film: names, settings, decor, and of course dialogue which renders every minor character (like the police officers who come to break some news to Ed Crane: "It's a bad break") entirely memorable. If you're interested in peripheral stuff like, well, plot: it's another blackmail/murder thriller, narrated by the central character, the laconic barber Ed Crane. He is "the man who wasn't there" because even though he is the cause of all the terrible things that happen to the people around him, they still don't notice, because they have spent the last 20 years not noticing him. And I'll say one thing for him: he's never judgemental and just lets things go. There's a wonderful interlude where Ed is telling us how he met and married his wife Doris (Frances MacDormand), when he receives a phone call and stops to go off and commit a terrible deed. Then he comes back and continues where he left off. "It was only a couple weeks after we met that Doris suggested we get married. I said did she not want to get to know me better first. She said, Why, does it get better?"... So although I wouldn't - yet - agree with Peter Bradshaw in The Guardian who thought this was the Coen brothers' masterpiece, I do - thirteen hours on - already want to see it again. But this time not to follow: just to wallow...
Rating:
Summary: The Death of Modern Man
Review: I'm not going to bother summarizing the plot of this movie, because to me, it was about so much more than what the story says. If you want to know what actually happens on camera there are about 20 other reviews here for you to read; or better yet, you could just watch the movie. I want to talk about what the movie is really about. Why is Ed Crane "the man who wasn't there"?
To me, the answer lies in the struggle that he embodies. The struggle that is "modernism". What defines "modern" man? It is his struggle to find his place in the world. It is the lack of empowerment he feels. It is his dying hope to try and make his mark on the world. This is Ed Crane.
To make it even more clear, the Coen Brothers have created a caricature of "postmodernism" in Freddy Riedenschneider. And it is made even clearer still at the end of the movie, in Freddy Riedenschneider's closing remarks. Ed Crane must die because he is obsolete.
Yet, despite the merciless fatality of the course Ed's life has to take. This is not an indictment of modern man. It is a celebration of Modernism. The film pokes fun at postmodernism and shows it as fast talk and fancy words; as a neat trick, slight of hand. Matter without substance. The film says it is better to live in a futile pursuit, than to live in the pursuit of futility. "Sometimes the more you look, the less you really know."
There are a million things that I could say about this movie. Scene-by-scene specific examples and analogies: aliens, adultry, murder, the attraction towards innocence. But I'm not here to spell it out for you the way I see it. You should make up your own mind as to what this movie is about. I'm only trying to suggest that it's about time we looked beneath the surface.
Rating:
Summary: not for people suffering from SADD
Review: this is an excellent film if you believe in the
human condition being bleak and thankfully, quite
limited. an excellent film noir wherein billy bob
does an superb reincarnation of humphrey bogart.
Rating:
Summary: best film of the year
Review: After being disappointed with Fargo, i went to see this movie hoping it was good, and it was brilliant. It told the story of Ed Crane (a barber in a small town) who black mails his friend, Big Dave(palyed by James Gandolfini)for $10,000 after finding out he's having an affair with his wife. But it all goes wrong,Big Dave knows who's balck mailing him.So he invites Ed to his office and attacks him, but it all goes wrong and Ed ends up killing Big Dave, but it's Ed's wife(Brilliantly portrayed by Frances mcdourmand) who's arrested for the murder. Don't get confused. Dispite it's complicated storyline its very easy to understand. I've given it four stars because there are a few tedious moments in the film(like i say 'a few'). The thing that stands out the most in the film is it's climax, it's a truly shocking ending,i won't spoil it but i think Ed gets what he deserves. I think Billy Bob Thornton deserves an oscar for his portrayle as Ed Crane.
|
