Rating: 
Summary: a review, ja, of that there movie fargo, ja
Review: Most of the time I find at least one semi- coherent or at least one completely over-the-top film geek'si nterpretation /review/criticism for every movie I've perused at Amazon. Why not, then, "Fargo"? Where is the astute reader who will tell us What This Movie Means? This isn't just about the Coens' getting their kicks from a little bit of the ol' ultraviolence, is it? I mean, what's this movie about? Why does it stick to my ribs all the time, seeming sweet and funny some times and other times cold and mean? Why did it send shivers down my spine the first time I watched it and made me laugh at others? Are the Coens, in fact, ripping off Kubrick now, having tired of Chuck Jones, Dashiell Hammett, David Lynch and Preston Sturges or are they taming themselves--maturing? Is this the first movie they've made that doesn't come with quotation marks around everything anyone says, as if they don't mean what they're showing us. And what's the deal with Mike Yamagita? Why does that scene resonate later? Is it the key to "understanding" the story in that scene? And what of "the 3 cent stamp" and its signifigance? Or the fact that there are only couples in this movie? (Has no one noticed that there are very few people alone here. There's always a pair in this film. i.e. Marge and Norm, the two killers, the father-in-law and his financial adviser("We're not a bank, Jerry." On and on.) I bring all of this up to try to offer my explanation (admittedly lame but a try) as to what dark urges this film taps into. I welcome, nay, implore more feedback. I think the key to the movie is William H. Macy's Jerry Lundegaard. His characterization is dead-on. The sweet-tempered, putty-faced dotting dad and Sales Supervisor trapped in his job, in his dead-end life, up to his neck in debt, bending the rules as he sees fit, and under the heel of his father-in-law (great rapport between these two actors, by the way) In Jerry, I think we find the Coens' voice and the theme of the film: that a dehumanized (symbolized by the white snow, the lack of faces, the lack of scenery) capitalist society instills and expects success at all costs from the people who are in the society and the rest of us are just happy little McConsumers content to gripe about the undercoating on our cars, watch daytime TV, and eat, eat, eat. While Jerry's choices are wrong, criminal and evil, Jerry makes those choices because he wants to be a winner at all costs, b'c the world respects and adores winners no matter how repugnant they may be (as evidenced by his father-in-law.) The question this film asks, I think, is: Is it better to be like Jerry and want to "win" the game of life with money and success, or is it better to be like Marge and Norm and accept our place in life and solace ourselves with the small victories and "three cent stamps" that we win and the hope for the next generation? (Any ideas about what's going to happen to the Lundegaards' son were he to grow up? Scary.) And what of Mike Yamagita? He, like the killers and Jerry, serve as reminders from the Coens that life's fraught with peril of all sorts, whether it be from bullets, kidnappers or from within. Our crazy, blood-thirsty world creates crazy, blood thirsty people and to navigate it, you need luck, a crack shot and to be a bit dim, perhaps, and know your place in the world. "It's not all about money y'know," Marge admonishes in the end. No, but a lot of it is about money, about social standing and position, and that remembering that we're humans takes heroic effort in a world that's as hard as ours. For those who say that Minnesotans are taking it on the chin from the Coens--people, lighten up. It's not that all Minnesotans are dumb and crazy murderers and talk really funny. (Excluding your Governor Ventura, of course.) Some of you are, yes, but that's true everywhere. This movie is applicable to all people, everywhere. I mean, last I heard they kill and kidnap people in California too. For those who say this is a "Pulp Fiction"-esque hodgpodge of violence and low lifes--well, yes, true, to some degree, but the violence has a panache and horror that "Pulp Fiction" lacks. And if you listen carefully, you'll hear the very human, very important message that I think the Coens are getting after.
Rating:
Summary: Go bears.
Review: Fargo is on my top 10 list of favorite movies of all time. The plot is very engaging, involving many twists and turns. This film keeps you interested the whole way along. The characters have the kind of personalities you seem to remember even after the film has ended. Frances McDormand deserved the Oscar she won for Fargo. Here's a little known bit o' Fargo trivia for all you Fargo buffs out there: Did you know that "The Artist Formally Known as Prince" appeared in the film? If you watch the credits at the end of the film you will see his symbol placed sideways under the heading "man running from car". I found that to be quite bizarre considering an extra or stunt man could have played that role. Just another quirky mystery surrounding Fargo!
Rating:
Summary: Artsy in a Funny Way
Review: This movies was GREAT! It was funny (In a twisted way). Most of the sceens are set up in quite an artsy way!!
Rating: 
Summary: Striking and good, but hoist with it's own petards!
Review: Always inriguing, "Fargo" is one of the better jobs of cinematic narrative that you will see in a 90's film, the stylish direction certainly deserving credit. Roger Deakins' striking cinematography goes a great way to summoning mood (the nocturnal chase on the snowbound interstate is a real highlight). And Macy gives one of the more convincing, less caricaturized portrayals of the weasely type than you're likely to see in a modern film. But one of the 100 greatest movies of all time? Very far from it. First, the comedy edge is blunted by a relentless insistance of gore and nastiness. Second, McDormand lays the dotty character she's playing on too thick to be convincing; also losing her accent at many junctures. Third, the film is too long. The lengthy scene with McDormand and the Japanese-American friend was completely irrelevant; and seems to be, in fact, merely an attempt to enlarge McDormand's part enough to get her to qualify for the Best Actress category, who actually proves to be of a minor personage to the film's plot. Fourth, Peter Stormare is way too robotic to be a real villain. Finally, the running joke of the pronunciation of "ja" wears thin after a few hundred times. So while consistently interesting, mostly entertaining, and certainly original, "Fargo" is too heavily flawed to add up to a really satisfying experience; let alone, one of the 100 greatest films of all time!
Rating:
Summary: Great movie from a hometown duo
Review: Well I live where the directors are from, and in fact worked at the restaurant where Jerry and Stan were sitting talking about the kidnapping. In fact a little bit of trivia, one of the directors was a busser at that restaurant. It took a couple viewings of this movie to really enjoy it, a favorite.
Rating: 
Summary: great
Review: not the greatest film of all time,weird,but a great movie none the les
Rating:
Summary: A small story become a great movie!
Review: The Coen brothers have with this movie showed the world that you don't need much to make a great film. Just take a story that happends every day world wide and take some of the best actors which not necessary have to be the biggest stars. That's acctually what makes the film; The Actors. Especially then the kidnappers, Buscemi and Stormare. Together I would say that they are one of the best duos in film history!
Rating:
Summary: The Coen brothers show American society
Review: The Coen brothers present a police woman, pregnant investigating a series of crimes. This type of heroine, that the movie wisely shows, forsakes away all of Hollywood's clichés for this type of character. The images and scenes of the movie correspond to their natural environment, they're cold, almost freezing, sometimes even surrealistic. The story plot possesses a slow-pace to show the peaceful life of a woman which bases her own happiness in the smallest and simples things in life; in contrast to this we see the life of Jerry Lundergaar, who leaving aside all his values and moral, for greed, hires a couple of low-life criminals for kidnapping his own wife.The exagerated scenes of violence are all filled with cynicism, and a satiric air of mocking the displayed cruelty. The empty lifes of the two criminals coincides with the scenery, and the snow plays the role of the witness, where the stains of blood remembers us of the wickedness of men . This movie is full of metaphors and may appear to some very boring, but no scene is for free, they all have something to show us and tell us in order to understand what the movie wants say.
Rating: 
Summary: TOO STRANGE FOR ME.
Review: VERY WEIRD MOVIE, NO BASIC PLOT, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE AFI RANKED IT IN THE TOP 100 MOVIES OF ALL TIME.
Rating:
Summary: A unique, entertaining film which stumbled onto the AFI 100
Review: FARGO is an entertaining, humorous movie the likes of which I have not seen much in the past. It was short (at 98 minutes) yet managed to develop its characters very well, and the plot line was extremely interesting to say the least. The acting was quite good and, although the pregnant sheriff began to grate on me after a while, the role was performed exacxtly as planned--an Oscar-worthy performance for sure. What mystifies me is how a this film--as unique and entertaining as it is--somehow managed to stumble onto the AFI's Top 100 movies of all time list. This film definitely belongs in the Top 50 movies that I have seen, but the Top 100 of all time? Maybe the American Film Institute (and the Academy, for that matter, who nominated FARGO for best picture in 1996) see something more meaningful, symbolic, and timeless about a person being put thorugh a wood chipper than do I.
|
