Raising Arizona

As Screwball as they come

Lover: Taken from IMDB
“A lot of things come together to make this film highly enjoyable; acting, writing, music, pace, directing... It's over-the-top fun. It took me several viewings before it sunk in that the film's base story is about child kidnapping; which is an extraordinarily serious crime. But this film makes you enjoy every minute so it's easy to forget the seriousness of the base story. While I'm not a fan of Nicholas Cage, I thought this was a perfect vehicle for him. Holly Hunter is always excellent, IMHO. Their attention to detail in crafting their characters was on point and thorough."Well alright then." :)”

Short and sweet and fair enough, over the top fun indeed!

Hater: Taken from IMDB
“1st watched 11/21/2008 - (Dir-Joel Coen): Attempted road-runner like comedy falls flat of impressing me as it's plodding pace bored me. Despite my expectations before watching this early Coen brothers film, I was somewhat disappointed with this screwball comedy with strange characters. Nicolas Cage has done this kind of non-acting before in other movies and Holly Hunter isn't a whole lot better. The movie is basically about a couple that wants a child, can't have one and decides to steal one of the quintuplets of a local rich family, obviously because they cant handle five. The antics that revolve around this act with other strange characters like a over-the-top motorcycle bounty hunter and prison mates also get in the act of trying to get the child and the reward money. All in all, the ridiculousness doesn't necessarily make for a very funny movie and I'm sure there have been better movies carrying basically this same premise.”

I think it all comes down to sense of humour; off the wall and over the top comedy is not your cup of tea then you probably wont like this, like this person.

What I thought:
Second in my Coen Brothers double bill was Raising Arizona, the self confessed screw ball comedy which in no way should be taken seriously. As pointed out by one of the reviewers above; the issue of child kidnapping should not be taken lightly, but this is no normal film. The Coens have created appropriately zany characters and Nicholas Cage is a wonder to behold, using his usual crazy eyes and emotive face for comedy rather than an unhinged performance.

In some places I laughed out loud, but the whole film I had a smile on my face. The characters are watchable and have their part to play. It’s not the most intricate of their stories but their dialogue is still second to none. The Biker burning the road as he drives; just one example of the hyper reality used in certain scenes but it all fits wonderfully. So it’s not the funniest film you’ve ever seen but you’ll have fun watching it.

A Serious Man

Did I miss something?

Lover: Taken from IMDB
“I have to say that before writing this review, I had some mixed feelings about the Coen brothers' most recent film A Serious Man. But I have to say that it is far superior to their previous effort, Burn After Reading. A Serious Man tells the story of Larry Gopnik, a Midwestern physics professor whose life begins to follow the rule of Murphy's Law, that anything than can go wrong will go wrong. Larry seems to be a nice guy and everything seems to just fall apart. He goes to three different rabbis for guidance. Unfortunately, they are no help as his problems seem to grow. His wife leaves him for an older man, his brother still lives with him and their family, a student tries to blackmail him to change a failing grade, and he's in love with the neighbor next door, who sunbaths nude. A Serious Man is a darkly funny film that It works mainly because of Michael Stuhlbarg, who gives a performance that deserved an Oscar nomination. I hope to see more of this actor in the future. The Coens have brought yet another great screenplay of their own to life, thanks in part to their brilliant direction. The Coens also have great help from frequent collaborators including composer Carter Burwell and cinematographer Roger Deakins. It may not be everyone's cup of tea and it may rub members of the Jewish community the wrong way. But if you approach it with an open mind then you might enjoy it.”

A good review, it was better than Burn after reading and Michael Stuhlbarg is outstanding. Not sure members of the Jewish community would be that offended?

Hater: Taken from IMDB
“One, you do not need to totally understand Judaism to get this film. Yes, the beginning of the film lays the groundwork that tells the viewer that any descendants of the Jewish couple who "killed" the Dybbuk is doomed to experience letdowns, but then again, maybe not. It is just a basic folktale, one from any religion or culture. Second, you do not need to understand physics either. Other than the passing of time seems to not pass at all while watching this film. After almost 40 minutes I had had it. Yes, a lot of %$&^ is dumped on this guy, and you wonder why he would deserve to be dumped on so much, but then you do not care. None of the characters were worth the time or effort. Maybe past the 40-minute mark it gets better, but alas I could not justify wasting my time to see what happened, and why. The acting was OK, but not worth the time to sit through this film, which might be better titled, A Pathetic Man.”

Now this one is a shame because it’s not a bad review but I don’t think you should review a film unless you’ve watched the whole film. It’s common sense, for all you know the ending could have blown you away!

What I thought:
Well despite being utterly confused at the end I was yet again impressed by the Coen Brothers. It’s not a hard thing to say as most of their films are lauded over by critics and filmgoers alike. This film however plants itself some where between The Ladykillers (the worst Coen movie) and No Country for Old Man (my favourite, though I haven’t seen True Grit yet). It’s really funny and darkly so in most places; it’s wonderfully paced and brilliantly acted.
I’ll stop there as I have to say I got confused towards the ending, I thought I’d missed something? Was I supposed to be reading deeper into this film than I had? I started checking the running time, thinking there might still be a scene that would expose the hidden meanings etc. There was just that ending? Our main character gets a scary call from his Doctor when he decides to take a bribe and a hurricane threatens to blow everything away.

I can make a guess at some ethereal matters of Old Testament style punishing from god, however that just seems too much but is it? It’s obvious our hero is descended from the cursed couple at the beginning but is that the point of the film? Our hero is destined to have things go wring because that happened? If so its not that bigger deal like I’ve already said the film is very funny and really entertaining. For me though the film feels like it had so much more and didn’t show it, I thought “am I not getting this because I’m not Jewish.”

It was touted as their most personal and as I’m pretty certain they are Jewish you can really tell. If you’re not like me and don’t think to deeply about films you’ll probably love this Coen classic.

The Buzz: 20/11/10

Fox and Warner go head to head with about Moses

Shooting news for all the next biggest comic book movies

The Coens remake Gambit

Leonardo DiCaprio discovers a "Legacy of Secrecy"