Coen Heads

Discuss the world of entertainment; movies, tv, journalism and radio.

Moderator: drizzle

Post Reply
Icesickle
Suburban Outfitter
Posts: 22728
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:00 pm

Coen Heads

Post by Icesickle »

There was a great series of articles in New York magazine a week ago about The Coen brothers, Wes Anderson, Sidney Lumet, Noah Baumbach (sp?), and Julian Schnabel (sp?). Here's one about the Coens and I'll post the ones about Anderson, Lumet, Baumbach, and Schnabel later.

Image

Coen Heads
The mind-melded Coen brothers have made a brilliant fetish out of favoring form over content. But now, with No Country for Old Men, they may have discovered they donג€™t have to choose one over the other.

By David Edelstein

The first nine-tenths of Joel and Ethan Coenג€™s No Country for Old Menג€”the centerpiece of this yearג€™s New York Film Festivalג€”is the best thing theyג€™ve ever done, with the possible exception of The Big Lebowski as seen for the third time, stoned. (No Countryג€™s last tenth Iג€™m not so sure about, but weג€™ll get to that.) The Coensג€™ return to the festival is a glorious omen. The NYFF made the brothers indie darlings in 1984 with the screening of their first film, Blood Simple. Six years later, Millerג€™s Crossing gave the opening-night glitterati an unexpected barrage of rat-a-tat-tat and splatter. Now, seventeen years after that, No Country for Old Men throws into stark (wide-screen, deep-focus, emotionally devastating) relief their evolution from snotty art-film postmodern jokesters to snotty art-film postmodern jokesters ג€¦ with soul. This one is Blood Subtle.

Before I continue: Writing about the Coensג€”and mining their oeuvre for Big Ideasג€”is a sure way of looking like an ass. When the Village Voiceג€™s J. Hoberman contended that the climax of Millerג€™s Crossing was a Holocaust allegory, the Coens didnג€™t know what the hell he was talking about. And when I interviewed them for American Film in 1986, on the occasion of their second film, Raising Arizona, they greeted my pointy-headed critical theories with the look of the Sundance Kid hearing a cockamamy new scheme: ג€œYou just keep thinkinג€™, Butch. Thatג€™s what youג€™re good at.ג€ Their cinematographer at the time, Barry Sonnefeld, told me, ג€œTopics are incredibly unimportant to themג€”itג€™s structure and style and words. If you ask them for their priorities, theyג€™ll tell you script, editing, coverage, and lighting.ג€ Later, I pressed Joel for his thoughts on the movieג€™s ostensible subjectג€”procreation, infertility, child-rearingג€”and he squirmed and smoked and finally said a babyג€™s face is ג€œfodder,ג€ like a gunshot with blood running down someoneג€™s shirt: something you can play with in surprising (and perverse) ways. ג€œFodderג€ sounds a little glib. Iג€™d prefer a more highbrow formulation: The Coens take found objects and arrange them for maximum disjunction.

At first, those found objects were movie conventions. The camera that travels smoothly along the bar in Blood Simple and ostentatiously rises and falls to avoid a slumped barfly was a cin

citizen
Posts: 10713
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 3:08 am

Post by citizen »

still excited for this movie, thanks

Trademark
oil baron swaggasaurus
Posts: 19683
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 3:37 pm

Post by Trademark »

great read, I love the Coens, in a sea of "what's/who's to come next" in film. ... it is great to know I'll get to see at least 10-15 more of their films before I'm forced to catch Royal Tenenbaums 15......




icesickle, thanks for revitalizing this forum it has been dead for a few days.

richard lamplighter
Posts: 1331
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:41 pm

Post by richard lamplighter »

Trademark wrote:great read, I love the Coens, in a sea of "what's/who's to come next" in film. ... it is great to know I'll get to see at least 10-15 more of their films before I'm forced to catch Royal Tenenbaums 15......




icesickle, thanks for revitalizing this forum it has been dead for a few days.
boo your anderson hate. boo all anderson haters. people are finding a flaw or two & arguing for total dismissal. instead as with most films, where people are like, is it worth watching? against an anderson film people generalize & find a flaw or two so as to dismiss the whole thing. this sort of top-down haterism is actually flattering to the films, though.

StormShadow
Posts: 8819
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Humboldt

Post by StormShadow »

Rushmore and royal tenenbaums are pretty fantastic imo




life aquatic and bottle rocket are kinda trash though

jamrage
Posts: 9841
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:09 am
Location: Houston

Post by jamrage »

StormShadow wrote:Rushmore and royal tenenbaums are pretty fantastic imo




life aquatic and bottle rocket are kinda trash though
Man, you are one of the few people I've found who agrees with me about this. "Rushmore" is just a great movie head to toe, one of my all time favorites actually. Bill Murray is next level. It was filmed in Houston too. :rockout:

Tenenbaums is good fun as well, I'm actually waiting on the criterion to arrive at my house any day now.

"Life Aquatic" was okay, some good parts, but didn't blow me away at all.

"Bottle Rocket" on the other hand is an overrated piece of shit. It's one of those movies kids love to name drop cause it was early Anderson. Fuck that, its mostly thumbs down.
[i]Styles can be applied quickly to selected text.[/i]

Trademark
oil baron swaggasaurus
Posts: 19683
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 3:37 pm

Post by Trademark »

I think rushmore and Royal Tenenbaums are really great as well, but unfortunately he has continued to make the Royal Tenenbaums ever since.....

drizzle
Awesome Vatican Assassin
Posts: 55482
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:55 pm
Location: where people throw ducks at balloons and nothing is as it seems

Post by drizzle »

am i like the only person in the world who doesn't like rushmore?
http://www.steadybloggin.com - some of these are my thoughts yo

Icesickle
Suburban Outfitter
Posts: 22728
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:00 pm

Post by Icesickle »

Bottle Rocket - 5/10 (Wacksauce and I think people overrate it for the reasons jamrage said)
Rushmore - 10/10 (Classic film. Nuf said.)
Royal Tenenbaums - 8/10 (Not nearly as good as Rushmore and has some filler, but still packed with classic moments...particularly those involving the interchanges between Hackman and Glover and Hackman and Stiller.)
Life Aquatic - 7.5/10 (A great film that's underrated by the Anderson haters. Not classic by any means, but it has some great moments (when Murray gives a tour of the whole boat, the ending, the boat party).

citizen
Posts: 10713
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 3:08 am

Post by citizen »

drizzle wrote:am i like the only person in the world who doesn't like rushmore?
probly not, i like it more every time i see it, i didnt like it much the very first time

Post Reply