Editor’s Note: This is our first guest article in April’s celebration of all things Coen, and it’s a doozy. Daniel Cook Johnson from the eminently readable film babble blog has dissected the musical vernacular of the Coen’s longtime collaborator Carter Burwell to the nth degree. Dig into his fantastic sonic breakdown of their first 6 films, and be sure to ride the innertubes over to his site. It’s worth a hallowed spot in your RSS reader.

PART I: From the Dark Debut To The Snowblind Breakthrough (1984-1996)

Even the most casual Coen brothers fan has to know how pivotal and perversely precise their soundtracks have to be to match their meticulously crafted movies. To this credit – Carter Burwell, composer on all of their films, has consistently provided scores that are purposely powerful or seethingly subtle (or both) in the fashion of the old time masters like Bernard Herrmann (the Mercury Theater radio shows, Citizen Kane, all of Hitchcock’s films, etc.) yet with his own unique and knowingly contemporary edge. Scores aside, the Coens have utilized many famous and obscure songs from all genres in a Scorsesean manor – jukebox or sing-along tunes with familiar voices and beats that set tones, imply back-stories, and get us toe-tappingly into their tall tales. So let’s look back and listen up to the music in the entire Coen’s canon starting with their cheap but brilliant 1984 debut.
Continue Reading »

This article is a contribution to Film at 11’s blogathon, updating Andrew Sarris’ The American Cinema with selections on post-1968 directors. Given the theme of the month here at MovieZeal, you can guess which director(s) we will be evaluating. For those unfamiliar with Sarris’ work or the canons within which he placed directors, see Film at 11’s initial post here.

LIGHTLY LIKEABLE

Joel and Ethan Coen (1954, ’57 – )
FILMS: (noteworthy entries in italics) 1984 – Blood Simple, 1987 – Raising Arizona, 1990 – Miller’s Crossing, 1991 – Barton Fink, 1994 – The Hudsucker Proxy, 1996 – Fargo, 1998 – The Big Lebowski, 2000 – O Brother, Where Art Thou?, 2001 – The Man Who Wasn’t There, 2003 – Intolerable Cruelty, 2004 – The Ladykillers, 2007 – No Country For Old Men

The most impressive accomplishment by Joel and Ethan Coen is how, in spite of working in wildly disparate genres (exploitation, noir, gangster, screwball, remake), they manage to not just make films, but to make Coen films. One would say of most directors, “Their first film was just practice, so we can forgive it if it bears little resemblance in content or quality to their later work,” but Blood Simple, the Coens’ debut, is so scarily assured and effortlessly confident that we can see unmistakable similarities between it and their Oscar lauded No Country For Old Men. How many other directors can claim a distinct style that has been preserved over the course of 12 films and 23 years?
Continue Reading »

Ethan and Joel Coen

We’re trying something a bit different this month at MZ by devoting all of April to the Coen Brothers (as you can see, our nifty random banner up top is already cycling through classic frames from their films). We’ll be reviewing each of their films chronologically on every Monday, Wedensday, and Friday, beginning with Blood Simple later today. As well, we’ll be participating in Film at Eleven’s blog-a-thon later this month, updating Andrew Sarris’ seminal The American Cinema with an entry on the Coens. Also expect insightful articles and witty observations on their evolution as filmmakers, Top Ten Lists (that crack cocaine of the internets), and featured guest contributors.

Look for essays and features from (in no particular order) Craig Kennedy at Living in Cinema, Joseph Demme of Cinexcellence, Daniel Johnson from Film Babble Blog, Dylan Fields (aka Fletch) of Blog Cabins (and purveyor of LAMB), Nick Plowman at Fataculture, Daniel Getahun from Getafilm (I just made that connection, Daniel), Rick Olson of Coosa Creek Mambo, and hopefully a few others who haven’t confirmed yet. Take a second to visit some of their excellent sites.

Basically, we’ll be ingesting all things Coen until Joel and Ethan come shooting out of our eyeballs. Not to be missed!

Funny Games

The second round of our debate on the validity or worthlessness of Funny Games. A summary of the posts so far:

• Round 1 of our debate, including an overview of the Double Shot ground rules
• My original zero star review
• Luke Harrington’s 4 star review
• Ghost Lyon’s 1 1/2 star review of Haneke’s original 1997 version

Here is round two of Luke and I’s debate. For redundancy’s sake, I am arguing against the film, while Luke is arguing for it. Comments and further insights are, of course, encouraged and welcomed (although I noticed a distinct trend toward siding with Luke last time…tsk tsk guys, I’m obviously correct here).

Continue Reading »

Note: the second round of our debate can be found here

Tentatively titled DoubleShot, this feature will involve two of us hashing it out in the public forum over a film we strongly disagree on. Although battle axes and morning stars in a cage match to the death would undoubtedly be more entertaining for you, the blood thirsty masses, we have instead elected to duel with words and wit. Here are the ground rules:

• Round 1: Each critic makes one argument for/against the film, specifically citing the opposing author’s review. Each critic then gets a rebuttal.
  
• Round 2: Round 1 is repeated, with two more assertions and the accompanying rebuttals.
• Round 3: Each critic gets a closing statement and a chance to respond to the other’s overall position.

Obviously, we encourage participation from you, whether you have seen the film in question or not. This exercise will only be successful if others get in the ring with us.

Funny Games

Our first film up for debate is Michael Haneke’s recent remake of his own film, Funny Games. A good primer would be to read our original reviews.
You can read my zero star review here.
You can read Luke’s 4 star review here.
Ghost Lyon, another contributer, reviewed Haneke’s original version, which he gave 1 1/2 stars, and you can find that review here.

Here is the first round of points and counter-points. Look for round 2 and 3 later this week.

Let the games begin (no pun intended).
Continue Reading »

I am, I believe, optimistic to a fault sometimes. My experience in the past with short films has been less then joyous. Go to a local short film festival and you will be treated to what I mean. Shorts seem to be, for the most part, an excuse for directors with sub-par talent to get their ‘films’ seen by people other than their immediate family. But these are the Oscar nominees for short films, right? They have to be better than the usual experimental art-house dreck that gets labeled ’short film’, right? Right?

Well, here are my thoughts on who should win/who will win, although to be honest, most people make their Oscar predictions based on buzz and marketing, and since neither of those things exist for the short film nominees, I’m shooting in the dark.

At Night (Christian E. Christiansen & Louise Vesth, Denmark)
I’m not going to even slightly suggest that cancer, suicide, comas, and death aren’t subjects worth dealing with in film, but to have all of them crammed into a 40 minute span with no break is a bit much, even for my masochistic self. You need moments of humor in order to grapple with such heavy topics, and this story of 3 women in a cancer ward at Christmas has none.
Will it win? I hope not, but it is depressing enough to be a front runner.
Should it win? No. It shouldn’t.
Continue Reading »

Well, here we are again—Oscar time, when everyone will tune in for a long, long four hours to watch Hollywood explain to the world, for the 80th time, why Hollywood is just so gosh-darn awesome. Excited? I know I am. As always, however, some of the awards handed out may prove a bit mystifying to the general public. Best Animated Short, for instance. Who watches shorts anymore? That’s right—bohemian film buffs living in New York, and pretty much no one else. But the award is still there, reminding us of a simpler time when the clips before the movie were entertainment, instead of ads for Coca-Cola and Wal-Mart. So for those of you who need to mark your Oscar ballots, I now present a rundown of the five pictures up for the award…

Even Pigeons Go to Heaven (Samuel Tourneaux, France)
In this stop-motion missive, a priest tries to sell a man a machine that he claims will take him to heaven. The animation is excellent, but the morality play is a little facile and a bit overdone.
Will it win? Possibly. Oscar does love iconoclasm.
But should it? Any film that features Death as a central character is okay by me.
Continue Reading »