Reviews Apr 07 2008 @ 07:00 am
REVIEW: Miller’s Crossing
Directed By: Joel Coen and Ethan Coen
Written By: Joel Coen and Ethan Coen
Starring: Gabriel Byrne, Marcia Gay Harden, Albert Finney, John Turturro
Running Time: 115 minutes
Rated R for language and violence
Here’s the rumpus. I don’t want to like Miller’s Crossing. Every frame smacks of condescension, the events are drained of emotion, and it feels as if the Coens are giving everyone – their characters and their audience – the high hat. They’ve created a clinical labyrinth of twists and turns that lacks any kind of human element, and what’s worse you can practically see them looking down their ventilators at you from behind the film. But despite the fact that I know I’m being grifted like a schnook and that the Coens are chiselling me every step of the way, I just can’t get Miller’s Crossing out of my head.
Let me give you the angle. Gabriel Byrne plays Tom Reagan, an advisor to 1920’s era gangland king Leo O’Bannon (Albert Finney). He quickly finds himself on the outs with Leo when it comes to light that they’ve been seeing the same twist, Verna Bernbaum (Marcia Gay Harden, in her first feature length role). To complicate matters, there’s a gang war a-brewing with Johnny Casper (Jon Polito), and Tom finds himself smack dab in the middle, which may be exactly what he wants.
Leo (Albert Finney) making art with his Thompson.
The proceedings are classic gangster mixed with classic noir, the kind of genre-blended concoction that the Coens love to whip up. They’ve drawn liberally from the works of Dashiell Hammett, that literary purveyor of hardboiled pulp (most famous for creating Sam Spade and The Maltese Falcon, although the Coens are drawing here from two of his lesser known works, The Glass House and Red Harvest), and have even employed sections of dialog verbatim from his books. The result is impressive, although dispassionate. If one found Blood Simple to be elaborately constructed, then Miller’s Crossing is Blood Simple shoved through the mind of MC Escher on crack (it comes as no surprise then that while they were writing the screenplay they contracted a severe case of writer’s block, only alleviated once they broke for 3 weeks to bang out the script for Barton Fink). Managing to keep pace with the intricacies of the dense plotting is a feat only fully achieved upon repeat viewings.
The enigmatic fedora.
Which brings us to the potato eater and his insufferable hat. The quintessential image of the film is Tom Reagan’s fedora, sitting in the middle of a forest glade, picked up by the wind and whipped into the background like a tissue on the breeze. The hat is a recurring character in the film, lost early on in a gambling match, referenced by numerous characters, dreamt of, and shown in conspicuous close-ups, both by itself and malevolently perched on top of Tom’s glacial brow. Why is the hat important? What metaphor/allegory/symbol are they aiming for with it? Who knows, and I suspect the Coens have included it for ambiguity’s sake, rather than harboring any clear intention of it’s meaning. The anecdote goes that during principal photography Gabriel Byrne asked the brothers what the point of the hat was, and their response was to look at one another knowingly and shrug their shoulders with a wry twinkle in their eyes, leading Bryne to declare that he would never work with them again. Suffice to say, I sympathize with him.
The (arrogant) enigma of the fedora is perhaps a reference to the equally enigmatic character of Tom Reagan. Curses on the Coens for creating a character of such inexplicable motivation that I am equally infuriated and fascinated by him. He doesn’t even seem to know why he does what he does, making him that much more of an irresistible Sphinxian riddle. On the one hand, Tom is as apt a pupil as Machiavelli ever had, playing each faction off of one another like Duke Ellington playing a Baby Grand. On the other hand, he seems to perpetually have that deer-caught-in-the-headlights expression on his face, twising his way out of beatings, executions, and double crosses with inches to spare. This paradoxical balance between manipulation and victimization is what both drives the plot and keeps you analyzing the film long after it’s over. It’s never apparent how in control of the situation Tom is, and a convincing case could be made that he is either 1) a lucky opportunist who happens to make the most of serendipitous circumstances, or 2) a cunning puppeteer who knows exactly how things are going to end before they’ve even begun.
Tom Reagan (Gabriel Byrne), Mr. Machiavelli himself.
Nowhere is this more obvious than in his attitude towards Bernie Bernbaum (played with slimy finesse by John Turturro). Bernie serves as the catalyst for the ensuing gangwar, since Casper wants him dead and Leo wants him not-dead (he is, after all, Verna’s brother, whom Leo is dizzy for). He could either be the crucial pawn in Tom’s chess game or the unwitting recipient of his (apparent) schizophrenia. The film’s brilliance (which I begrudgingly acknowledge) lies in the fact that it could be both or it could be neither.
If the Coens know whether or not Tom has a heart, they’re not telling, and Gabriel Byrne is certainly clueless. That leaves us, the dumbfounded audience, to determine for ourselves which it is. It is a passionless endeavor, as the Coens seem to care less about their characters than about the meat grinder they get to run them through, but it is a fascinating one nonetheless. Try as I might, I just can’t stop chewing over Miller’s Crossing.
Thanks to “You Know, For Kids!” for supplying the glossary of gangster’s terms employed in Miller’s Crossing
on Apr 07 2008 @ 1:04 pm 1. kristena said …
When the Coens are serious, they make me deeply uncomfortable. Add an overdose of pretension to that, and I’m done.
Honestly, we could sit all day and discuss what that blessed hat means, but I feel like the Coens would snicker behind our backs if they knew. And that’s just irritating.
on Apr 07 2008 @ 1:10 pm 2. Chuck said …
Wonderful work here, though I didn’t quite see the film as you did Evan. I feel that the answer of Tom’s intentions is mysterious even to Tom himself (which you say) and that is, really, enough for me. Tom is a purposeful cipher, who may do things if for nothing else than to see if said things will raise his pulse a notch. He screws his boss’s woman, then tells him. He goes back and forth amongst Casper and Leo’s gangs, he spares Bernie, and he wouldn’t be able to tell you why he did any of those things (though there’s, the girl be damned, an honor about him). That is the meaning of the oft mentioned hat: the elusive something that never comes into focus. I found the film to have a heart, and to be extremely moving.
on Apr 07 2008 @ 1:25 pm 3. Evan Derrick said …
You know, Chuck, I’ve been reading a lot of other people’s thoughts on the film and they are saying much the same, that it did move them deeply. I’m not one to die on the beachhead I’ve staked my opinions on, so perhaps Crossing deserves a second look down the road. The chance to sort through some of the dense material again would be welcomed, at the very least (I’m still trying to figure out who knocked off the guy with the toupee at the beginning…any thoughts out there?).
I think you’re right about the hat – it represents the fickle uncertainty of Tom’s character which, in a way, is almost the same thing as saying it exists for ambiguity’s sake.
Thanks for your thoughts!
on Apr 07 2008 @ 2:33 pm 4. kristena said …
I think Tom has a deep love for Leo that controls him in a bizarre way.
At the same time, there’s something very existential about him. Very much like Albert Camus’ The Stranger (L’homme Absurde). He just does whatever strikes him in the moment. Which is kind of what Chuck is saying.
Is it possible for him to be both controlled by his feelings and disconnected by them at the same time?
on Apr 07 2008 @ 2:42 pm 5. Thrifting and the Coens | thimbly things said …
[...] notice similar themes, camera angles, and even a splash of their Coen humor. But when we got to Miller’s Crossing and Barton Fink, I was pretty disappointed. But like I said, maybe if I watch them [...]
on Apr 07 2008 @ 4:20 pm 6. Phillip Johnston said …
I believe this is my favorite gangster film. I love the lazy pace, the recurring visual themes, Carter Burwell’s score … it all meshes together so nicely. Indeed, it is a hard film to analyze. The Coens know that, though. I love that last shot of Gabriel Byrne by the tree. It’s almost like he’s telling us that we’ll never get inside his head. We’ll never understand him because he doesn’t quite understand himself.
on Apr 07 2008 @ 9:00 pm 7. Coosa Creek Times, 4-7-2008 | Coosa Creek Mambo said …
[...] I couldn’t agree more. (this just in … another Coen review, this time of Miller’s Crossing, which I think is right up there with Goodfellas, here). [...]
on Apr 30 2008 @ 11:55 am 8. HallsyHatesU said …
Personally, I think Miller’s Crossing is one of the funniest movies the Coens have done; the humour just is not as obvious. The dialog is incredible. I have so many favourite lines but if I had to choose I would say: “I told him you’re a tramp and he dump ya.”
I love the scene where Tom beans the hood with a chair, prompting the little old guy to come in and kick his ass. Every scene with Jon Polito is gold, too.
I don’t think the hat was a major theme in the story. I think you might be trying to overanalyze a little bit. The hat is just a hat. Watch the scene again where Marcia Gay Harden jumps to conclusions about the dream – “No I didn’t chase after it. There’s nothing more foolish than a man chasing after a hat.” Or something like that.
The music is really top-notch. In particular, the scene where they shoot up Leo’s bedroom and the scene where they take Tom out to Miller’s Crossing.
Minor spoiler:
Rug (the guy with the toupee) was killed by Mink (Steve Buscemi). I think that was explained pretty explicitly in the film. It can certainly be confusing on the first viewing, though.
on Apr 30 2008 @ 12:01 pm 9. Evan Derrick said …
Glad to have your voice at MZ, Hallsy.
One of the Coens greatest strengths is their ability to straddle the fence when it comes to tone and mood. Some see nihilism, some see humor. I saw ambiguous symbolism, you saw a simple hat. More than any other filmmaker working today, multiple interpretations of their work seem equally valid.
Agreed with you on the music. Carter Burwell and the Coens mix like Kahlua and milk – perfectly.
Great comments. Hope you drop your two cents in the hat more often.
on Sep 22 2008 @ 2:45 am 10. Seamus said …
Hey guys. I just saw ‘Miller’s Crossing’ and was so intrigued by the elusive metaphor of the hat, which to me is clearly intentional and significant, that I googled ‘hat metaphor’! Interesting to hear others’ thoughts, but here’s my take. the film starts with Jasper’s explanation of the importance of ethics. Like many works of art, the opening gives a frame of reference through which the rest of the film can be understood: the striving for (or disregard of) a set of ethics is the most crucial factor in the characterisation of all the characters, but especially Regan. So I took the hat to be a symbol of integrity. To give someone the high hat is to be disrespectful; when Regan comes close to killing Bernie at Miller’s Crossing he almost loses his hat; when he has first cheated with Verna and betrayed Leo he lost his hat temorarily; and in the film’ conclusion, when Regan opts to part ways with Leo, Regan magnificently lowers his hat and covers his brimming eyes, hinting at his strength of will in maintaining this integrity in the face of deep personal pain. So to me the hat was a metaphor for the different forms of integrity and different codes of ethics that different characters displayed.
on Sep 22 2008 @ 10:26 am 11. Evan Derrick said …
Thanks for visiting, Seamus. That’s actually a great observation on the hat – it might be the best one that I’ve heard so far, and certainly more interesting than my assertion that it was included for “ambiguity’s sake.” It definitely works in the context of Reagan’s character.
Hmmmm. I’ll have to think on that a bit more.