Ah, Joel and Ethan strike again, and masterfully, confounding the expectations I didn't even realise I had. Although I'd watched No Country For Old Men on its release, it wasn't until 2014's Inside Llewyn Davis (a film which baffles and beguiles me in equal measure to this very day) that I realised I'd never really latched onto the Coen brothers' work. While I still haven't digested the entire back catalogue, I thought I'd now seen enough of the classics to get a better handle on where they're coming from. To say that Hail, Caesar! wasn't the movie I was expecting isn't entirely fair, but it's not completely the tight, zippy caper that the trailer was selling either. And I only say all this because the Coens are, by this point, in a position to release exactly the film they want to be seen by audiences, produced and finished to their own standards. In short, I'd like to think that anything in this movie I didn't really 'get' was down to me alone. Although I still don't think that's the case...
Set in 1951 during the tail-end of Hollywood's golden-age, Hail, Caesar! follows Capitol Studios head 'fixer' Eddie Mannix, a man desperately trying to corral the studio's talent into behaving on-and-off camera and keep tinsel-town's press and gossip-columnists at arm's length, all the while struggling to make time for his domestic life and weigh up a lucrative job-offer from a global arms manufacturer. When the studio's most prominent A-lister, Baird Whitlock is kidnapped and held to ransom, Mannix has to pull strings and lean on contacts to retrieve him; and it's these twenty-seven hours that we spend in his company while he does it…
Throughout all of this, Hail, Caesar! is imbued with an impatient air clearly intended to come off as chaotic-farce, although it feels more like a general lack of focus. With the kind of casting we saw in Wes Anderson's Grand Budapest Hotel, a raft of tertiary characters are introduced which hang around too long to be cameos, but aren't written fully enough to be supporting roles (in fact, only one of these gets any real ending at all, the rest seem to be abandoned or given closure with a line of someone else's dialogue).
In much the same way that MGM's Singin' In The Rain was a film purposely assembled from disparate songs and set-pieces, there's almost a suspicion that Universal commissioned the Coen Brothers to make a comedy from sketches and ideas that were already lying around in one form or another. Although the movie just about works as a whole, some elements (and casting choices) work more smoothly than others, and there seems to be half a potential classic in there needing more development.
But there are some outstanding scenes in the film, the highlight of which for me was Ralph Fiennes and Alden Ehrenreich holding a script discussion which borders on Stewart Lee-levels of testing the limits of an audience's patience (I found it increasingly hilarious, the rest of the audience seemed to grow conversely irritated; complete with a punchline several scenes later which my fellow patrons didn't seem to acknowledge. The danger of being a comedy-snob, I'm afraid). When the script is sharp, you could shave with it; the rest of the time it kind of bumbles along amiably.
On an entirely personal level, I'd have enjoyed the film a lot more without Michael Gambon's narration pulling me out of the experience every twenty minutes or so. Partly because he's being the same Michael Gambon™ that he uses for his advert-work, devaluing the artistic currency of his CV with every smug utterance, but mainly because he needlessly narrates exactly what we're watching on-screen anyway...
By no means a failure, Hail, Caesar! is watchable enough but doesn't have the drive or insight we know the Coens are capable of. The film is a bit of a curiosity, and sometimes a bit of a mess.
Although I'll freely admit that it's a bit of a mess which I'll probably get more out of when I watch it again...
Grand Budapest Hotel, My Week With Marilyn, Singin' In The Rain.
Only if you're a purist, although both the film's setting and its setpieces are a glorious homage to cinema itself.
I'd say not quite, your mileage will vary.
It isn't.
I won't.
There isn't.
Level 1: Hail, Caesar! stars none other than Clancy 'Savage Opress' Brown.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Inside Llewyn Davis (second-pass)
Cert: 15 / 105 mins / Dir. Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
So after what probably seemed like a lukewarm review, I decided to watch Inside Llewyn Davis again before it gets relegated to afternoon showings next week. The good news is, it's just as mesmerising the second time around (perhaps more so, as the spiralling narrative of the film feels even more like a recurring dream). The rhythms of Llewyn's opportunity, ineptitude and regret are almost soporific, in the much same way that Davis himself finds it impossible to break the cycle of his behaviour. Oddly, the inevitability of his failures remains consistent however many times you watch the film. C'est la vie.
If there's a downside, it's that I didn't really gain that much from watching the film again; I'd hoped that I could lay the plot on the back seat and focus more on everything else, but it's either everything I caught last week, or so far beyond me that I'm never going to get it (the more likely option). It's not that the film is mysterious, more that it's magnificently subtle. That said, I had more fun with the secondary characters this time around, especially knowing in advance how they work in isolation of one another.
I was initially unsure about the opening and closing motifs, and having watched the film again am now even moreso. It's not something I'll go into here, but if you want to get symbolic, come and have a chinwag over at the Facebook page. I look forward to you bending my brain...
Inside Llewyn Davis is a fiendishly interesting film, although while there's plenty for me to like, I can't bring myself to outright love it. I probably don't need to see this again for some time now, and when I do return, it'll be largely for the soundtrack. It's a film I'd recommend, but for when you're in a contemplative mood.
And yes, that does sound massively self-indulgent. It's a Coen Bros film, after all ;)
Yeah.
As much as I was ever going to, yes.
Now, I think it probably does.
It's a night in with a bottle of red.
No.
Yeah.
No.
So. Coen Bros. Where's a good place to start?
Haven't been able to latch onto anything I loved. I didn't like True Grit, but I thought No Country… was okay (just not 'my thing'). A couple of other films of theirs I've tried and failed with, but am willing to have another go. So, where do I start?
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
I won't lie to you, the first time I saw the trailer for Inside Llewyn Davis was with Mrs Blackout, and afterward we looked at each other and I mouthed "what?". This happens more often than is good for anyone, but it's rare that repeat viewings of a trailer actually sell me a film. Nonetheless, by the time today's showing rolled around, I was quite looking forward to it, not least because I'd also heard an interview with the directorial brothers on 5Live, laying the pitch for the narrative and the themes, rather than just the setting. Oh yeah, The Themes. This film has The Themes. It doesn't beat you over the head with them per se, but you should be prepared to understand that you're seeing Llewyn Davis' version of events*1, not that you'll see any other.
The film's soundtrack and Oscar Isaac (responsible for a large percentage of that soundtrack) do the heavy lifting, thematically speaking. Most of the other characters are totems of the various facets of Davis' personality, since we only see them from his point of view, and they very rarely interact with one another. The narrative is needfully meandering, as again, it's essentially Davis telling the story, and it reflects his haphazard lifestyle.
Bruno Delbonnel's soft-focused camera lends the film a dream-like quality, tranquil and disconnected even in its more emotionally traumatic moments. Quiet, introspective and borderline hypnotic, I think this is how I'm supposed to feel about all Coen Bros films. I think I understood it*2; I think I enjoyed it. But I've been wrong on both counts in the past, so let's chalk it up quietly as a success*3.
Inside Llewyn Davis is as centered and driving as its eponymous character, and is a better film for it. I'm fairly confident I'll get more out of it on repeat viewings, but I'm happy to let it bed in for a while, first.
Yeah, mostly.
…I think I did.
Probably. Maybe. I don't really know.
It's quite an 'intimate' film, so it wouldn't hurt to watch it at home.
Nah.
I will.
There isn't.
Is F. Murray Abraham just, like, not ageing or something?
*1 You knew that anyway from the title though, right? Yeah. Good.
*2 Not withstanding the cinematic devices used to tell the story, I know nothing about 1960's folk music, other than the fact that there are 'real world' references in here that I didn't fully get; I just knew they were there.
*3 Me enjoying a Coen Bros film, I mean. Not the film. The film's a success irrespective of how much I get it, I know that much.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
