This scene was put in place, I thought, to inform the patrons in the theatre who were lost where they should be in the story, and set up the ending. But I now believe the Coen brothers inserted this scene so it could bookended with the last scene and assure the audience that this tale of the idiotic was simply that - nothing more.
John Malkovich plays an ex-C.I.A. agent on the bad end of a failing marriage to Tilda Swinton who is having an affair with the lascivious Harry Pfarrer, played by George Clooney. After burning her husband’s financials onto a disc for her attorney, Swinton’s character initiates a divorce. This disc ends up in the hands of the self-involved Linda Litzke, played artfully by Joel Coen’s wife Francis McDormand, who with the help of her co-worker at Hard Bodies attempts to blackmail the ex-C.I.A. agent. Linda and Chad, played with hysterical accuracy by Brad Pitt, believe this disc contains C.I.A. secrets and play spy until Chad is killed. Pitt is marvelous as a foulmouthed moron and provides the movie with its biggest laughs. He skillfully delivers his line, “Osbourne Cox? I thought you might be worried about the security of your shit,” with such passion and well timed pauses that I found myself wishing Pitt played for humor more often.
In what can only be a screenplay coincidence Linda and Harry meet each other for a tryst tying the whole gang together in a nice little knot. Harry shoots Chad and runs to Linda. Harry then believes that Linda is in league with the ex-C.I.A. agent and gets arrested. The ex-C.I.A. agent murders the manager of Hard Bodies and promptly gets shot. And Linda gets cosmetic surgery.
As the film ends we return to the two C.I.A. agents discussing these events. The superior asks if all the loose ends are tied up. The subordinate informs him all but one. Linda needs her cosmetic surgery paid for. The superior oks the payment and states that he just wishes he knew what the hell just went on.
6 out of 10: I enjoyed the return to whimsy for the Coen Brothers, but I feel the stakes were so low that it made it impossible to enjoy fully.
6 comments:
i would have given this at least more of a 7-7.5. Not perfect but certainly an enjoyable 90 minutes at the movies- very "intolerable cruelty"-esque in that regard.
please post more criticism and less plot summary next time, please!
Yeah, sorry about that. I went and reread all of my past reviews and the one's I liked the best had a nice peppering of criticism and plot summary. I'm trying, now, to find a balance.
Also - what a wasteland the theatre has been recently. Have you seen anything in the theatre that you think we should go watch? i mean come on Tokyo Dangerous or whatever? blah.
I can't really. The last few films I've seen in the theatre have been duds- "Bottle Shock" was atrocious, and "Elegy" & "Tell No One" were both pretty OK but barely worth the admission price.
I did see "Hamlet 2" and chuckled a couple of times. Also, "Baghead" was funny but I doubt that's playing over there in the stix. I didn't love it but "Vicky Cristina Barcelona" might be the best you've got?
Sometimes I forget that there are actual spoilers in your reviews. I still kinda want to see this (which of course means Netflix). Why is it that I'll only go to the theater for Seth Rogen? What does this say about me?
sorry if I ruined anything for you Trav. I love that you started writing again.
Thanks for the tips matt. I figured there were very little suggestions but I thought.... maybe.
I generally love the Coen brothers, this is probably my least favorite of the ones I've seen. I felt unfulfilled.
Post a Comment