I don’t feel like going into a long explanation, but they can be pretentious and heavy handed, and I think they’ve declined a bit as they’ve run out of ideas. I don’t hate them, though. I love Fargo, Blood Simple, The Big Lebowski, Miller’s Crossing. Not so crazy about Barton Fink and No Country.
I guess I agree with that… I enjoyed No Country, but there were several scenes where I just rolled my eyes because of how heavy-handed it was. But how about those of you who really hate them?
are there a lot of people who really hate them? I thought they were pretty universally liked, but I guess anything goes on mubi.
i love the coens (in fact dffoo, i saw barton fink first at the tate center in 1990)
and don’t think they’ve run out of ideas at all. a misfire or two here or there (big lebowski, ladykillers)
but their record is among the most consistent of contemporary american filmmakers.
I’ve sworn myself off of these “defend an opinion merely because it differs from mine” threads because most of the time they’re just one person bullying another into trying to come up with an objective analysis of subjective opinion (and they’re usually horribly vague at that)… not that you’re doing that, but…
Anyway… Just chiming in to remind; there are plenty of reasons to love and hate any filmmaker of any kind. Specificity is key. Analysis of a single film will probably be far, far more enlightening than tackling their entire oeuvre in vague “love” vs. “hate” positions.
I’m not trying to be mean, seriously, but with stuff like this it’s usually just a matter figuring out what it is you like about them and then realizing that those attributes may very well be the things others don’t like about them.
I’m sure if you posted your reasons for liking them, or any critic’s favorable review, those things would be things I not only don’t value in art but actually find dangerous or abhorrent.
In this case it’s mostly the treatment of their characters. They seem, to me, to not really like people. They seem to enjoy making people look stupid and making their audience feel better about themselves for being "better’ than the characters. Even when they show what I suppose some might term affection (Raising Arizona, etc.), there’s a cartoonish aspect to the characters that turns them all into buffoons. The “beautiful” style of their films, while not as nauseating as Sin City or 300, is still more pretty than interesting. They make “big” statements but lack spontaneity… I could go on but i’ll just stop there.
Going back to my first point, if I look at and truly understand a filmmaker I like, such as Mike Leigh, it’s pretty obvious to me that the people who don’t like him feel that way because the things I love about his films don’t fit their (flawed) value system of appreciating art.
I hate the Coens for the same reasons their fans love them.
who don’t like him feel that way because the things I love about his films don’t fit their (flawed) value system of appreciating art.
so their value system is flawed by yours isn’t?
Their early films—“Blood Simple,” “Barton Fink”—were phenomenal. After, they veered into a territory where randomness masqueraded as profundity, prentension eclipsed the intellectuality that their comedy once promised.
so their value system is flawed by yours isn’t?
Read what he wrote. He’s talking about subjective opinion. It’s flawed to him… it may not be to you. That’s the entire point he’s making. <—-That is why I dislike these kinds of threads… what does the conversation I’m anticipating from these comments have to do with the Coens films? Nothing. It will just, most likely, be people trying to force their “value systems” upon others…
@Drunken
I enjoy the Coen Brothers and I think they’re excellent Hollywood filmmakers (although they can be hit-and-miss for me). If their films were the representative of the average Hollywood film, I’d be happy. Now, I think some of the backlash stems from the fact that they make Hollywood films, but they’re elevated to the same level as great filmmakers of the past (e.g. Fellini, etc.) I think the same sort of thing happens with Tarantino.
@Q
I’ve sworn myself off of these “defend an opinion merely because it differs from mine” threads because most of the time they’re just one person bullying another into trying to come up with an objective analysis of subjective opinion (and they’re usually horribly vague at that)…
I hope you’re not referring to me when you right this, but I suspect you might be. For me, when I ask someone to explain a film or filmmaker that I don’t appreciate, I’m not trying to bully the other person—and I hope I never come across that way—but I’m genuninely interested in hearing a case for either a) why the person loves that film/filmmaker; or b) a case for why the film/filmmaker is truly great. I come into these discussions with an open mind, and I’m not trying to harass people or put them on trial—as in, prove to me that you have good tastes, or whatever. I have no interest in that sort of thing.
Finally, I don’t think I’m asking for an “objective analysis” but I do think we can make arguments for or against a film/filmmaker. If by “subjective opinion,” you mean that all opinions are absolutely relative in some way, then I sort of think discussions about these films are sort of pointless (or at least less interesting for me). Personally, I don’t believe opinions about these things are absolutely relative.
so their value system is flawed by yours isn’t?
I have my own way of using the parentheses. In this instance they were meant to indicate that, of course, they would say the same thing about my value system if they were being honest and if they have actual values. yes, I believe that there’s is flawed and mine isn’t but I’m not going to force them to change. Being open-minded about other people’s choices doesn’t mean you have to say every value system is mature and worthwhile.
Oh, Quetz pretty much answered for me. Thanks:)
@Q
Read what he wrote. He’s talking about subjective opinion. It’s flawed to him… it may not be to you. That’s the entire point he’s making
I don’t know. Had Mike not used “flawed” I would have agreed with you, but the use of the word seems to suggest that the value system is not merely subjective.
what does the conversation I’m anticipating from these comments have to do with the Coens films? Nothing. It will just, most likely, be people trying to force their “value systems” upon others…
I know the conversation can and does become this way, but it doesn’t have to. If we were all hanging out together and some loved the Coens and others didn’t, I think a discussion about what makes them good or not would be interesting and enjoyable—as long we didn’t personally attack or insult anyone.
Uh oh….
Anyway, maybe most of what I like about the Coen brothers is that Fargo and Burn After Reading are pretty much the only comedies I like (btw I really dislike Raising Arizona). I guess I like the fact that they do make their characters look dumb.
We can shut this thread down if you guys want…. anybody?
I think the Coen’s are real masters of their form. However, I don’t particularly care for their nihilistic outlook on the world. The central theme of their movies seems to be that nothing matters, life is random, and bad stuff happens for no particular reason.
Had Mike not used “flawed” I would have agreed with you, but the use of the word seems to suggest that the value system is not merely subjective.
Come on, Jazz! Are people not capable of subjectively stating that they think something is wrong anymore? Are we putting the word “flawed” on moratorium because everyone is right and everything is okay or do we only do that with films. Sorry, for me, films, life, it’s all the same. Values are values and some are flawed, yes, obviously In. My. Opinion. Do these three words need to be used at the end of every statement even when your name is attached.
Mike Spence (Not the voice of God)
In this case it’s mostly the treatment of their characters. They seem, to me, to not really like people. They seem to enjoy making people look stupid and making their audience feel better about themselves for being ’better’ than the characters.
i’ve heard this from a number of people. i think it’s a valid objection to many of their films
5 stars for “A SERIOUS MAN” ????
ARE YOU SERIOUS??
Yep – the acting was great, it was hilarious, and the ending was incredible. Why didn’t you like it?
I love that film!!!!
wait – what?
I said I love that film!
wait – what?
Sometimes they just like to torture their characters a little too much.
Plus, someone has to pay for “No Country for Old Men”. Pompous tripe.
ARE YOU SERIOUS ??
Nothing nihilistic about these panderers to the quirky-indie consciousness. When thet trot in nihilists—as in “Lebowski”—theyre mere punch line.
I agree with that, Z. Bart… people try to classify them as nihilists, but they’re definitely only cynics.
Well is everyone supposed to make films about dancing Rockettes with smiles plastered to their faces? At least they’re consistent in the kinds of views they’re interested in making a film about. I don’t mind it. And I’ve enjoyed their films, and don’t really get the contempt for No Country for Old Men. Does that mean I have BAD TASTE?
And what does “only cynics” mean? That nihilists are a cut above cynics and therefore cooler?
Sigh…
@Mike
Come on, Jazz! Are people not capable of subjectively stating that they think something is wrong anymore?
Absolutely not. And I also agree with this line you wrote: Being open-minded about other people’s choices doesn’t mean you have to say every value system is mature and worthwhile
On the other hand, if you’re going to use words like “flawed” or not “mature” or “worthwhile,” to describe someone else’s value system—versus simply saying you disagree or even strongly disagree—you shouldn’t be surprised if you offend the person—even if you admit your statements are your own subjective opinion. That qualifier doesn’t get you off the hook, imo. It would be like saying, “It’s just my subjective opinion, but I think you’re kind of stupid and ugly.”
@Drunken
FWIW, I loved A Serious Man!
Drunken Father Figure of Old
I know many of you can’t stand the Coen brothers. To me, they have an uneven catalog, but still have some really great films. While I’ve only been able to give one of their films five stars (A Serious Man), I still think they’re some pretty solid filmmakers whose films I’ll keep seeing. Is it just that you guys don’t like the pop-cynicism? Is that all?