Some great atmosphere, but story of clueless, narcissistic folk singer, really isn't worth telling

Rating: 4/10 (17 January 2014)

The problem with the Coen Brothers is that in every one of their movies, they're looking through a glass half empty and never half full. 'Inside Llewyn Davis' is no exception. Oh yes, you'll find the usual excellent cinematography, casting, acting, direction and neat recreation of bygone eras. But what you'll never find is sympathy for your protagonist. The Coen Brothers always pride themselves on standing above the fray and looking down on their anti-heroes. In essence, what they're saying is, 'we're good at exposing the underbelly of the dark side of Americana; applaud us.'
The failed folk artist, Llewyn Davis, is prototypical of their one dimensional view of things. Are there really people like the fictional Davis (supposedly an amalgam of real life musicians including Dave Van Ronk, Phil Ochs and Ramblin' Jack Elliott)? People so clueless, so narcissistic, that they never listen to feedback from anyone else, so that they never change. It's a rare individual who is so misanthropic, like the Coens' Llewyn, that you will ever run into him, in real life. But even if there is such a character, does he really deserve to be immortalized in film? I hardly think so.
The Coen brothers had no problem in admitting that 'Inside Llewyn Davis' has little plot. More important is the fact that the story is devoid of a concrete antagonist. The only antagonist is Llewyn's internal demon— which takes the form of myopia, cluelessness, and narcissism. The demon never emerges into Llewyn's consciousness, so that perhaps he can reflect upon where he is going wrong. Instead, we're asked to sit through a 104 minute chronicle of an unlikeable mediocrity, who pursues a wrong-headed quest for fame and fortune in the folk music world of the early 60s.
Llewyn Davis is much more caricature than a real human being. The Coen brothers go out of their way to show just how much of a loser this guy is. Are there really people like this? Consider their catalogue of Llewyn's shortcomings: He originally was part of a Simon & Garfunkel precursor type group, Tom & Jerry, but his partner committed suicide; he has no money and sleeps on acquaintances' couches; he's forced to carry some friends' cat around with him after he locks himself out of their apartment; he impregnates a woman but doesn't have to pay for the abortion, after he learns from the abortion doctor, that a previous girlfriend, never went through with the procedure; he drives all the way to Chicago, only to learn that a music manager never received his latest record in the mail and doesn't think he has any commercial potential; he heckles a woman during a folk concert and is later beaten up badly by the woman's husband, outside in a dark alley.
'Inside Llewyn Davis' is the ultimate sad sack tale. And unfortunately, sad sacks never make for good drama. What the film does have is lots of atmosphere. There are some neat cinematic scenes, notably the one involving John Goodman as a sleazy, heroin-addicted jazz musician, who is a passenger along with Llewyn, on that trip to Chicago. I also liked the attempt to recreate NYC in 1961, particularly various streets in Greenwich Village.
Rather than consulting all the positive reviews from 'professional' critics on Metacritic, you'll find some much more honest and insightful reviews in the review section of IMDb. There, at least, is a sense that Llewyn Davis is not a believable character and if by chance, such misanthropes truly exist in real life, their journeys are certainly not worth being looked at, given the lack of change or growth. If you like a straw man, Llewyn Davis is for you. The Coen brothers are experts at shooting straw men down--but such a maneuver should never bring praise and accolades; that's reserved only for the gullible!