Better work (finally) from the Coens

Rating: 3/10 (20 November 2007)

I'm an enormous fan of Blood Simple and not much else from the Coens. I consider The Big Lebowski, and The Ladykillers two of the dumbest films ever made. This movie is much better than the Coen's last 8 genre ripoffs. Its structure is very forthright; it's a pleasure to watch the Coens make plot points and connections with something other than dialog; you have to pay attention (but really not even that much) to understand/anticipate the motivation of the next scene. Even respected directors (Scorcese) have become dependent on actors explaining things to make plot points; and been filming talky scripts with little invention. It's just better when it's done in a filmic manner. The wordless connections here reminded me of the silent sequences where plot develops in Antonioni's Blowup.
The real problem with the movie begins about the time Jones who has been an internalized man of few words for the whole movie, meets up with his brother and suddenly becomes effusive. Everything that was underplayed, or in the subtext, becomes hideously direct and clumsy. Jones had already been heading for a best actor nom, but the Coens apparently wanted to give him a hammy scene or two to pump the Oscar-consideration process, in the media hype that leads up to that free-for-all. These scenes are leaden.
It's generally very economical. All the questions I wondered about were answered with a little thought except one; How the hell do Jones and Bardem not encounter each other in the hotel room? Also the title is so dumb it almost prevented me from seeing it; telegraphing the theme, the ending, the final score, etc. I can imagine about a thousand better titles. And changing it from the book may have grated them the freedom to scrap some bookish scenes. You could toss everything away that occurs after Bardem exits the family household and looks at his boots. In these places it begins to look like their meandering, pointless Man who Wasn't There. It has about 4 endings too many.
I've recently revised this review downward after a suitable amount of time has passed. I am utterly neutral (no interest) about seeing this movie a 2nd time, so it failed there for me. It also doesn't make me contemplate a thing, not even film technique.