Oscar's relationship with Joel and Ethan Coen has been an odd one to say the least. The past two decades have seen the brothers garner one Best Picture nod for Fargo and a win for No Country for Old Men. However, with the Best Picture category opening up to ten, the Coens found themselves with back to back nominations in the first two ceremonies of the 2010s.
I've talked recently about how changing the number of nominations from five meant the Academy made some questionable choices and I would say one of those picks applied to the first film in this post. A Serious Man was the Coens' second film after No Country For Old Men, the first being the overtly comic Burn After Reading. While those two films fit neatly into specific genres, I couldn't quite tell you what A Serious Man wanted to be. At times I found it was too clever for its own good especially seeing as it contained an opening sequence that bore no relevance to the rest of the film. The movie's protagonist is Larry Gopnik, a physics professor who leaves what he believes to be a quiet life. The film sees Larry's life fall apart firstly when his wife reveals she's leaving him and then when she kicks him out of the house in favour of her new lover. Additionally Larry is having to support his brother, who participates in several illegal gambling endeavours, and deal with the fact that a student is attempting to bribe him in order to get a passing grade on his course. Aside from the story of Larry, the Coens appear to be filling time by including a subplot involving Larry's son Danny's addiction to pot and how it effects his upcoming bar mitzvah. I have to say that Danny's story is especially weak and only partially plays into the ambiguous ending. I feel the point of the film is to feel sorry for Larry as he experiences problem after problem even owing money to a record club that he never joined in the first place. However it's very hard to sympathise with a man who's attempts to let life pass him buy have finally caught up with him.
More than anything else I found A Serious Man to be a rather annoying film and there wasn't one character that I particularly warmed to. Although Larry seemed like a nice enough fellow, I think the Coens repeated the same formula too many times especially in reference to the character's constant outburst of 'I didn't do anything'. At times it feels as if A Serious Man is attempting to be a comedy and I will admit that I did laugh twice during the film. However, A Serious Man elicited little emotion in me as it progressed and it just left me cold. On the plus side, I do feel the casting of unrecognisable faces helped to add a realistic tone to the film. Particular praise must go to Michael Stuhlbarg for his portrayal of the intelligent but not wholly perceptive Larry. To his credit, Stuhlbarg tries to make the audience root for his character, but I couldn't help but think that a lot of his problems were caused by his apathy. Possibly the most recognisable member of A Serious Man's ensemble is Richard Kind as Larry's needy brother Arthur. As I know Kind primarily as a comedy actor his larger-than-life persona was too much for the downbeat tone of the film. Of all the performances I felt that Fred Melamed probably did best as the slightly sleazy Si Ableman, who's attempts to plot Larry's downfall were quite transparent. Overall I really didn't know what to make of A Serious Man, a film that doesn't really show its hand and one that I never felt I could properly relax into. I was surprised to learn that the film came from the usually reliable Coens who obviously felt like they could deliver a movie which worked for them if not for a wider audience. I can't explain why exactly A Serious Man received an Oscar nomination but I do feel that, had there been less than ten nominees, then it wouldn't have featured in the Best Picture race at all.
Thankfully the Coens were back to their best a year later with their adaptation of True Grit, a novel that had previously been turned into a film back in 1969. That film was most famous for John Wayne's performance as Rooster Cogburn, a part for which he won his only Oscar. Here Cogburn is played by Jeff Bridges, who puts in a suitably gruff turn as the self-serving US Marshall. However I think the film's main strength is the then thirteen-year-old Hailee Steinfeld's performance as the formidable Mattie Ross. For those unfamiliar with the story, it concerns Mattie's quest to track down Tom Chaney, a former employee of her family's who had shot and killed her father. After much persuasion, Mattie convinces Rooster to lead a manhunt for Chaney promising him a handsome reward if he was successful in his mission. Joining Mattie and Rooster on their hunt is Texas Ranger LaBouef; a man who is presented as the opposite to the Marshall in almost every way. It's clear that, unlike the 1969 film, the Coens wanted to put Mattie front and centre as she appears in almost every scene. The odd couple trio of Mattie, Rooster and LaBouef is what makes the film work for me as we see the teenager lose her innocence as she witnesses several murders during the trek. Unlike with A Serious Man, the Coens make you engage with all three of the lead characters meaning that you care about them in the final third of the film when they find themselves in deadly peril. The scene in which Mattie was attacked by a snake was a particular edge-of-your-seat moment for yours truly and I think that demonstrated just how much I'd grown to care about the youngster throughout the course of the film. One issue I did have is that the Coens didn't seem to know how to finish the film and the epilogue involving the older incarnation of Mattie felt a little flat after what had come before.
However, that's a minor niggle in a film which I found to be an utter treat from beginning to end. Although I'm not a massive fan of the western, I do have certain favourites from the genre and this remake of True Grit is the latest addition to that list. The film was primarily shot in New Mexico and the Coens utilise their vast scenery to full effect. True Grit saw the Coens' latest collaboration with Roger Deakins who was unsuccessful yet again in his quest to win the Best Cinematography Oscar. I do feel that Deakins should have won the award for a film in which his shots of the landscape really helped enhance the story of the film. Another worthy winner would've been Hailee Steinfeld who I found utterly captivating from the first moment she appeared on screen. For a first time performance, Steinfeld's turn as Mattie was an absolute joy to watch and she more than held her own against more experienced stars. Steinfeld is able to convey both Mattie's headstrong nature and the fact that at heart she is a simply a teenage girl. Not only did Oscar make one mistake in not giving her an award in made another in putting her in the Supporting rather than Leading Actress category. Why a young woman who appears in almost every scene in the film should be considered a supporting artist boggles the mind but I've long stopped trying to figure out the Academy's logic. Jeff Bridges also deserved the Best Actor award for his performance as Cogburn than he did the previous year as the washed-up singer in Crazy Heart. True Grit was nominated for ten Oscars altogether but ultimately won none thanks to the success of both The King's Speech and Inception. However I think the Coens can be proud of a film that betters the original True Grit in almost every aspect and especially in the casting of Steinfeld who was simply dazzling as Mattie Ross.
From the Wild West we turn to the mystical east for a CGI-heavy fantasy film.
No comments:
Post a Comment