Skip to main content

Playing Catch-up [part 1]

A Serious Man

I've fallen behind on writing about the films I'm seeing and I place the blame directly on Ethan and Joel Coen. It has been a good, long time since I've seen a film that I disliked so much that I just couldn’t stop thinking about it. Usually, I reserve this pleasure for films by Haneke and Lars Von Trier, but something about A Serious Man has seriously gotten under my skin and I'm having trouble shaking it.

Larry Gopnik's (Michael Stuhlbarg) life is unraveling. His wife is leaving him, a student is attempting to bribe him, his brother has moved in, he's getting calls demanding payment for a record subscription that he knows nothing about, and he is up for tenure. And Larry wants to know why these things are happening to him and is seeking council from the rabbi. In A Serious Man, Larry is under attack from all sides and needs to understand why. Perhaps my biggest problem with A Serious Man was a complete failure to find humor in this black comedy. This film seemed more like a morality tale, or tragedy, than a black comedy. Last year's Burn After Reading was equally dark, but induced laughter that I couldn’t find in A Serious Man. Not only didn’t I find anything about Larry Gopnik’s circumstances funny, but I’m wrestling with the message of this film.

Basically, it appears that all of Larry’s problems stem from his unwillingness to act. He protests throughout the movie that he has done nothing to deserve mistreatment by the universe at large, so why is God punishing him? This could easily be read as another telling of the story of Job; that Larry has in fact done nothing to incite God’s rage.

Or is he in fact being punished for his inaction? This might be what I find irritating about A Serious Man, is this notion that the majority of Larry Gopnick's problems stem from not doing anything. And I can see why Ethan and Joel might decide to run a character through the ringer for repeatedly coming up with perfectly rational reasons to not act on his whims, desires, or really anything, but I just didn't find it enjoyable to watch and often A Serious Man was uncomfortable. This might be because it left me with a nagging question. What does it mean in life to do something? And I found myself awake in the middle of the night more than once in the weeks after wondering if my life was not too dissimilar from Larry's. At least, I am aware of a few desires that I would dearly love to act on, but I can also compose a lengthy list of very good reasons not to. But really, the biggest thing that impedes me is the simple fact that is is so much easier to do nothing.

So I guess I cannot make any claims that A Serious Man was not provocative, just not as enjoyable as what I had hoped after seeing the trailer. In fact, the trailer may be a much more exciting piece of filmmaking than the movie.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhastan

Right after seeing Sacha Baron Cohen's film, Borat, I was disappointed. I didn't laugh nearly as hard as I had hoped and it wasn't quite as outrageous as I had expected. But in retrospect, I have to admit the comic brilliance of Borat. Sacha Baron Cohen has adeptly created a film about a fictional man, Borat, from a fictionalized Kazakhastan and used this creation to show the hipocracy of America. Using tactics pioneered by reality television shows, Borat travels across America on a quest to find his true love, Pamela Anderson. On this journey, he meets numerous people who share their thoughts about a multitude of things, exposing the way some Americans really believe about race, class, homosexuality and the other sex. It is a very interesting film. Sure, it gets laughs from ambushing Pamela Anderson with a wedding bag, traveling with a bear, and a bit of naked wrestling, but this film is also very smart in its sly portrayal of the wealth of prejudices that are ali

Horror?

From Blogger I apparently have no clue what a horror movie is. Or at least, when the challenge rolls around and I take the leap and attempt to watch 31 horror movies, I suddenly feel as if I have no idea what that means. There are times when it is obvious that a movie is horror; Friday the 13th, Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre . Once I dive into the challenge, I begin to question whether the movies I'm seeing really count. This year, I've seen Buried, Carrie, Clean, Shaven, Nosferatu (1922), Scanners, Sisters , and I sell the Dead . Nate protested Sisters, saying DePalma's movie about a pair of disturbed Siamese twins isn't a horror movie. And he has a point, but how is one supposed to choose movies without having seen them before to really know whether they are horror? Especially since I'm only using the challenge to catch up on movies that I should see because they are classics and to re-watch a few others that need to be revisited. But picking the

My attempt at Filmspotting's Top 5 List

I just finished listening to Filmspotting podcast, episode #296, and I've been inspired to begin a small project. My concept of great cinema has changed now that I live in a place with so many choices. When I lived in Anchorage, I primarily saw movies at the local Art House, Capri Cinema. Rand, being an out gay man, tended to show a lot of GLBT cinema as well as the better known independent/art house films. The years I lived in Columbia, I watched more mainstream film and really, just about everything that came to town that sounded at all interesting. But in Seattle, the choices are overwhelming by comparison. Sometimes I'll see a classic film, or a film with a lot of buzz, and there are a lot of foreign language films, because of the wide variety of cinema I have access to, I am now a very devoted fan of Asian cinema. The filmmakers in Hong Kong, Korea, China, Japan, Thailand are incredible. And this isn't at all limited to the genre films that have made Asian film