Laugh While Seeing

Yes, that’s indeed why it is called Sunset Boulevard. Beautiful, isn’t it? And I wonder whether this is why the Vista Theatre is called the Vista. I saw this lovely warm evening light as I came around the corner on Tuesday, on my way to meet a friend to see a movie I’ve been waiting for for some time now – Burn After Reading. It’s a Coen Brothers movie, and for me, it is an event when one of theirs comes out.

As has been the case a number of times in the past, when people hear I am interested in seeing a Coen film, they tell me things like “oh, the reviews weren’t good”, or “it hasn’t been doing so well”, or “the reviews are mixed”. My response is to thank them but politely ignore them. Especially for films I’ve made up my mind to see, I ignore all reviews.

In fact, as a rule, I read film reviews only after seeing the film, and then mostly for entertainment. (I’ve previously discussed aspects of this here.) Reviews just give too much away, and I’d rather see the film with as fresh a pair of eyes as possible. I also like to make up my own mind, and reviews (or at least the type I like to read that have a thoughtful analysis) can make that harder to do. Exceptions to that rule are reviews of films that I’ve really no interest in seeing. It’s fun to read the New Yorker’s Anthony Lane’s acidic (yet humourous) take on some new dreadful thing, sometimes. Just to read how he tears it up. Same goes for Mark Kermode’s wonderful rants on BBC Radio 5 (you really should go to itunes and podcast it). Other times, I’ve learned about good films I might never had chosen to see from them. After seeing the film, I like to read my favourite reviewers (Anthony Lane, Kenneth Turan, or listen to Mark Kermode) and get their thoughts. Even if I don’t agree, it is like arguing with a good friend to read about why they came to their opinions.)

For Coen Brothers films, I am even more careful to ignore the warnings. People often just don’t understand what they are doing. There’s a darkness and weirdness to their way of doing things -and a charming old-fashionedness that celebrates a past age of film-making – that is often lost on audiences steeped in the certain rather shiny vocabulary of film-making that the big US studios have been leaning toward. So if you’re looking for humour of the “Knocked Up”, or “40 Year-Old Virgin” variety, you might simply not find anything funny in “Burn After Reading”. This probably means that “O’ Brother Where Art Thou?” didn’t have you howling in the aisles either. So maybe best not to go with high hopes then.

If however, you like something more akin to Ealing comedies (does anyone remember what those were?), then this is perhaps a film for you. In fact, this is the Ealing comedy the Coens should have made when they tried (very poorly and forgettably) to remake “The Lady Killers” some years back. They failed. This film, however, really works. I was excited about it right at the get-go because of another aspect. The cast. One of the other reasons I love the Coens is the way they like to draw on the pool of some of my favourite actors, or actors of a certain Coen-film-ish type that just work really well with their type of work. When they show up in their films, I smile at them like they are old friends. That “type” has a certain sort of face and style of acting that fits well for their work (and I think that to some extent these film-makers are able to take actors and turn them into Coen-type actors too). I’m thinking of Frances McDormand, of course, and J. K. Simmons. You’d expect William H. Macy as well – the film cries out for him to walk on – and he does not, but there’s clearly his character there in the form of David Rasche’s character, or maybe Richard Jenkins’. Both of these actors are wonderful in their roles too. These icons of the more low-key, quirky American film world are the core, but then throw in as a bonus the wonderful Tilda Swinton, whose snake-like iciness here sends delicious shivers down my spine, and (one of my favourites in any genre) the marvellous John Malkovich and I’ll go and see the film even if it was made by a bumbling fool. You then top it off with George Clooney and Brad Pitt both being lovably over the top in their roles, and you’re in for a treat. If you like the overall quirkiness.

The script is tight, sharp, and just plain clever. It all works when woven into the performances and characters and is, as a result just plain funny. It is beautifully filmed and a pleasure to look at. The camera work delights in the individuality and quirks of everyone’s faces and bodies – a real and welcome holiday from the pressure-mold-plastic shoe-horning-to-type that you get in a lot of films.

I was giggling or smiling from ear to ear all the way through, stifling laughs at times to as not to disturb those around me. It seemed to me that every single minute of the film was a real pleasure. Perhaps I was just in that sort of mood. As always with the Vista (one of the reasons I love going), it was a great “performance” of the film – as a result of seeing it with an audience of locals and regulars who appreciate film and responded well during the course of it. The friend I was with didn’t like it much, which is fine. (I’m actually amused by the irony that there’s a scene in the film where two people are at a film and one is finding it really funny while the other isn’t.) You might not like it much. I can see that this sort of character-driven dark farce is not for everyone, and that if you’re not in the right mood, the entire film can pass you by, leaving you wondering what the fuss was about.

But don’t just sit and listen to what you heard from the reviewers. Take a chance. If you’re in the right mood, the right frame of mind, you will see that “Burn After Reading” is a truly great contribution to the genre.

-cvj