[quote=“cyber-lili”]
Ok, then you know you have seen NO Coen in a way. Check out this list :
Blood Simple, Miller’s Crossing, Barton Fink, The Hudsucker Proxy, Fargo, The Man Who Wasn’t There.
And if you’re in a comedy mood, check out O Brother, Where Art Thou ? and Raising Arizona.
[/quote]
for sure i’m gonna check out all their movies, they are very obviously very gifted and great filmmakers.
[quote=“Col. Crazy Kenneth”]
for sure i’m gonna check out all their movies, they are very obviously very gifted and great filmmakers.
[/quote]
Something tells me that you’d probably get a real kick out of Raising Arizona.
well then maybe i’ll try that one next, thanks
Really interesting trailer. Looks a lot like Barton Fink so I’ll be stoked to check it out.
[quote=“C.C. Baxter”]
Something tells me that you’d probably get a real kick out of Raising Arizona.
[/quote]
I sort of liked it. I never fully indulged in the plot, but the relationship between Francis and Nic Cage was so hysterical.
My favorite Coen Bros. movie is Fargo, I think Bette Davis would have done a similar role if she had the chance, or lived in this generation anyways.
Fargo is easily their best.
just got my tickets to see it at the vienna film festival. yay!
I watched Fargo for the first time yesterday. It was pretty amazing 8)
I don’t really see how they can oversaturate themselves. Some filmmakers are just more prolific than others. You’ve got people like Malick and you’ve got people like Corman. As long as their films aren’t bad, then I have no problem with a film a year.
Some people have a lot to say and a lot of films they want to make.
[quote=“Angel”]I don’t really see how they can oversaturate themselves. Some filmmakers are just more prolific than others. You’ve got people like Malick and you’ve got people like Corman. As long as their films aren’t bad, then I have no problem with a film a year.
Some people have a lot to say and a lot of films they want to make.[/quote]
I understand that completely. It’s just that, typically speaking, directors who produce films at such a rapid rate run the risk of spreadin themselves thin. Of course, “typically speaking” (Or, tpyical anything, for that matter.) doesn’t apply
to the Coens anyhow. Nevermind. I must’ve just been attempting to stir up a little bit of conversation along w/
getting the word out on their new picture. Playing the ol’ Devil’s advocate & all that. 
Carry on, then.
I saw it and I really liked it. It’s considerably better then Burn After Reading (IMO obviously). I had doubts about them releasing so many movies in so few years as well, but after seeing it I’m no longer worried. It had very classic Coen brothers elements, but I was really surprised by how emotional some parts of the movie were. I’m not used to that emotional rawness in a Coen brothers film, or maybe it’s just been way to long since Ive watched some of them…
[quote=“Elmer Ephraim Ellsworth”]
I understand that completely. It’s just that, typically speaking, directors who produce films at such a rapid rate run the risk of spreadin themselves thin. Of course, “typically speaking” (Or, tpyical anything, for that matter.) doesn’t apply
to the Coens anyhow. Nevermind. I must’ve just been attempting to stir up a little bit of conversation along w/
getting the word out on their new picture. Playing the ol’ Devil’s advocate & all that. Carry on, then.[/quote]
Well, I understand what you are saying. I think in terms of spreading themselves thin, though, I think the Coens (maybe because there are two of them 
) are not in immediate danger of it.
What I thought of your initial question was whether the Coens were releasing too many films from a fan perspective. Tarantino films are big movie events, cause he tends to take his time. Kind of like how Disney only releases their older films in limited editions every 5 or 6 years. So they retain that special quality about them.
But this really only applies to film fans. Cause the average person sees Burn After Reading and thinks “the new Brad Pitt and George Clooney film”. And I think film fans are getting used to the Coens’ rapid filmmaking process.
[quote=“Elmer Ephraim Ellsworth”][quote=“Angel”]I don’t really see how they can oversaturate themselves. Some filmmakers are just more prolific than others. You’ve got people like Malick and you’ve got people like Corman. As long as their films aren’t bad, then I have no problem with a film a year.
Some people have a lot to say and a lot of films they want to make.[/quote]
I understand that completely. It’s just that, typically speaking, directors who produce films at such a rapid rate run the risk of spreadin themselves thin. Of course, “typically speaking” (Or, tpyical anything, for that matter.) doesn’t apply
to the Coens anyhow. Nevermind. I must’ve just been attempting to stir up a little bit of conversation along w/
getting the word out on their new picture. Playing the ol’ Devil’s advocate & all that. Carry on, then.[/quote]
Their hero is Preston Sturges...
The man made like 8 or 9 films in 4 years and they were all gold.
I'm pretty sure the Coens are trying to hit a streak like that. It's obvious that he is their influence in terms of prolificness.
seeing it now
well this sucked. another horrible non-ending to one of their movies, only this time it didnt matter as much because they werent ruining a masterpiece. the movie wasnt shit, all the good ingredients were there for a truly satisfying experience, but most of the time it was just so dull to watch.
somebody should sit down the coens at a table, open the dictionary where it says “closure”, and then repeatedly smack their heads into the page.
I like their endings. 