Now that the dust has settled, can we all agree that this was comfortably mid-tier Coen Bros? Not terrible. Not great. Just adequate.
>>70086604
yep
>>70086604
they should stop shitting up movies with channing tatum and scarjo
>>70086604
It was a very good film. It's just that they've made a number of great films. Still, really funny, enjoyable, a nice ode to that time in Hollywood and style of films.
>>70086759
Tatum was excellent, scene stealing, twice. And again, fit into the Busby Berkeley mode of performance perfectly. Scarjo, yeah, not so much.
>>70086759
I'll give you half credit. Tatum was fucking excellent in the movie. Maybe the best performance of any of them.
Scarlett Johansson? Eh, not so much. Probably the weakest link of the main case. She didn't come across as her character, she came across as Scarlett Johansson trying to act like a character. The accent was fucking awful.
But yeah, Channing Tatum fucking killed it. The whole dance number was spot on, and the sub scene was probably the part of the movie.
Wasn't their best by any means, but I honestly don't get the hate it received.
It may not have been as deep or unique as their other films but it had some excellent moments; that dance sequence, the sub, Clooney's general goofy performance, the spaghetti lasso, "would that it were so simple" and so on.
It was fun, looked gorgeous and was an all round comfy movie, I enjoyed it.
>>70086604
it was bretty bad
there is absolute no quality to the film, a complete waste of time
>>70087305
memellenial pls
>>70087077
>that dance sequence
>the spaghetti lasso
I think what amazed me about scenes like that is that those guys don't actually do that. They don't do Gene Kelly dance numbers regularly. They don't work as a rodeo showman. They actually had to spend time learning some crazy shit just to act like they were the actors who could do that.
>>70087077
>"would that it were so simple"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGpsXuMvApo
It would have been better without George Clooney and only following Josh Brolin's studio problems.
Cut all scenes from Clooney with the commies and would be a better movie.
>>70087480
>cut out the only plot point which ties the movie togther and it would be a better movie
Nigga wut?
>>70087350
sorry fanboy its just not a good movie
a few dance scenes and a convoluted story makes cohen brothers just look like hacks
they should really go for quality over quantity
>>70087513
Making the plot point Josh Brolin's life would have been better.
it was okay, Coens on autopilot.
Brolin's character was meh
I know they serverd their purpose, but Scarlett Johansson, Tatum and Jonah Hill deserved more screen time.
I didn't like it, there were quite a few parts that I realised were pointless when the credits started rolling and the film left absolutley no impression on me. Usually a Coen brother's film at least hints at an underlying meaning to it but with Hail Caesar there didn't seem to be anything underneath.
>>70087547
So what would you want? An extra thirty minutes of contract negotiations at the Chinese restaurant?
>>70087565
>Jonah Hill
He was the only fairly major character who really seemed out of place and underdeveloped. Johansson was meh at best. I could've used more Tatum. I wish they had developed his whole communist thing more.
>>70087662
I only watched it once, but I was left with the impression that it's probably deeper than it appears. I'm NOT saying it's a deep movie, but probably deeper than it appears. I'm guessing that all the subplots with the various movies and styles all somehow work together with Brolin's life.
Again, not saying it's deep, but the Coens generally don't just half ass things (except for The Ladykillers), and I suspect that it works together well somehow.
>>70087565
>Coens on autopilot.
most accurate description I've heard
these "lukewarm" movies are gonna cost them dearly in the long rung
it seems they just love money alot
I'm sick to fucking death of Josh Brolin, he's shite yet he's in everything and I have no idea why
>>70087778
>these "lukewarm" movies are gonna cost them dearly in the long rung
How on earth does it cost them? They've got a pile of Oscars, even their shittiest movies still get good reviews. A-list Hollywood actors and actresses will do anything to be in their movies---for fuck's sake, just look at the cast for this movie. They can make any movie they want with complete control and complete artistic freedom.
How on earth will this cost them? It's not top tier work from them, but it has pretty good reviews over all and made back 3x its budget. They can keep doing whatever the fuck they want as long as they want.
>>70086759
The Channing Tatum hate meme needs to end. Just because every girl you've ever met wants his pee pee inside her doesn't mean he's a bad actor. Did you see Foxcatcher? He absolutely demolished the "ungrateful ape" role.
Alright everyone name your top 3 Coen flicks
For me it's :
No Country for Old Men
Barton Finks
Fargo
>>70087869
That's because you're a bong and are scared of his all-American manliness.
Ethan > Joel > Etan
>>70088137
Raising Arizona
Fargo
No Country
Depending on my mood, I could probably switch out Big Lebowski for No Country.
>>70088242
What do you like so much about Raising Arizona? I found it to be entertaining at most
There wasn't anything special about it except the qt
>>70087939
in 50 years those oscars and a list cast choices will mean shit (they mean shit even now)
they will be looked upon as some hollywood directors who had an okay career but with not much to tell.
it's the whole tarantino theory one bad movies destroyed three good ones, and they have a lot borderline crap movies(hail caesar included)
>>70088541
Go to bed, Etan
You should be prouder of your cousins
I didnt like this movie
Loved it tbqh
Is everyone seriously forgetting True Grit?
Sure, its a remake, but damn I loved that movie. Great child actor, based Bridges, an actually good performance from Damon, and a great bit by Brolin. Fantastic score and cinematography.
Seems like its always overlooked.
It was super comfy
Am I the only person who thought the plot was almost nonexistent? It had good production value, a good cast of A-listers, and several interesting scenes, but it didn't go anywhere. In terms of narrative structure nothing was really going on, in addition to being extremely anti-climatic at the end. It didn't feel like anyone other than Channing Tatum accomplished anything.
>>70086604
It was okay.
>>70089865
>It didn't feel like anyone other than Channing Tatum accomplished anything.
Did you see Burn After Reading, A Serious Man, Llewyn Davis? Their films are not about accomplishing anything as such, and feature relatively simple narratives.
Middling even for them
Based Clive
>>70088137
the big lebowski
a serious man
hudsucker proxy
>>70089293
People forget how many great movies the Coens put out. They're like Woody Allen if he actually had some consistency. The Coen Brothers in my opinion have never made a "bad" movie. Some are worse than others, but even their weakest movie is preferable to most dreck out these days.
Especially with Hail, Caesar. The plot was all over the place but it had so many memorable sequences, and obviously a lot of time and effort went into recreating golden age hollywood. They put the work in even if they aren't on their A game script wise.
>>70090164
agreed, i think they are very good at making movies that would otherwise be bad look good or at least decent.
>>70086759
Tatum killed it in this film.
>>70090237
Who has had the more surprising turn in careers in Hollywood? Channing Tatum or Mcconaughey? Both of them continue to rack up legitimate credibility as actors.
I'd Tatum has an advantage because he has a wider range.
>>70086604
Woodititwer so simple
>>70090438
Tatum turning out to be a great actor is fucking hilarious. It's genuinely funny that this dude whose career only started because he was some Chad stereotype turned into a fantastic actor.
>>70090438
I'd say Tatum isn't quite there yet, he needs to kill it in a serious lead role that gets recognition and he might ascend to actually serious-tier
Foxcatcher was close but not quite there
>>70088137
Fargo
Inside Llewyn Davis (fuck you it's fantastic)
No Country for Old Men
How are they so good bros
>>70088420
For me, it really pays off on repeat viewings. I think that, since they were so young and still trying to make a name for themselves, there was an incredible attention to detail that's lacking nowadays. It's a comedy, but it's impeccably made, and a lot of allusions and self references within the film easily go unnoticed. The more I watch it, the more I see how stuff fits together.
>>70088541
>this is going to cost them
>because the oscars won't mean anything
>but they don't mean anything now aways
So, again, I ask you, how will it cost them? If the oscars are worthless now, then how do they lose anything by the oscars continuing to be worthless in 50 years? You said it's going to cost them, but if they have nothing of value to lose, then where's the cost?
>>70089973
This. They don't exactly follow a traditional plot structure. In fact, they really push against that in pretty much most of their films.
>>70090016
>culture crash
>culture crash
>culture crash
>>70090076
>hudsucker proxy
Seriously? I don't think it's as bad as people say, but I honestly can't see how it'd be anybody's top 3 for the Coens.
>>70086604
Coen brothers tier list pic pls
>>70089293
>Fantastic score and cinematography.
True Grit is a good movie over all, not great, but pretty good. But it probably has some of their best cinematography and music. Their movies have killer scores and based Roger Deakins always has fucking amazing cinematography, True Grit is near the top on that metric.
>>70090679
This 100%. Tatum has the potential to go big, but he's not quite there yet.
Hell, this movie actually made me respect him more. It was a minor role, but he really stood out among a fucking stellar cast.
>>70090846
i know, objectively there are better coen movies, but for some reason i've been a huge fan of the movie. i think i saw it on tv when i was really really young, the double stitches scene is actually one of my earliest movie related memories, so that's probably why.
>>70086604
Better than Fargo
>>70090742
They will lose the admiration of this one guy on 4chan, and if you ask me, it's too high of a price to pay for any Hollywood filmmaker.
>>70091414
NO ITS NOT!!!! :((((((
>>70090945
This.
I like Tatum. He was good in this and Hateful Eight. As a featured performer, he is exquisite, but I don't think he has the talent to fully encapsulate a lead role to its fullest potential. After a couple years, I'm guessing we will see a fantastic movie with him leading.
>>70087705
>jonah hill
>fairly major character
what, it was basically a cameo
>>70088137
Fargo
No Country for Old Men
A Serious Man
It was very good. Had that typical not really going anywhere but still entertaining vibe from A Serious Man
I liked it because the Coen's sense of humor wasn't too intrusive. The comedy wasn't too fettered by bizarre energy or hammy dialogue. I think it's a very smartly written movie.
>>70086604
Bearing in mind that "mid-tier" Coen movies easily beat god-tier movies by other directors
No I'd say it was pretty awful. It doesn't succeed in any form. It's not a compelling drama, the satire is limp and underdeveloped, the laughs are few and very far apart, the performances barely adequate. Even the cinematography was just sort of plain, they could have done much more to emulate the look of 50s films if that was the goal.
It really felt like a first draft of half baked ideas.
>>70088541
In 50 years nobody will remember their handful of misfires, just like every other artist. People will still talk about Fargo and NCFOM long after this is forgotten.
>it's the whole tarantino theory one bad movies destroyed three good ones
Hitchcock spent his last 15 years making mediocrities but that did nothing to undo the first 30 years of regularly making masterpieces
>>70092861
Mostly because Hollywood is a circle-jerk, but kind of I guess.... :/
>>70093021
Yea, unless they make a movie that is truly repulsive. Then people will remember that.
>30 years from now
"Let's have a Coen marathon, but skip over <insert horrible Coen movie>!"
>>70093120
>Yea, unless they make a movie that is truly repulsive. Then people will remember that.
The Ladykillers is a fucking terrible movie and is looked on by most as a terrible movie, and it didn't do too much damage to them.
>>70093158
I rate the Ladykillers higher than Intolerable Cruelty
>>70089973
>>70090777
Llewyn Davis and A Serious Man were character studies, and Burn After Reading is an intentional clusterfuck of stupid people being stupid with no greater purpose.
Hail Caesar is much more thinly sketched; it equally but underwhelming satires Hollywood, religion and the red scare, is part mystery caper, something of a character study but buries the lead among too many side characters and doesn't give him much character to begin with, and is full of throwaway comedic scenes that work to various effect. It's really all over the place and could have used a tighter narrative to tie things together
>>70093158
>looked on by most as a terrible movie,
Not by anybody who matters.
>>70093158
fuck the masses, ladykillers was a solid 6.5
>>70093358
>A Serious Man were character studies
Nope, it was not. It was a polemic, the Book of Job.
>>70086604
>comfortably mid-tier
that's a positive spin to the word 'mediocre'
whenever i watch a coen movie i feel like the coen's wanted the movie to be exactly as it was. there's some sort of confidence that i get from the movie somehow, which is why i don't think i find any coen movie bad, or even mediocre. even their movies i don't like feel well made to me.
>>70095200
absolutely
Yes, id also classify it as low-kino
Anyone know what font "Capitol Pictures Studios" is written in?
>>70087077
The scene where Brolin gathered all the religious leaders and the "would that it were so simple" scenes are very well done by any comedy film's standards.
its sad that people trying to copy their style do better work then they can aka fargo season 2
>>70092721
It was an entire movie of basically cameos.
>>70093236
Yeah, but that's basically a fight between retards at the special olympics. By any measure, they're the two worst, by far.
>>70096249
Looks like an all caps Futura, maybe.
>>70087778
>it seems they just love money alot
this movie was made out of pure love for the history and craft of filmmaking, youre talking out of your ass
>>70096457
I know the "would that it were so simple" was supposed to be the funniest scene in the movie, but the scene with the religious leaders was by far the funniest in my opinion. That's Coen style comedy and writing at its best. The orthodox priest complaining about the chariot race scene was fucking great.
>>70096749
thanks famiglia
>>70096812
Word. This was a $20m artsy comedy that was never made for a wide audience. Absolutely nothing about implies movie. Fuck, this is just two brothers who can now do whatever the fuck they want and just making a fun homage to cinema history.
>>70096459
They're producers on Fargo
>>70086604
It's mediocre by Coen standards. Still a good film.
>Jesus is not the son of god
>God likes jews the most
What did the coens mean by this?
It was an excellent commentary on 1940s and modern hollywood. There were a lot of layers to this movie too. Its an excellent movie to analyze.
I feel like this movie would have gotten better reviews if it wasn't advertised as an ensemble comedy.
>>70086604
I think that's the perfect description of this movie
I'm upset the cowboy didn't have to lasso any communists
>>70095200
This 100%
I was surprised how funny Tilda Swinton's bit was, and then the scene with Ralph Fiennes floored me. I watched a clip of it on youtube before seeing the movie and it did nothing for me but it was amazing in the movie. The whole thing was a lot better than I expected based off of the lack of buzz around it.
I saw this with two friends. I absolutely hated it and rank it with the likes of Ladykillers and Intolerable Cruelty, friend #1 thought it was average and put it in the middle of their filmography and friend #2 absolutely loved the film putting it in the Coens top 3.
For me personally, it felt like the Coens had a bunch of great ideas and funny moments and just dumped them into this bare bones film without any rhyme or reason. The plot was nonexistant, which usually works for them, but there was so much shit going on and none of it had anything to do with anything else.
>>70090016
bhery dipphicult
bhery dipphicult
a hush hush glade
![Hail.Caesar.2016.720p.WEB-DL.X264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_00.06.31_[2016.05.27_18.08.46].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ZelJUfX.jpg "Hail.Caesar.2016.720p.WEB-DL.X264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_00.06.31_[2016.05.27_18.08.46].jpg")
>people saying there was no real ending
Did you not listen to Italicus' speech at the end? Movies and celebrities have become the new religion, the new Christianity. "Why shouldn't gods anointed appear here, among these strange people to shoulder their sins. Here, in this sun drenched land. Why shouldn't he take this form, the form of an ordinary man, a man bringing us not the old truths, but a new one?" Baird asks as the shots focus on the film crew. Isn't cinema a "new truth told not in words but in light"? And that's a truth we could see if only we had a character like Mannix who's there to act as another Jesus, someone to shoulder the sins of his studios' children, so that the image the poor and huddled masses will always be one of semi-divinity, a new kind of truth that works only if, in the image of the film industry, we have butfaith.
>>70086604
It wasn't a good movie.
>>70101213
t. Communist
>>70101203
Certainly the coens greatest strength is the ability to present an unassuming story, with thick subtext, in a way that seems so natural.
>>70086604
yeah
>>70101203
Just realized his name is Autolochus
I thought it was Attalicus
>>70086604
>Now that the dust has settled, can we all agree that this was comfortably mid-tier Coen Bros? Not terrible. Not great. Just adequate.
Sounds about right.
>>70100770
Friend #2 is a patrician, you should be more like him and not a retarded pleb
>>70086802
>It was a very good film. It's just that they've made a number of great films. Still, really funny, enjoyable, a nice ode to that time in Hollywood and style of films.
I consider it a better love letter to 50s films than Hugo was to the silent era.
The complete lack of Sacha Baron Cohen is part of the reason for this.
>>70088137
O Brother, Where Art Thou?
Raising Arizona
Burn After Reading
Hobie a cute
a CUTE
>>70101203
...that actually makes sense. I can buy into that.
>>70104110
>Burn After Reading
I can respect your other two choices, and I even think O Brother is severely underrated, but Burn After Reading is weak in their catalog.
the characters could have been fleshed out a bit more. all the funniest moments were in the trailer as well.
>>70104759
That wasn't a list of their best films. Only my favorites. I will say that there are still some I haven't seen, Miller's Crossing and Barton Fink being big ones. From what I've heard, Fink may replace Burn.
>>70104759
Not that anon, but Burn After Reading would be in my top 3 as well, after A Serious Man and Fargo. I've laughed more at Burn After Reading than any of their other films. Brad Pitt trying to blackmail John Malkovich never fails to make me laugh. It may not be their best, but it's definitely their most underrated.
>>70105133
Absolutely agreed. I didn't even know it was maligned until now. It was a great farce.
>>70086604
Agreed. Some interesting camerawork (excellent lighting as always), a couple funny scenes, lots of likeable celebrities giving performances that are a bit out of their usual territory, and many juicy riffs on Golden Age Hollywood.
Not as poetic or insightful as Llewellyn or Barton Fink, not as intense or thrilling as No Country or Blood Simple, but solid entertainment. I'd give it a B.
>>70105133
Same here but for me I'd probably replace Fargo with Inside Llewyn Davis, but I completely agree with you about Burn After Reading its hilarious. I've seen it about five times now and all the material still makes me laugh to this day. If you we're ranking them by comedy it'd probably be second to Big Lebowski.
>>70092905
>It really felt like a first draft of half baked ideas.
This, essentially. I might've described the film as an excuse to make setpiece A with actor B but this might be a better description.
>>70088137
Inside Llewyn Davis
O Brother
Big Lebowski
Fargo or True Grit could've been in there too.
>>70092905
>they could have done much more to emulate the look of 50s films if that was the goal
It wasn't...
>>70086604
>If only itwere so simple
>>70106846
WOODATITWURRRRR SO SYIMPULLTRIPPINGLY
>>70106846
What's funny is it didn't even illustrate the kid as a particularly bad actor. Just ridiculously removed from his element. He expressed himself nonverbally, putting better weight in less eloquent lines and through his other talents (like song and stuntwork)
He had no business being in that part. Might as well have cast Sylvester Stallone in Pride and Prejudice.Too, the director hated him because he wouldn't put out.
>>70086604
Low tier tbqh.
Now, low tier obviously should be reserved for the Ladykillers/Intolerable Cruelty period, HOWEVER, I discount that as they were going through that whole drama at the time.
So I would say this is low tier.
Mid tier would be Burn After Reading/Arizona tier.
This is Hudsucker tier (inb4 HIDF).
I'm not worried though. After their Disaster period they came back with No Country, after the the shaky Burn, they came back with Serious Man and Llewyn.
All is good.
>>70087077
It's relative.
This was mediocre Coens.
Compared to most films that just makes it "okay".
Compared to other Coen's films, that makes it "horrendous".
Honestly, they were coming off the back of one of their strongest efforts to date, so hype was real.
Also, they always seem to disappoint a little when they go with full star power casts. I don't know why.
>>70088137
A serious man
Burn after reading
Hail Caesar
>>70107824
>make the film's villains Hollywood communists
>make their leader the gay dancer
>make the pretentious British director a homo
>make the other European director a womanizer who has a child out of wedlock
>say that the dumb main actor also dabbled in homosexuality
>make the main hero a devout Catholic
>make the secondary hero a good natured cowboy
Literally Americakino
>>70088137
Can't name a top 3 because they have legit too many 10/10's.
>Fargo
>Lebowski
>Barton Fink
>No Country
>A Serious Man
>Llewyn Davis
Special mention for the 9.5 Miller's Crossing which loses a half point for the scene where Albert Finney unconvincingly beats up Gabriel Byrne.
>>70107882
>that whole drama at the time
What drama?
>>70089293
True Grit is a really good movie.
Just not in the same league as their absolute best.
>>70090016
One of my favorite Coen sequences.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8xpfhcwpDA
>>70099419
>I feel like this movie would have gotten better reviews if it wasn't advertised as an ensemble comedy.
This desu
>>70086604
>would that it were so simple
>it's complicated
>are you a principal or an extra?
>... i think i'm principal?
>scoffs
this movie felt like a christmas episode in a cohen show. it was just comfy and non sensical.
>>70107975
Amercakino depicting an American age.
>>70108047
a serious man is full of top tier coen moments. i love the jewish zombie bit at the beginning, and the dentist story.
>>70090164
The Ladykillers and Intolerable Cruelty come very close to bad.
But like I said, they were going through some shit at the time.
>>70090438
McConaughey.
Tatum has never really done anything "good". He's been "surprisingly not bad" in some stuff and picked really good roles and people to work with (like Mark Wahlberg).
McCounaughey showed a massive amount of promise at the beginning of his career (so he was always more legitimate than Tatum) but people had completely written him off as not only an actor, but also as a leading man. Then he went on that insane streak of top tier acting and even leading man roles in blockbusters (that weren't Capeshit).
That's an all timer comeback.
>>70108037
Basically during the period that they made Ladykillers/Cruelty their mother had died, the brothers were having some sort of personal issues beyond that (you'll notice that the credits change in this period) they were getting horribly shit on by critics asking them to please retire (which was also why critics went ape shit when No Country hit the festivals and they were "back") and they had their one attempt at a huge budget movie (a violent WW2 survivalist movie) starring Brad Pitt fall apart.
They took a little break after Ladykillers and then came back strong.
If you're an oldfag, it's almost considered a comeback because everyone was like "they're done, washed up" etc.
>>70108309
Yeah, Ladykillers was only good near the end, when the slapstick hit. Explains why they were so lax. Didn't know about their mother.
>>70108590
>Posted on Monday, August 24th, 2015 by Russ Fischer
>Back in the early 2000s, before their one major career downturn, the Coen Brothers were planning to direct an adaptation of the novel To the White Sea, with Brad Pitt in the lead role. The story, based on the novel by James Dickey, follows an American gunner who parachutes into Tokyo from his burning plane during World War II, then makes his way across the frozen northern expanse of Japan in an attempt to reach the sea, and freedom.
>The film didn’t happen, and the Coens had a couple of rough years with Intolerable Cruelty and The Ladykillers before rebounding in a big way with No Country for Old Men.
>In the decade-plus since, To the White Sea has been untouched. Now Warner Bros. has the rights to adapt the film, and they’re starting from scratch.
>THR reports that Roy Lee and Vertigo Entertainment are working on a new version of the film. The trade says Jon Berg will oversee for Warner Bros., while John Middleton will executive produce. The Joel and Ethan Coen script is gone. The producers will look for a new writer and/or director to spearhead the development.
>To the White Sea is a project the Coens continued to talk about for quite a few years after that 2002-era development stalled. (They didn’t make the film then as they felt the budget allotment wasn’t enough to do it properly.)
It's so shit that the Coens will never get this off the ground.
The script was amazing.
>>70108728
Man that is a shame. That said, Brad Pitt isn't a leading man at heart. His best moments, where he really shines, were in supporting roles. Pitt's a character actor through and through. How much of a character was Dickey?
>>70108728
They shouldn't adapt stuff, their original stories are much more interesting. It's like what Joel said when they won the screenplay Oscar, that the only two authors they've adapted to film are Homer and Cormac McCarthy.
>>70108871
The upside would have been that it's very similar to The Revenant.
The script opens with a big speech by a General (I imagine it would be J.K. Simmons) then follows Pitt's character being shot down and crash landing over Japan. From then on it's a near dialogue free film as Pitt's borderline Serial Killer survivalist character tries to leg it back to Alaska from Japan. Would mostly be physical acting.
>>70109040
That could work, actually. Certainly would've been better than the Revenant.
>>70108968
They've done good adaptations obviously (No Country and True Grit of course). This is very much in that wheelhouse.
The book is nearly all internal monologues, whereas the script has no voice overs. It's by nature a very different experience and would be as a film.
The problem, and the reason they scrapped it, is that it's a very expensive film, and it's like Fury meets No Country in terms of tone, theme and violence. So even with their post No Country success, they could probably never secure the budget needed. Unless they had a DiCaprio on board.
>>70086604
Acceptable for a single viewing. Poor for the coens but not too bad for movies in general.
>>70109153
If you're interested;
https://web.archive.org/web/20131114062711/http://www.youknow-forkids.com/tothewhitesea.pdf
I almost hate reading it because you know you'll never get THAT film.
Same as Tarantino's original Kill Bill script.
>>70086604
Yeah, it was OK. I didn't really get the point of it. Clooney was funny albeit typically Clooneyish.
I actually could have really done with way more of the cowboy actor dude. I really liked how he sort of accidentally became a pulp detective.
>>70109153
>it's a very expensive film
Because of Brad Pitt or does shit really end up going down along the way?
>>70108189
>dentist story
absolute perfection.
>>70109254
>I didn't really get the point of it.
You're overthinking it. The Coens wanted to write a love letter to 50s hollywood and film the way Scorsese wrote a love letter to early silent film when he directed Hugo.I personally feel Hail, Caesar! did a better job in this regard.
>>70109331
Mostly the opening actually. Large firebombing on Tokyo.
Then there is recreating war period Japan ruins and woods I guess, but it's mostly Revenant style after the large opening with the firebombing.
Pitt would have been needed to get that sort of budget greenlit. Although he couldn't even manage it.
>>70109331
>A WWII adventure pic starring Brad Pitt as an American pilot stranded in China and unable to communicate, the project is infamous among longtime Coen fans for the script's minimal dialogue but was shelved by the studios because of its $80 million budget.
>Even with the duo enjoying their greatest financial success Ethan Coen said that he still didn’t think they could get the film produced. “I don’t think anything will happen with it. I mean we came just short of being able to get money for it and did come up short even with Brad Pitt basically doing it for free.” When asked if there was anything they learned on that adaptation, Joel Coen replied “Yeah, don’t set a movie in Tokyo during the firebombing unless you have lots of money to pay for it. That was the lesson we took away from that.”
>>70109403
>>70109480
Makes sense.
someone please explain the hate for ladykillers
it's jsut a small, silly movie - like burn after reading. so why do people hate the former so much but not the latter?
>>70098346
>PALESTINE
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
what did they mean by this?
>>70096853
Picardo's super underrated
i think would that it were so simple is my favorite scene of 2016 so far
I was freaking confused throughout this movie. I thought it was actually a comedy but it is like a serious drama with politics and god/religion. Actually was on my phone a few times. The acting was ok not something spectacular. Brolin delivered and Clooney as well. Did not like this and I have no idea how I managed to keep it on the full 1Hr.50mins. Pass on this one trust me. -HAIL WHO?-
![Hail.Caesar.2016.720p.WEB-DL.X264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_01.12.50_[2016.05.28_00.08.21].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/VFHLiK9.jpg "Hail.Caesar.2016.720p.WEB-DL.X264.AC3-EVO.mkv_snapshot_01.12.50_[2016.05.28_00.08.21].jpg")
>DURN YOU MOON
Saetre confirmed for one of the Coen brothers
>>70113003
fuck I love the Treasure of Sierra Made
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w4B7QxL_n4
>>70112993
>Actually was on my phone a few times.
Kill yourself.
If there was any proof I needed that /tv/ was pleb tier, it's that barely anyone has mentioned O Brother Where Art Thou?.
>>70114798
pleb
>>70086604
It really liked it but I like old Hollywood. I think the style threw people off
>>70114819
Well, yeah, I'm posting on /tv/
>>70087536
>convoluted story
It was pretty straightforward. How old are you?
>>70114847
I liked it for much the same reason. I just dig golden age hollywood.
