I think it was the film's profile. The budget was the biggest they'd ever had, and Silver Pictures was one of the production companies. It was also their first film after winning the Palme D'Or at Cannes for Barton Fink. So for the first time, they were no longer cult filmmakers flying under the radar -- and all the critics had their knives poised and sharpened. The film deserved better.
I liked the movie alot. It taps into the D.C. paranoia quite well. In D.C. everybody thinks their neighbhors are spying on them for whatever security organization that suits their imagination. Then, there's the characters that I completely identify with. There's people I know that I can easily equate to this odd lot. We all must have know folks that aren't very far removed from the main characters here. I've known women as obcessed, well close, as Frances McDormand's character.
I think it's an above average film. Just because it's not as good as their best films are to some people doesn't mean it sucks. It's just another good film by them to me. I'll rewatch it many times, I'm sure.
wow, interesting thread. i thought this movie was a masterpiece. Very much on par with Rules of the Game. I think maybe the reason so many people don't connect is because the characters are so unlikable so stupid and so American. In many ways it's as freightening as "No Country" perhaps even more so, because these people are us. The Coens are holding a mirror up to contemporary america and it appears not many like what they see. "She's not a moron. She's a nice lady"
I think you're reading alot into the movie and its intent. Maybe you're right but I think it's just a 'dumb' comedy rather than a statement about the modern day American.
If the Coens intended it to be a look at Americans then they failed miserably because I've never seen anyone draw that conclusion about the movie (and I don't see how anyone could walk away from the movie thinking that).
As both a long-time DC area resident, and former gov't employee and contractor, I'm going to have agree with Travis et al on this one. This was a classic (and IMO well-done) Coen mistaken identity caper like Lebowski or Hudsucker, but instead of setting it in early-90s LA or late-50s NYC, it's modern-day DC. There was little to nothing about either the American gov't or the American people. Just sad-sack Coen characters being caught up in something that was different to everyone.
On a side note, it was pretty cool seeing several notable DC area landmarks, and even my office building was in a shot (namely, the one where Clooney stops jogging at the top of a hill in Georgetown looking across the Potomac into Rosslyn).
You can even look back to their first film, Blood Simple, another plot based on people working at cross-purposes and no one (except the audience) having a complete picture of what's happening.
I suspect that's not so much their view of America as their view of humanity in general. Every so often, they create a character like Marge (in Fargo) or The Dude, who manages to put it all together, and those are the unlikely heroes. But not in Burn.
Oh, ok, so to be true, a conclusion must be widely and immediately accepted? The film was filled with Americans holding beliefs and attitudes I see mirrored on a daily basis. Thats how anyone could walk away thinking that.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but pretty much every film made and set in the US is filled with Americans holding these beliefs and attitudes. That's kind of the point. I assume you meant it was emphasizing those beliefs and attitudes, but I still think you'd be reading way too far into it.
No but I didn't see anything in Burn After Reading that could persuade me to think that the Coen brothers are "holding a mirror up to contemporary america" with this movie. Every movie is open to interpretation by each viewer but I could say that Friday The 13th was written as a morality tale to steer teenagers away from sex or drugs (rather than just a cash-in on the success of Halloween) but that doesn't mean that I'm right.
I saw this one in the theater as well and thought it was very good. Not as good as Fargo but very funny. I didn't particularly care that the characters weren't likeable, I wanted them to be loony. I guess Marge Gunderson was likeable in Fargo but nobody else comes to mind.
I did pick this up (used, in "like new" condition) a little while ago at a good price off eBay. It's good to have a looney comedic popcorn flick like this to enjoy w/ the wife -- one can only have so much romantic comedies to meet that viewing spectrum afterall (and I'm actually the more sappy one in this couple too).