CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Intolerable Cruelty = Intolerably Maligned
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intolerable Cruelty = Intolerably Maligned

post #1 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:10pm
Thread Starter 
Rather than continuing to derail the O Brother thread...

I always see this one mentioned as a misfire by the Coens, and while it is undeniably one of their lesser efforts, I think it's a very solid throwback of a comedy in its own right. Clooney is doing some really strange but funny stuff, Zeta-Jones is ravishing in her Milfitude, Billy Bob is being as Billy Bob as a person can possibly be (his slurring "I trust you" through a mouthful of BBQ paper makes me laugh just thinking about it), and it has Wheezy Joe andHeinz, the Baron Kraus Van Espy. Really, I think it's worth the price of admission for the first courtroom scene alone. The judge's deadpan "I'll allow it"-s start out amusing and get sublime by the time the defense is objecting to strangling the witness.

So why the disdain? Sure it lacks some of the depth of their outright classics like Fargo and Miller's Crossing, but I don't think that tonally, it's all that much sillier than O Brother, which is much better received (deservedly, but still). Is it because it led directly into The Ladykillers*, and conventional wisdom quickly lumped them together as evidence of the brothers "losing it"? Is it overdue for re-evaluating or just not that good?

*Which I haven't seen, but always seems to be invoked in the same breath as a dig on IC.
Reply
post #2 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:11pm
Poorly paced, clunky, and not as funny as other funny Coen Brothers movies. As far as I can remember. But much better than Ladykillers. So there's that.
Reply
post #3 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:14pm
I think people don't like it because it's obviously the Coens' attempt to go straight for the general audience. They get two big stars and then crank out a sort of pedestrian take on the screwball comedy, which is a kind of movie everyone has watched countless times before sitting down to this one. That is, I think its bad rap is mostly due to who made it. If anyone else made the film, it would be just as forgettable as most rom-coms, if not regarded as slightly better than average.
Reply
post #4 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:25pm
I kinda agree with Schwartz, although I understand why people dislike it. It's a very...odd movie. A screwball comedy with an odd structure and sense of pacing. But it has some really great performances and some incredibly clever moments.

As far as romantic comedies go, this is near the top of the pile. Clooney and Zeta-Jones have some great chemistry (not to mention comic timing) and it has enough of the Coens stereotypical style to win me over. The scene where Clooney's speech is so freaking weird that it somehow wins me over.

It's also important to know that this is the only instance (that I'm aware of) where the Coens came in and re-wrote a pre-existing script (because of the urging of Clooney, from what I've read). So that might account for some of it's peculiarity.

To be honest, I'd take it over O Brother. I like O Brother but this type of comedy (screwball) fits my sensibilities a little better, even if it's not as original.

It's certainly better than The Ladykillers. Their only weak movie, as far as I'm concerned.
Reply
post #5 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:26pm
Thread Starter 
I have no doubt that the bad rap is because of who made it. I can't imagine that if Nora Ephron or whoever had made it, it would be regarded as anything worse than a pleasant surprise. However, it's hard for me to see this as LCD pandering. A willfully bizarre send up of romantic farce from 60 years ago doesn't seem like a shortcut to box office dominance to me.
Reply
post #6 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:35pm
I will continue to beat the drum that The Ladykillers is worthwhile at minimum and damn hilarious at times. I actually put it on par with IC and might even give it a slight edge. Might be my fondness for diarrhea jokes.
Reply
post #7 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:36pm
I always avoided this one, but when I picked up the Universal double feature of Out Of Sight, and this one, I decided to watch it. The opening sequence with Geoffery Rush, as well as the courtroom scene with the Baron alone make this worth at least a rental.

I also second The Ladykillers. That one is hilarious.
Reply
post #8 of 26
6/22/10 at 9:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post
I have no doubt that the bad rap is because of who made it. I can't imagine that if Nora Ephron or whoever had made it, it would be regarded as anything worse than a pleasant surprise. However, it's hard for me to see this as LCD pandering. A willfully bizarre send up of romantic farce from 60 years ago doesn't seem like a shortcut to box office dominance to me.
I really do think that it's the Coens trying to pander to the LCD and it appears that the lessons they took for why it failed were: 1) Clooney has a spotty record for opening pictures and 2) it was too smart. So, we got the abortion that followed, which was a dumbed down remake of a film starring the biggest star in Hollywood who wasn't either black or in the middle of a complete career meltdown.
Reply
post #9 of 26
6/22/10 at 10:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post
Rather than continuing to derail the O Brother thread...

I always see this one mentioned as a misfire by the Coens, and while it is undeniably one of their lesser efforts, I think it's a very solid throwback of a comedy in its own right. Clooney is doing some really strange but funny stuff, Zeta-Jones is ravishing in her Milfitude, Billy Bob is being as Billy Bob as a person can possibly be (his slurring "I trust you" through a mouthful of BBQ paper makes me laugh just thinking about it), and it has Wheezy Joe andHeinz, the Baron Kraus Van Espy. Really, I think it's worth the price of admission for the first courtroom scene alone. The judge's deadpan "I'll allow it"-s start out amusing and get sublime by the time the defense is objecting to strangling the witness.

So why the disdain? Sure it lacks some of the depth of their outright classics like Fargo and Miller's Crossing, but I don't think that tonally, it's all that much sillier than O Brother, which is much better received (deservedly, but still). Is it because it led directly into The Ladykillers*, and conventional wisdom quickly lumped them together as evidence of the brothers "losing it"? Is it overdue for re-evaluating or just not that good?

*Which I haven't seen, but always seems to be invoked in the same breath as a dig on IC.
Testify brother, I find the film funny as fuck personally - my first cinema viewing I was laughing so hard I damn near threw up and had stomach pains for days afterwards. I've honestly never got the hate. The Ladykillers it aint.
Reply
post #10 of 26
6/23/10 at 12:42am
Honestly, I'm not sure IC found it's audience. Not only is it a screwball comedy, it's a 'women's' screwball comedy. Think about it: It's about divorce, it features an Ultra! Glamorous! woman, a handsome leading man and at its heart is a romance. It feels closer to 'Sex and the City' than most else in the Coen's oeuvre in tone. (Not quality! I mean tone!). So is it a failure of the marketing? What did *you* expect when you walked into the theater?

Since I'm on a Sirk kick right now (having mentioned him in the Ang Lee thread), I'll throw that out there. It's the Coens doing a chick flick.
Reply
post #11 of 26
6/23/10 at 12:49am
I find it hit and miss. Clooney's great (his rapport with the Coens is unmistakable, and he does a great spit-take), Zeta-Jones is pretty good, Rush is hilariously slimy, and Thornton is damn near perfect. I liked the Wheezy Joe bit.

The movie is cartoony as hell, though, and I think I prefer the tone of their movies to be more sarcastic than wacky. Even Burn After Reading manages to cover the same areas without feeling so over-the-top, like it has a relatively dry "eye" through which the film views a bunch of ridiculous people.

I remember seeing it in theaters -- the first press screening I ever attended -- and thinking that when George was in the bar that it'd be the perfect place for a Bruce Campbell cameo. Clearly, The Coens felt it too. Nature was just begging for it to happen, right then and there, and my wish was granted.
Reply
post #12 of 26
6/23/10 at 12:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Foster View Post
The movie is cartoony as hell, though, and I think I prefer the tone of their movies to be more sarcastic than wacky. Even Burn After Reading manages to cover the same areas without feeling so over-the-top, like it has a relatively dry "eye" through which the film views a bunch of ridiculous people.
So, not a Raising Arizona fan then...
Reply
post #13 of 26
6/23/10 at 1:00am
The stuff with Cedric the Non-Entertainer is pretty weak. The stuff with Geoffrey Rush is really weak. They're the two elements that keep this from being close to a classic. That said, while I like Clooney and Zeta-Jones' chemistry in this, they seem to be acting in two different movies at times - she's not quite as screwball-comedy savvy as he is.
Reply
post #14 of 26
6/23/10 at 1:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratty View Post
I will continue to beat the drum that The Ladykillers is worthwhile at minimum and damn hilarious at times. I actually put it on par with IC and might even give it a slight edge. Might be my fondness for diarrhea jokes.
I just watched Ladykillers again within the past month and you can add me to the fan club (I ain't paying dues, dammit). It's the really unfairly maligned Coen Brothers film.

Cruelty is funny, and such a breeze. As others have pointed out, any Coen movie that isn't an outright masterpiece is seen as a failure. At first, anyway, it seems the cult takes hold quickly, and continues to pick up steam.

I was working in a theater/bar/restaurant when Lebowski came out, and it was generally seen as an artistic letdown after the success of Fargo. This is all anecdotal, I realize this, but I had many of the same conversations upon the release of Burn After Reading, following on the heels of No Country For Old Men.

But really, I won't rest until I convince at least one of you that Ladykillers is worth a revisit.
Reply
post #15 of 26
6/23/10 at 1:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith F View Post
But really, I won't rest until I convince at least one of you that Ladykillers is worth a revisit.
I'm all for championing underappreciated movies (have I recently mentioned that Tank Girl is the best superhero movie ever?) but let's not go crazy here.
Reply
post #16 of 26
6/23/10 at 1:30am
I actively dislike Intolerable Cruelty, while I'm only ambivalent about Ladykillers (I think Hanks saves a lot of it). My big problem is that I really loathe pretty much all the characters, and the subject matter, hateful rich people trying to best one another through legal manouvering, is impossible to care about. Wheezy Joe feels like a warmed over 'character' from Arizona or Lebowski, and it's the only time I thought Clooney was unlikeable. The Coens are usually so good at making vile characters palatable, but they struck out big here.
Reply
post #17 of 26
6/23/10 at 1:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rain Dog View Post
So, not a Raising Arizona fan then...
No, I love Raising Arizona. Hmm. I guess the subject matter plays a part. Intolerable Cruelty is meant to be biting and cynical, whereas I think Raising Arizona is much more earnest.

Someone -- I think maybe it was Liza Schwarzbaum? -- complained that the Coens disdain for their characters in Burn After Reading was suffocating, and I see it there, and in Cruelty, even if I don't agree with her that it's a problem. But I believe the Coens like H.I., and want to see him succeed. Cruelty is sort of in-between. They seem to have affection for Miles Massey, but they also seem to think he deserves what's coming to him for being a moron.

I just saw on IMDb that the Japanese title is Divorce Show. Hilarious.
Reply
post #18 of 26
6/23/10 at 1:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
I'm all for championing underappreciated movies (have I recently mentioned that Tank Girl is the best superhero movie ever?) but let's not go crazy here.
Worth a revisit is hardly calling it a forgotten masterpiece, or anything along the lines of such hyperbole.

I just think it's a very funny film, and I think that's what it's trying to do, make me laugh, so at that rate it's successful. Yeah, I know, comedy is subjective and all that.

No comment on Tank Girl.
Reply
post #19 of 26
6/23/10 at 1:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith F View Post
I was working in a theater/bar/restaurant when Lebowski came out, and it was generally seen as an artistic letdown after the success of Fargo. This is all anecdotal, I realize this, but I had many of the same conversations upon the release of Burn After Reading, following on the heels of No Country For Old Men.
This was my experience as well.

Put me in the "laughed really hard through Intolerable Cruelty" camp. Only saw it once in the theater, but I loved its energy and especially its cast.
Reply
post #20 of 26
6/23/10 at 2:20am
Damn funny movie that had it come from any other filmmaker would probably be a (small) cult classic. Had it been someone else's first movie, they'd be a "filmmaker to watch."
Reply
post #21 of 26
6/23/10 at 7:50am
THE LADYKILLERS is worth it for Hanks cutting loose and going broad, something that, at that point, he hadn't done for like a decade. I LOVE Hanks in it - he's so oily and just a perfect update of the Alec Guinness character. The movie itself doesn't deserve him.
Reply
post #22 of 26
6/23/10 at 8:20am
Ladykillers is worth it just for "Get your fingers out my man's nose!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DA86rsKOjo

Made me laugh like an idiot for about five minutes. "THESE FINGERS ARE WAY THE FUCK UP MY NOSE"
Reply
post #23 of 26
6/23/10 at 8:35am
Billy Bob's "I mean, I love you like a son of a bitch!" is reason enough to see it.

I know I made some disparaging remarks about it in the O Brother thread, but I do like the film. I just don't love it and the last act is way weak. The first 45 minutes or so are pretty good though. Its not a bad film, its just a bad Coen film.
Reply
post #24 of 26
6/23/10 at 8:37am
IC is hilarious and only really gives the impression of pandering because, y'know, romance with a happy ending and all. But the script and characters feel Coen through and through for me. They're definitely romantics at heart.
Reply
post #25 of 26
6/23/10 at 9:23am
I like it more than most by it's very uneven. While I always enjoy the first two thirds I don't find the final one as good. Wheezy or no Wheezy. But I'll still watch at least a bit of it if it's on. I absolutely love what Clooney did with his role, Jones is as beautiful as she's ever been and the first courtroom scene is indeed awesome.
Reply
post #26 of 26
6/23/10 at 11:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker View Post
It's also important to know that this is the only instance (that I'm aware of) where the Coens came in and re-wrote a pre-existing script (because of the urging of Clooney, from what I've read). So that might account for some of it's peculiarity.
I thought it was a script they wrote early on in their career, that they had no intention of directing. Hm.

CZJ is breath-taking in this. Literally. I think I gasped (at least slightly) everytime she entered a scene.

I remember being amused (Clooney's got great delivery) and enjoyed it's throwback vibe. I'll revisit it, as it's on my Coen marathon schedule.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Intolerable Cruelty = Intolerably Maligned