The Hudsucker Proxy

It's forced, but I still like it. There's a lot of really nice little moments, and it's also arguably the last time that we really see the classic old Sam Raimi camera, thanks to his all-too recognizable second unit stuff.

Jennifer Jason Leigh is one of the only people who could have pulled off that '30s screwball style of delivery, but at the same time I never really buy her for a second and that really hurts it.

The movie's kinda hit or miss at times, but the cast is perfect and I am absolutely in love with the design of the film.

This is probably my third favorite Coen brothers film, after Millers Crossing and Barton Fink.

Yeah, I don't get why Lebowski is revered and this is usually dumped upon. I mean, Paul Newman, Charles Durning, Bruce Campbell, Tim Robbins, even Jennifer Jason Leigh's performance (not really a fan) is crackling and alive. Maybe it seems too fantastical, or the ending too deus ex machina??

I think Hudsucker has a lot of heart, and is probably their sweetest movie. It's kind of nice to see that side of them as filmmakers. I also really liked Cruel and Unusual, which most people seem to loathe.

Hudsucker is better than I remember it(saw it again a few weeks ago), but I'd still rank it near the bottom of my favorite Coens films list. It's still got a lot of classic stuff though(the suicide, the hoop finds success with that kid). I've yet to see an outright bad Coen bros. movie, so being at the bottom of that list is better than being at the top of many other filmmakers' lists.

I love it. It's absolutely near the top of my list.

Ladykillers came dangerously close.

For some reason, a lot of the Coen's movies are greeted with critical scorn when they first come out, then slowly become beloved classics.

Raising Arizona, Hudsucker, Lebowski, O Brother Where Art Thou, Intolerable Cruelty, and The Ladykillers all got slagged on first release. All except The Ladykillers are now generally accepted as good or even great movies. (Well, some people still haven't come around to the greatness that is Intolerable Cruelty, but they will.) Even Barton Fink was met with some ambivilence. The only Coen Bros. movie I've seen that was beloved right away was Fargo.

It's especially funny when each is declared to be "the first real disappointment from the Coen Brothers". Seriously, I think at least one review includes this sentence every time one of their movies comes out.

The trick is to remember that their movies don't usually withstand hype or heightened expectations, but tend to get stronger and stronger as the years pass. Lebowski being the ultimate example of this, since it's kind of dumb on first watching but gets funnier every time.

Tim Robbins plays nice but dim, Jennifer Jason Leigh plays Katherine Hepburn as a sort of emancipated Beat Girl, and The Chin plays ... The Chin. I always thought of it as a kind of Capra pastiche.

I genuinely like the film though. It fair crackles with energy and as mentioned above, has a kind of innocence that, even if it is pastiche, is difficult to find in films nowadays.

And the pexiglass moment is pure comedy gold. It still makes me laugh.

This is my favorite Coen Bros. movie. The writing and characters, especially Jason Leigh and Robbins, are awesome. It's a little long, but that's just so Buscemi can show up. It's more solid in terms of ideas and point than Arizona, Cruelty, O Brother, or Ladykillers. It has Gallagher as Sinatra and Campbell as Smitty. I've never understood the universal dismissal of it.

The first two Coen films I saw were Raising Arizona (still my favourite, if only cos I used to watch it EVERY day after school) and Hudsucker. It came as something of a surprise to me how dark so much of their oeuvre is by comparison. I mean, Blood Simple is as noir as noir can be, Miller's Crossing, while funny, is damn violent in places (their best film, IMHO) and Barton Fink, while arguably their most interesting script, is heller-dark.

I think each Coen film presents something new for the boys, whether it be them tackling a new genre, or challenging themselves in terms of style. What Hudsucker is is their most accomplished technical work thus far (and I believe their most expensive?). The film looks absolutely gorgeous, from start to finish and absolutely nails that rose-tinted, nostalgic look of the fifties. Its also unrepentantly silly, despite being incredibly tightly written - Norville spends the first two-thirds just being a good-hearted goof and that's a turn off for some people. I think when the film shifts gear - not once, nor twice but three times - from knockabout to romantic comedy to rags to riches to rags again to some kind of wistful fantasy by the end (time stopping, the angel of Hudsucker coming down and everything working out fine) it probably lost a lot of people. Its easy to see the film as a complete mess, but its just as easy to see it as wholly original and unique, with script structure and dialogue bordering on perfection. But I'm not surprised it didn't find an audience.

In the pre-internet saturation days of the early-mid nineties, both this and Shawshank bombed because they didn't have aggressive ad campaigns and the title told you nothing of what to expect from the film. And let's face it, this isn't the easist film to sell anyway...

I still love it, I think Bruce Campbell is excellent in it, I think Jennifer Jason Leigh proves she's one of the most interesting actresses working and Newman is wonderful as the baddie ("Sure sure"). However, despite all of its classic Coen ingredients (the symbol in the form of the Hula-Hoop, the quick-fire dialogue, the gorgeous cinematography, the offbeat humour), it doesn't feel as essential as other Coen films and so I don't return to it as often. I think they nailed a similar style more successfully in O Brother, what with the mythological aspects and the fantastical flood towards the end.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

i love hudsucker, i think its brilliant. 'you know, for kids'.

there is nothing great about intolerable cruelty.

I absolutely heart this movie, it's just a great film in it's own right. I don't really think of it as a Coen movie, I'm not really sure there is such a thing as a Coen movie. I remember being so surprised at how good this film was when I actually got to see it, it certainly is a difficult film to 'sell' to people.

It's forced because a lot of the screwball homage doesn't work but they plug along anyway.

It's a great film. It's sweet and fun and every single actor looks like they understand the Looney Toons universe the movie inhabits. I don't understand why this is the black sheep of Coen Brothers movies.

I call bullshit on Intolerable Cruelty hate, which is a fucking hysterical movie with a monster of a performance from Clooney.

hm, i dont see it.

the ending alone keeps it from being great, especially compared with the wrapups in other coen bros films.

I think this movie is just about perfect. Tonally, it hits the mark and stays there. Remarkable. It's at least as funny as "Big Lebowski"; I'm not really sure why it doesn't get more attention.

Granted, I've only seen Ladykillers once, but I agree. My main problem with that movie was Marlon Wayans. He was either really miscast, or his role was written as if he were in another, more serious film. His character just didn't seem to fit with the rest of the caricatures. I don't know how to explain it.

I didn't "get" Lebowski the first time I saw it, and I almost hated O, Brother. The Coen flicks certainly do grow on people though. I love both of those now, especially Lebowski, which I feel is one of the funniest movies ever made.

And I watched Intolerable Cruelty again last night. Okay, it loses it a bit toward the end, but it's incredibly wittily written and Clooney absolutely kills. His scene where he brings up "Kershner" has me in stitches every time. Cedric the Moderately Entertaining is pretty good in it too. And, though i'm no fan, Zeta-Jones is luminescent throughout. This will definitely earn a better reputation over time, if not ever destined to be a Coen favourite.

Hudsucker has one of my favorite Coen scenes ever--the one where Robbins contemplates the idea that he and Leigh were a pair of ibex in a past life who crossed paths briefly.

Hudsucker's also the only time the Coens and Anna Nicole Smith have ever teamed up...for what that's worth.

As far as Cruelty--it's at or near the bottom of my Coen list, but I still think in that movie Clooney's the best he's ever been, acting-wise.

This movie deserves the accolades if just for the scene where Tim Robbins offends the Swedish couple with a smile on his face. The way the guy throws the drink on him, and then throws a punch is just great.

When this came out, I kept thinking, oh great, another movie that presupposes everybody from Indiana is just a dumb hick. Then I rolled my Trans Am after a chase by the police whilst drunk on Mad Dog, and the criticism subsided.

It's a Finnish couple, not Swedish. And the language Tim speaks is just gibberish, it doesn't resemble finnish at all.

Excuse me. And I knew it was gibberish, he sounded like the Swedish chef from the Muppet show.

Loved Jennifer Jason Leigh's personification of Katherine Hepburn, but then I love screwball comedies.

In all the film is less than the sum of its parts, but the parts are pretty fun.

"It's a BLUE LETTER!"

"Don't worry Mr. Mussburger, I got you! I got you by your pants!"
"Pants?!"

Tops The Big Lebowski as my favorite Coen film.

Sure sure.

Do you have an appointment? Shall we look in the book, hmmm? We don't seem to be in the boo-ook. If we had an appointment, we'd be in the boo-ook.