Seriously. We endorse this message and for your consideration ad from the folks at Focus Features regarding the Coen Brothers’ “A Serious Man.”
There’s not a ton of Oscar buzz on this one, but it’s a silent, but deadly quality contender. Trust us, especially with 10 Best Picture nominees this year, when the Oscars finally announce their best pic noms, “A Serious Man,” — which is really yet another classic Coens work, no matter how wonderfully inscrutable it is — will be part of the list.
Also, those that do not consider the film’s lead, Michael Stuhlbarg, a serious contender for Best Male Actor, are seriously underestimating how good he is in this picture.
Will it win any major awards at the Oscars? That remains to be seen, but the aforementioned nominations, plus original screenplay, seem like very logical fits. Plus we love this poster. Plus if, “Precious,” “Avatar,” or bunk like that get nominated first, we will burn down the Academy headquarters.
I've yet to see A Serious Man, and despite being a big Coen brothers fan, I'm not that miffed about it. I don't know why I'm not jazzed to see it other than feeling a little burned by Burn After Reading (it was ok). So is it better than Burn? I know their movies are hard to compare since they are all so wildly different, but what movie of theirs is it closest to? Man Who Wasn't There or Barton Fink, etc?
Much better than Burn After Reading. A much darker film. It has ambiguous qualities like Fink and Man Who Wasn't There, but not quite as dark. It's like taking Burn After Reading in comedic tone and infusing it with No Country For Old Men, sensibilities. It's excellent, but a head scratcher to many.
I think this is the Coen's most despairing, bleak vision of humanity yet. That it remains totally absurd, dryly funny and absolutely fascinating is a tribute to their writing. I don't see this gaining traction (sadly) at Awards season. I'm sure it will be nominated, but it's far too dark to win anything.
Oh yeah, it's also mind-breakingly brilliant. I have a theory on the structure of the film (in short, it's mathematical – seriously) that I'll have to save for another day.
This is a great film. The ending has troubled me for days.
Kevin: I'd love to read your mathematical analysis of the movie! I don't think I'll understand it, but it can't be more complicated than the Mentaculus, can it?
Also: We don't know that Avatar is bunk just yet. I know you saw Precious and were underwhelmed, fair enough, but you haven't seen Avatar yet, have you? Sure, it looks like bunk, but maybe, maybe it'll be OK.
@mike. Maybe, but the stunted, he-man, platitudes and cliches of the expository trailer dialogue don't instill a lot of confidence.
interested in hearing your mathematical analysis beyond the obvious homage to talmudic narrative structure.
i thought this was a fabulous movie, but i think it's a stretch that it would win best picture. too ethnic and discomforting. a lot of people seem to be alienated by the inside jokes / yiddish humor. in short, not enough mass appeal. which is what makes it so great – it really feels designed for a niche audience…
i think it was a fabulous movie and it's definitely one of my favorite coen brothers for sure, but more because it rang so true to both my life experience and felt like the great adaptation of a philip roth novel we have not yet seen.