In the opening scene of Barton Fink, there’s a play put on by some New Yorkers about some guys selling fish or something, and the first thing I thought about was “who wants to see a play about some fish?” And the second thing I thought was “Geez, it’s just like those Cohan boys to make fun of simple fisher-folk. I bet they all die in the end, too.” (But I fell asleep before the end so I didn’t find out.)
Anyway, that just goes to show you about Joe and Ethan Cohan: they really suck as movie-makers. I mean, really, really suck. Over their five-film career, they have ran the gamet from stupid bar-room movies (Blood Simple) to stupid desert comedies (Raising Arizona) to idiotic hat films (Miller’s Crossing) to movies about bowling, hoola-hoops and cereal killers (The Big Lebowski, The Hudsucker Proxy and No Country for Old Men, respectfully), and you would think that with all that experience, their movies would be better, but they’re not. They’re all just crappy and despite the variety, all the same.
Let me adjudicate: their cinematography — by the brothers themselves under the pseudonym “Roger Deakins” — is decidedly third rate: it’s as flat and uninviting as a tranny hooker (not that this reviewer knows anything at all about tranny hookers). And whoever thought it was a good idea to let Carter Burwell write the music for all four movies? It makes me question Joe and Ethan’s judgment right alongside their talent.
But the heart of the matter is, the brothers just can’t direct their way out of a paper bag. They have no sense of pacing, their movies either go at a walk (and not fast like a race-walker walks, either, but more like a slow, arthritic, old-lady walk) or gallops along like a thoroughbred on steroids. There’s just no in between. And don’t get me started on their work — or lack of it, haha — with actors. To site just one horrid example, in Raising Arizona they made the normally sophisticated, erudite Nicholas Cage look like a hick, and Holly Hunter appear as if she were from the South. Now that’s bad directing!
To some it up, though I’ve seen all eight of their films — and three of their rock videos — I haven’t seen one thing I thought was worth the price of tea in China. But I will persist, gentile reader, because it is my mission to sacrifice myself for the sake of your knowledge and enjoyment. If you see the words “A Joe and Ethan Cohan Joint” on a movie trailer, run to the ticket window to get your money back.
I’m just glad that they haven’t won any Oscars!
(Note: this is an entry in the Bizarro Days blogathon over at Lazy Eye Theater. What? You thought I really wrote like this? Don’t answer that . . .)
RSS 2.0
About time someone stuck it to those talentless Cohan brothers.
Personally I haven’t a clue what they’re doing, do they know which end of the camera they’re meant to film through?
And what was O Brother Where Art Thou? all about? They nicked it all from the Wizard of Oz. Lousy Cohan brothers.
Long may they never win anything.
You mean O Brother Where Art Thou is a Cohan Brothers movie? Geez, I thought it was directed by Yasujiro Ozu. All the low angles and all.
All I can think of now is tranny hookers. Thanks a lot pal, way to go. Now I’ll get nothing done at work. And by the way doofus, the name’s spelled “Cowehen”.
Tranny hookers? What I meant to say was tranny hookahs, which are, as everybody knows, very different. And I beg your pardon … Joe and Ethan are the great grandsons of George M. Cohan, I’ll have you know.
They shoulda gone into politics, where their talents for ripping off the public would be appreciated. Bless you, Richie, for exposing these frauds – and their little dog, too!
Marlin, politics is too good for these charlatins. They deserve to be locked in a 8×10 room with an insurance salesman for their fraudulent flatulence and “O Brother are you Snotty” smirking
Not that I have anything against insurance salesmen.
Their next one, Burn After Smoking, looks like Con Air or something.
Just when I thought there were no safe places online to admit to HATING No Country for Old Men. Probably the worst Best Picture Winner of the last 50 years.
You can have the Coen brothers. I’ll take the Farrelly brothers.
I can’t decide which of the brothers cowen i hate more. Also, Fargo is the worst movie of the 90’s.
Well they did direct that piece of trash Barton Fink…
*ducks and runs for cover*
Cinexcellence, if that is your real name, where do you get off even commenting on this sight? I’ve never been to your so-called blog and hated your post on why Lucas should direct Indy 4, although I agree that he could do a better job than that hack Spielbert. No thanks for commenting!
Daniel, I hated Know Country so bad (I wonder what they thought they knew?) that I didn’t write two posts on it. That’s how bad. btw, have I told you lately how much I disrespect your sight?
Joe, I personally hate the little red-headed jerk, what’s-his- name Cohan. I think it’s the weasley little eyes or maybe the euro-trash glasses. I hate euro-trash glasses.
Evan, I couldn’t agree more. What a piece of s–t is Barton Fink.
My friends and I like to refer to that movie as “Barton Fuck this Stupid Piece of Shit.” We’re pretty clever.
Oh! I almost for forgot to mention this. I was at my local Hollybuster Video and saw a KNOCK-OFF of the Cohan Bros. franchise!
Some copycats called “The Coen Brothers” basically make movies that suck as bad as the original Cohans (who’d want to copy these talentless a-holes, I’ll never know) but call them their own.
One of them was called “Fargo” or something. I don’t know, looked pretty bad to me.
All that that piece of trash Fargo accomplished was to pull audiences away from that masterpiece Little Indian, Big City…
Scott, those Coens ought to be ashamed. They can’t even spell the name right!
Ah, Little Indian, Big City … what a fine film. It’s about a small Native American and . . . a large metropolis. Feel the magic.
You want to see a movie about a small Native Indian you should check out The Indian in the Cupboard! Don’t worry, the Cohans didn’t have their grubby little fingers in this masterpiece.
God, I love a good small Indian movie!
Well well, thats the most interesting article i’ve read in a long time. Though i couldn’t agree with you lesser, i understand the ordeal that you must have gone through. Cohan it seems.
Shubhajit, Cohan it seems what? The ordeal was long and hard and I needed a lot of sympathy, but got none, alas.
Was the part about you not knowing anything about Tranny Hookers also part of the Bizarro world, because that would be totally awesome!
Whitney, I’ll never tell. That’s what’s so freaking bizarro about it!
Yeah! I hate the Coen Brothers too! All style and no soul. I wish Robert Altman could’ve lived longer…. even his misses were far better than the Coen Brothers excuses for movies.
Wow. First of all, it’s Coen. Second of all, Rick, stop saying “sight” – it’s site, as in website, as in don’t ever write a post again you dick implosion. Third, it’s No Country, not “Know” (you idiot), which is based on Cormac McCarthy’s eponymous novel; the Coen Bros movie is a condensed version that has the exact same import and tone. Fourth, holy shit, where did you pull ‘adjudicate’ from when you can’t even properly conjugate the verb “run” in the preceding paragraph?
Where do any of you get off talking about the Coens’ repertoire? You appear to have no credibility whatsoever as film critics or as writers. There isn’t a single post that offers a compelling comparative upon which to base your criticisms, nor do any evince valid arguments. They amount to trolling and hollow banter. For example, what is an example of good pacing? How might the Coens’ cinematography be judged against the work of similar cinematographers? Why, perhaps, did the Coens choose to elongate and stagnate the plot of Fargo? The filmmaking process is primarily about choice, so it is the responsibility of the critic not only to find fault with cinema but to dissect and consider the choices made by the filmmakers.
Further, movies involve many, many people. The directors play a relatively small (but important) role. The production designer, editor, cinematographer, and – of course – actors are all very involved in the process, too. What about them? Do you know who they are in these movies? What were the contexts of production for various films? What ideologies underlie the films? If the films are going for style over substance, WHY? How? What does that say about them (other than, “they suck”)?
Honestly. Reading stuff like this is almost as bad as watching that Attack! Attack! music video, or listening to The Sean Hannity show, or watching a dog shit. What’s wrong with the human race?
Hey, “the Horror.” Liten up, will you? Did you not sea the disclamor at the bottom of the post?
Try getting a clue before you make an ass out of yourself. OOPS … too late. You already did.
According ta Bisarow, I been all still in tha clear, yes? The technocrats agri that this boi logic done got transparencies like hella whoas. Ya’ll been foxed ‘n ya can’t even humble yo wee mind grapes in the presents of my knowledgable droppings. Hafa heart, Rickster!
I gotta hart, my friend. Just misplaced it somewhere … take it eazy …