Hail, Caesar!

I was very surprised how quickly "Hail, Caesar" was in and out of the theaters...but now after seeing the film, I can completely understand why. It was as if the Coen Brothers simply said "let's do a film for ourselves...who cares whether or not the public enjoys it or not!". I appreciated it myself...but I am also not the average film-goer. As for the average viewer, the film makes allusions to many events in the history of Hollywood...but if you aren't aware of these events or rumors, you'll not understand or appreciate much of the film.

The story is based SLIGHT on the life of Eddie Mannix--a motion picture exec who was known as a 'fixer'--a guy who knew how to make bad problems do away...and with the bad behavior of many of the stars, this was an exhausting job. The story seems to be just a slice out of Eddie's life--possibly not the worst time as a fixer but a busy one. Through the course of the film, several problems arise--such as a pregnant single starlet and an actor of dabbles in communism. In each case, Mannix has to get to work to be sure the public never knows...and you see how exhausting this job is.

If you are looking for big laughs, you won't see them. There are a few small ones...just a few. Instead, it's more like a time machine trip to the early 1950s and you are that fly on the wall watching these Hollywood types as they go about their lives and doing stupid things. I do NOT strongly recommend the film but only mildly...and only if you are a real fan of the films of yesteryear AND are aware of the misbehaviors of some of our stars...or alleged misbehaviors.

Caught this at a screening the other night, and wasn't very impressed. The laughs are infrequent, and it's downright boring in stretches. It does have its moments, though: My favorite was Brolin trying to get reassurance from an array of religious leaders that his new biblical epic won't offend anyone. And Ehrenreich, who I'd never heard of, was great as the clueless but sincere rodeo expert who has somehow fallen into serious act-ting... much to Ralph Fiennes' chagrin. Who knew a line like "if only it were so simple?" could generate such hilarity? Such moments are few and far between, though.

Overall, this is a C+ flick - I think it's getting over-rated by critics just cuz of the Coens' name. It's one of their weaker efforts.

This film seemed to get quite a mixed response when it came out, and watching for myself I can understand why. On one hand it is a light bit of fun, which is professionally delivered in all aspects; however at the same time it always feels like it could easily have been more than this – and maybe could have delivered more along the lines of other Coen brother films. How strongly you feel about this will depend on the individual; for me I fell between the two stools.

As a comedy I enjoyed it. It had smart dialogue and characters, all with plenty of color and atmosphere. At the same time the film looked great from the cinematography through to the cast involved. This did work against it for me too then; mainly because it seemed to always harken back to other films such as Barton Fink, and other better films. This feeling is confirmed because Hail Caesar! is at its best in the moment, but doesn't really build or develop into something more satisfying. It is still funny, very well delivered, and enjoyable as part of the familiar Coen world, but they have done better, and it is hard not to think that while watching this.

Review: I'm usually a fan of these type of quirky movies but this film was all over the place! There was so much stories going on at once, so it was pretty hard to follow and I wasn't that impressed with the different characters that kept on getting introduced throughout the movie. George Clooney's weird face expressions made me laugh in a few of the scenes and Tilda Swinton, who played the twins Thora Thacker/Thessaly Thacker, also was quite funny but I didn't really see the point of some of the characters. Jonah Hill (Joe Silverman) and Ralph Fiennes (Laurence Laurentz) are only in a couple of scenes, and the main character, Eddie Mannix (Josh Brolin) just seems to be running around, trying to keep everyone happy. The movie is based in a movie studio during the 1950's, and it follows Eddie Mannix, who is trying to find a big shot actor, Baird Whitlock (George Clooney), who has been kidnapped by a bunch of writers. While he is on the hunt for Whitlock, who is being held for a ransom of $100,000, Mannix has to make sure that the big budget movies that are being filmed, are under control, and he has to handle the press who are constantly on his back for information. The period was portrayed quite well throughout the movie, and Josh Brolin played the lead quite well but it was hard to find a point to the whole project. There wasn't much of an ending to the various stories and no one seemed that bothered about Baird Whitlocks random disappearance. With all of that aside, it's a still a watchable movie, because you don't know what directed the plot is going to take from one scene to the next but I still expected something special, once I saw the cast. Its not the type of film that will go down as a classic but I have to commend it for it's originality and witty script. Watchable!

Round-Up: After watching many of the Coen Brothers work, I was really looking forward to this movie but it didn't live up to its expectations. There first movie came out in 1984, called Blood Simple, which was followed by Raising Arizona, Miller's Crossing, Barton Fink and the Hudsucker Proxy. They then hit the big time with Fargo, in 1996 and then came the brilliant, The Big Lebowski, which I thoroughly enjoyed. After that came O Brother, Where Art Thou?, The Man Who Wasn't There, Intolerable Cruelty, The Ladykillers, Paris, je t'aime, No Country For Old Men, Burn After Reading, A Serious Man, True Grit and Inside Llewyn Davis, which all made a profit at the box office and established there name in Hollywood. All of the A-list stars want to work with them, mainly because of there unique style and approach to film making. I wouldn't say that this film is there best work but it won't damaged there reputation as great film makers.

Budget: $22million Worldwide Gross: $63million

I recommend this movie to people who are into their mystery/comedies, starring Josh Brolin, George Clooney, Ralph Riennes, Alden Ehrenreich, Scarlett Johansson, Tilda Swinton, Channing Tatum, Frances McDormand, Jonah Hill, Veronica Osorio, Alison Pill, Chrisopher Lambert and Clancy Brown. 5/10

Sure, a lot of people hate this movie, and I get it, it isn't for everyone. Your enjoyment of the film solely depends on your sense of humor, expectations, and background knowledge of Hollywood films of this era.

I had read into this film a bit before I saw it, and therefore my expectations were pretty much surpassed. I already knew that there wasn't going to be much plot and that a lot of the big name actors and actresses in the film were in it very little. But, no matter how negative some of the criticism I heard, I still eagerly wanted to see it. And I did see it, and I loved it!

One of the main reasons why I enjoyed it so much was because of my previous information of classic filmmaking. I knew plenty about classic epic, musical, and western cinema, and there's plenty of nods to various filmmaking techniques of that era that I noticed. A lot of this film kind of feels like it was made back in the 50s, so I have to give credit to the Coen brothers for that.

My biggest complaint was how little screen time various actors got. Many of the people who were top billed are barely in the film at all. I mean, Jonah Hill is literally on the POSTER and yet he was in the film for hardly even a minute! Couldn't his part have been a bit longer? Or maybe he simply shouldn't have been on the movie's poster! Other actors/actresses were in it disappointingly little to, such as Scarlett Johansson, Ralph Fiennes, Channing Tatum, etc. However short their appearances may be, all of the performances are extraordinarily well done, which is why I wanted to see more of these actors in the first place!

Other flaws I found were rather minor. Certain gags went on a little too long, although pretty much all of the gags worked very well for a remainder of their existence. There also isn't much of a plot for a lot of the film. While there is SOMETHING resembling a plot, there was very little of it. Of course, normally in a film (unless it is experimental or a documentary), I like a bit of plot and conflict, and in "Hail, Caesar!" there wasn't as much of it as the trailer may want you to believe. But, the film didn't really need much of a plot to keep me hooked and entertained.

There certainly were more positives than negatives from my point of view. When a gag in the film worked, it worked extremely well. And the entire film is shot beautifully as well!

There's plenty of entertainment value to be had. There's a bit of comedy, mystery, music, and even some elements of drama. I enjoyed "Hail, Caesar!" quite a bit, and look forward to seeing it once again in the near future! While there are a few problems, all the positives make up for them really well! This is a great satire that I'd recommend to people who really appreciate older films, have a somewhat dark sense of humor, and don't mind a film with very little plot