A Serious Man
Movie Review
A Serious Man
by Eric D. Snider
Grade: A
Released: October 2, 2009
Directed by:
Cast:
Joel and Ethan Coen, the fraternal existential pranksters of filmdom, are experts at making us laugh, making us think, and making us think about whether we're supposed to be laughing or thinking. Their latest, "A Serious Man," does all of that, and some elements of it are liable to produce puzzlement. Yet the Coens have outdone themselves this time. There are details within "A Serious Man" that help us interpret not just this film but some of the brothers' other inscrutable works, too. It might even summarize everything they've ever done.
Set in the Coens' native Minneapolis in the 1967 of their youth, it offers such sublime Coenic delights as offbeat one-scene characters, befuddled yokels, repetition of dialogue ("Be out in a minute!"), unexpected plot devices, and a shrewd eye for visual composition. It also includes allusions to Old Testament figures Job and David and is deeply, deeply Jewish. It's a dark comedy, I think, or maybe a drama with some darkly funny moments. I've seen it twice. One audience laughed a lot more than the other one did. I don't know which one I agree with.
That's OK, though, because uncertainty plays a significant role in the movie. Our protagonist is Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg), a physics professor at a small college who is the epitome of the hapless, put-upon, bespectacled nebbish. His pants are too short, his manner is neurotic, he is cowed by his overbearing wife and treated as inconsequential by his teenage children. But he is a good man who provides for his family and always tries to do what is morally right.
And what does Larry get for his troubles? Nothing but grief, that's what. His wife, Judith (Sari Lennick), wants to leave him for his co-worker and friend Sy Ableman (Fred Melamed). One of his students (David Kang) has attempted to bribe him for a passing grade. He's uncertain whether he'll be granted tenure at the college. His Gentile next-door neighbor (Peter Breitmayer) seems to be slowly encroaching on the Gopniks' property, the sort of thing that historically has made Jews a little nervous. Larry's brother, Arthur (Richard Kind), unhealthy and maybe unstable, is living with the family indefinitely. An unspoken "oy vey" hangs over every aspect of Larry's life.
What Larry wants to know is this: Why? Why are his wife and Sy and the failing student and everyone else so unreasonable? He is perplexed by all the persecution. What has he done to make God send him such trials? He seeks advice from rabbis and gets little help, though you might find what they say both amusing and, in the context of the film, enlightening.
As Larry's life slowly falls apart, his son, Danny (Aaron Wolff), is supposed to be preparing for his bar mitzvah. Mainly he smokes pot with his buddies and attempts to retrieve the transistor radio that was confiscated during Hebrew school. And what does Danny's story have to do with his father's? A fine question! We meet them both at the same time, with the Coens cutting back and forth between Larry getting a physical exam at a doctor's office and Danny surreptitiously listening to Jefferson Airplane in class. Does this parallel editing mean the two Gopniks are connected thematically? Later, a frantic Larry observes that at the very moment he was in a minor car accident, someone he knows died in a major one across town. A coincidence -- but does it mean something? Is God trying to tell him that he and the other person are somehow alike? What is God trying to tell him?
You could just as well ask what the Coens are trying to tell us. After all, if a movie is a made-up world, then the directors are the gods of it. These particular Minnesotan deities are well-known for resisting their worshipers' pleas for enlightenment, preferring to reward the faithful with treasures of understanding that the less observant miss. And sometimes they're just messin' around with you. Sometimes the answer is that there isn't an answer. Which is the same answer Larry Gopnik gets, when someone tells him, "Accept the mystery." Since this is the Coen brothers, naturally the "answer" to the film would come from a minor character in a throwaway line in reference to something else, and of course Larry doesn't get it.
The Coens' worldview -- or at least the one conveyed in this and some of their other films -- is that no matter what you do, stuff happens. It's not always fair or logical or appropriate. Life is messy and unpredictable. As someone in "No Country for Old Men" told us, "You can't stop what's comin'. It ain't all waitin' on you. That's vanity." The first words in "A Serious Man" are a quote from the medieval French rabbi Rashi: "Receive with simplicity everything that happens to you." Just accept it, man.
You could drive yourself crazy trying to figure things out. Take the film's prologue, for example, set in a European Jewish village 100 years ago. A husband and wife have opposite views of the same person, an old man who stops at their cottage and who might be either a harmless old man or a demon. Who is right? He's like Schrodinger's cat, for all intents and purposes alive and dead at the same time because we don't know for sure either way. Larry Gopnik knows about Schrodinger. He knows about the uncertainty principle, too. He ought to apply his understanding of physics to daily life.
The only way to truly solve life's problems, the film suggests, is to stop thinking about them. By forgetting that the mysteries even exist (and drugs, like Danny's marijuana, can help change your perspective there), you relieve yourself from worrying about them. Once you no longer have problems to worry about, you're happy. You can't ever really solve the mysteries of life anyway, so why bother with them? Whatever is going to happen is going to happen.
I don't subscribe to that philosophy myself, and who knows if the Coens even really do. But what an engrossing and thoughtful tale they tell in the service of it! Michael Stuhlbarg, a largely unknown actor (like most of the cast), gives a powerhouse performance as Larry, a man who gets beaten down but maintains an inner reserve of strength and dignity. He is never pathetic or pitiful. That's important. I also love Fred Melamed as the velvet-voiced Sy Ableman, and Richard Kind (probably the most famous person in the film) as Larry's sad, sad brother.
The film is a wonder: At every turn there's an offbeat character or an unexpected development waiting to surprise you. It's all about the uncertainty of life, yet the film itself is very certain, carefully crafted, impeccably written and acted. The first time you watch it, you enjoy the unpredictable ride you're on. The second time, you contemplate how all the pieces fit together. I'm eager to see what happens the third time.
Grade: A
Rated R, about a dozen F-bombs, brief strong sexuality, a scene of nude sunbathing, brief moderate violence
1 hr., 45 min.
Copyright © Eric D. Snider.
This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.
This item has 11 comments
October 11, 2009 at 6:58 pm
I like your take on the movie. The film requires patience and the rewards are plenty. The Coens love to leave us thinking and that's what I love about their movies. I'd like to add that in addition to Richard Kind, who most people know more by his face than his name, Adam Arkin would be the most well known actor in the film.
October 21, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Fyvush Finkel is a close runner-up for most well-known...
October 24, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Thank you for the great review. I knew the lady on the park bench said something profound during the brief scene with Larry but for the life of me I couldn't recall it in discussions we had in a movie group. Now I no longer have to "accept the mystery".
December 21, 2009 at 5:00 am
I loved this movie as I do most Coen Brothers movies. This review was perfect Eric. You bring up many excellent points and got me thinking even more. Was the head rabbi supposed to be the original rabbi from 100 years ago?
December 21, 2009 at 5:40 pm
I forgot to mention that I loved Larry's dream sequences. I think there were four of them. In 3 of them (not the one in the classroom), I was fooled thinking it was actually happening and not a dream. I really hope this gets nominated for a best picture Oscar.
January 21, 2010 at 8:09 am
AN OSCAR !?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
How ludicrous, this has to be the worst cohen brothers films since o borther where art thou.
Maybe this means something to someone... (and I am a devoted david lynch film) but this was absolute dribble. Jewish dribble.
I thought some of the scenes where hilarious, some of the characters so off beat and interesting and some of the scenes were purely great ! Except.. it never went anywhere.. it never said anything.. apart from lifes a bunch of random events in which there is no greater meaning.
That could have been said in a twitter post, did it really need a film ?
I am seriously dissapointed and also felt as though the film was one big excuse to indulge in the jewish culture, an exclusionist culture which I find to be disgusting.
I am so glad that I didn't pay to see this film.
Big thumbs down, although what what I know.. I'm just a Goy.
February 2, 2010 at 2:15 pm
This is a fine spot on review and I'm wanting to see this film. I was once a film critic in the glory days when they had banquets at LA press screenings. If the Coens were storytellers of a more intellectual age, they'd be giants of film right now instead of the whimsical auteurs they're made out to be. It seems like A Serious Man harks back to days when films were about real people and not just escapism for simple minds. Filmmakers don't owe us an answer to life in cinema. Given the symbolism the Coens often put in all of
their films, you make your own interpretations. And there are many.
February 21, 2010 at 5:23 pm
I would ad ...
Don't you want somebody to love?
Don't you need somebody to love?
Wouldn't you love somebody to love?
You see...it's a love story :)
Oh..and by the way James...the Coen brothers want YOU to know...
"No Jews were harmed in the making of this film."
April 9, 2010 at 3:30 am
Fantastic review. I agree 100%. I've been saying the same things to people ever since I saw the film. I've seen it three times now and think it's one of their finest works (after The Hudsucker Proxy). ^^
James seems to have missed the point entirely.
I liked The Hurt Locker as well. But I thought A Serious Man was a finer piece of cinema, better crafted, better told, more efficient. In a word, mentaculous.
May 13, 2010 at 1:53 am
Thanks for a helpful review.
I do think that the movie is basically about the uncertainty of life. We all ask those questions, and let's face it, we probably will never have the answers. I just don't agree that we shouldn't ask and just take it as it is. But in either case, this reminds me of an old Jewish joke (sorry for a cliche):
An old Jew is sitting on a bench, deeply concentrated. A friend of his passes by.
Friend: Hey, Chaim, what are you thinking about so deeply?
Chaim: I am thinking, why is there a letter 'O' in 'Chaim'?
Friend: But Chaim, there is no letter 'O' in the word 'Chaim'.
Chaim: Well, what if you put it in?
Friend: But why would you put it in?
Chaim: That's exactly what I'm thinking about: why?
If you didn't like the joke, my apologies. But I think it tells you what the movie is about. Note also that 'chaim' means life in Hebrew. We ask questions we ourselves come up with, and maybe they are as pointless as the one Chaim was asking. At some point the question you ask is, maybe there is no point?
I hope there is one. I am in agreement with Larry on this one, everything has consequences, and there is a point, no matter how senseless it all seems to be. I also think this is what Judaism is all about.
Which brings me to the last scene. I still didn't figure it out. Does anyone have any idea? It's clear he is going to die (or something of the kind). Is he being punished for accepting the bribe? What about his son, are they going to be killed by the tornado? What is Fagel's look supposed to mean? I have many questions, and maybe there are no answers. Maybe someone else knows better?
And to James: you are clearly an anti-Semite, so I am not sure why you even watched the movie. You know, the directors are Jewish. I suggest you try to first learn something about Judaism before making accusations. And if you have such huge issues with being non-Jewish, you can convert.
April 25, 2011 at 1:53 am
I watched this again and loved it just as much. I was reading some comments on RT and people were saying that you need to be Jewish to like this movie. Really? That makes no sense at all. You just have to be smart and have a good attention span. Do you need to be Greek to enjoy "My Big Fat Greek Wedding"? Do you need to be Italian to enjoy "Goodfellas?
Spoiler ahead:
As for your questions Daniel.......I'm pretty sure nobody has any answers. Not even the Coen Brothers. That's the beauty of the movie. It's just like real life. Just take your question......Is he being punished for accepting the bribe? Well even if he finds out he has a bad disease......that doesn't mean he is being punished for changing the grade and accepting the cash. Like in real life, there are plenty of crazy coincidences that happen just like that. Some people believe it is God punishing them and some people don't believe in God. Some people believe in God but believe he gave us complete free will. So if we do something bad........and something bad happens right away.......it's still just a coincidence. Such a great movie that it makes us think about stuff like that.......even if we don't want to.