Frequently is at the bottom of people's lists of Coen bros. movies. I wouldn't put it in their upper tier by any stretch, but there are several of theres that I would class as "worse" than this one - namely, HUDSUCKER and (let's face it) BLOOD SIMPLE.
shareI saw this movie a number of times in the theater. I love it!
But then, I do have bizarre tastes in movies.
It probably gets trashed because it's a remake. I don't know.
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER
Some people just automatically think a remake is inferior to the original. They'll whine about it even before they see the new version.
Yeah, they're dead; they're--all messed up!
Why do people hate this movie?
Tom Hanks also died in Philadelphia yet they seem to love that one.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Tom Hanks also died in Philadelphia yet they seem to love that one.
Yeah. Far as I´m concerned, Hanks gives his best performance in The Ladykillers - and he´s probably the best thing about the film that I´m not overly fond of otherwise.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
[deleted]
Yeah. Far as I´m concerned, Hanks gives his best performance in The Ladykillers - and he´s probably the best thing about the film that I´m not overly fond of otherwise.
[deleted]
Well at least it has a real good fart joke in it. Simmons´s bowel stuff, on the other hand, got quite tedious - even though it has a neat pay-off in the end.
Actually, the whole movie feels a little like Coens sh-tting a brick - trying too hard for a laugh all the time. They usually have a lighter touch with their humor.
It´s certainly funnier than Intolerable Cruelty.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
[quote]It´s certainly funnier than Intolerable Cruelty.[quote]
I don't know if I've ever seen that one before. It doesn't sound familiar.
Talking about Coen brothers.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Talking about Coen brothers.
"But that is one I haven´t heard of".
Probably for a reason - it´s universally considered their worst film and in this case, I agree. My favourite Coen comedies are The Big Lebowski and The Hudsucker Proxy, but others are good, and funny, too.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Probably for a reason - it´s universally considered their worst film and in this case, I agree. My favourite Coen comedies are The Big Lebowski and The Hudsucker Proxy, but others are good, and funny, too.
You mean Intolerable Cruelty? It´s a romantic comedy, a very light and conventional movie by Coens´ standards. Largely, it sort of lacks their unique touch.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Simmons´s bowel stuff, on the other hand, got quite tedious - even though it has a neat pay-off in the end.
Why do people hate this movie?
[deleted]
Wow! There is absolutely no way that this film is better than either Blood Simple or Hudsucker. Those films are about things, they have class and atmosphere. They're nuanced and interesting. Ladykillers just doesn't have anything going for it at all, nothing works. Its a total waste of time.
shareWow! There is absolutely no way that this film is better than either Blood Simple or Hudsucker. Those films are about things, they have class and atmosphere. They're nuanced and interesting. Ladykillers just doesn't have anything going for it at all, nothing works. Its a total waste of time.
Well, I'm certainly not enough of a Coen fan to make lists of their movies. But this movie peeves me, and makes me feel sorry for millions of people, because the original is such a finely crafted and perfectly paced caper flick.
A movie which is both a caper movie and a comedy depends on the plot being unfolded before your eyes just so. The original, with its magnificent pace and great direction, does a fine job of that. If you watch this remake, then you have all the spoilers in the world dumped in your lap, and you can't watch the original without knowing where it's going. That's a terrible pity.
Poll people who watched this one first, and most say they're both okay movies. Poll people who watched the original first, and most people say the first was fantastic and this one sucked. This makes me very glad I watched the original long before this piece of inferiority came out. If this spoiled the original for you, you can still watch it and enjoy it somewhat. If the original spoiled this one for you, this one sucks. What does that say about the relative merits of the two?
If I were someone who saw this remake first, I'd be pissed that the outstanding original was forever spoiled for me. The Coen Brothers should have had enough sense to let alone what they could not possibly improve upon--or even match. To do something that deprives millions of people of most of the pleasure of watching one of the great caper comedies of all time is just plain rude.
I can't say why everyone who hates this movie does so. But that's why I do. It makes me feel sorry for everyone who saw this, and hadn't already seen the original. All it does is spoil a GOOD movie.
Like another poster said in a different thread, how brilliant do you have to be to improve on one of the all time greats? And if you really are that brilliant, why wouldn't you do something original--or remake a good plot which has never been made into a good movie before?