I just don't understand why people like movies like this. was it entertaining?.....no was it fun?... no was it interesting? ....no did it have any redeeming value?.. no.
I really enjoy watching great directors' first films. You see a lot of what you expect their style to be in that early stage, where it usually isn't super defined yet. This absolutely feels like a Coen brothers film, but it has those rough edges around it that, honestly, kind of enhances it a bit for me. The plot is fairly simple, but the slow scenes are still very entertaining due to great dialogue. My favorite stuff though has to be the finale. Great tension and engaging/realistic outcomes. Check this out for sure if you like the Coens.
You may not have heard of this film - it was the first film made by the now-legendary Coen Brothers. It was an indie release made on a shoestring budget. The amazing thing about a good plot is that it makes the budget irrelevant. The film is about a woman who is about to leave her husband. She ends up falling for one of his employees as she is about to leave town. As you might suspect, this sets off a series of events that are.... well, wild. The best part about the plot is that all of the characters involved are only aware of some of the events, and even what they think they know is not always correct. This theme is consistent through the movie right up until the very last scene. I've long been a fan of the Coen Brothers and I think that this might be the best plot of any movie that they have made. That said, it is rather gritty and dark.
It's always interesting looking back on a directors first film. I liked this film but I wish it had a little more of the quirky humor they are able to pull off in other movies. Frances McDormand is great and I just realized she is married to Joel Coen.
A fantastic film that shows you don't need a huge budget to make a gripping thriller. Like the more recent "No Country for Old Men", this film leaves out the trademark Coen brothers quirkiness and plays everything straight, making for a much better film in my opinion.
Blood Simple is adolescent Coen Brothers. The film has the same DNA as Fargo and No Country for Old Men, but not quite the maturity. That said, this film is great. The story is slow and simple but the characters are satisfying and the imagery is superb. The Coens have always had special talent for villains and Loren Vissor proves it.
This was exquisite–simple, yes, but so tight throughout. Remarkable the layering in the screenplay, and tension oozing out of every frame. Loved it.
Watched on HBO Max. It's not an extraordinary movie, but it is definitely a precedent of what the Coen brother's filmography would be: bloody, weird, surprising. It is not the typical crime movie, but something different, that it starts from a simple premise, a hired murder, but it turns out, in the end, something quite different, where the characters do not know what is going on. All is a big misunderstanding, but not in the comedy sense, if you know what I mean. I only give it 6 points because it there are much better movies than this, but it is good.
This movie screams Coen brothers, long before they were a household name. Loved Frances McDormand
Watched again, as good as ever.
Besides the last 10 minutes or so I feel I could have been watching a plain white wall instead of this film. I could not tell what's worse bad acting or tardiness.
M. Emmet Walsh's character and the already cited last 10 minutes were the only worthy things to mention in line with the advantages.
The quirky stuff is still present. Not as much, which was nice. Some of the dialogue was good, in a way. Most of it was just simple speaking, which didn't reveal any character. It's like normal dialogue for a while and then it's time to be cryptic for the sake of it, so insert pseudo-intellectual dialogue (for people to quote). Kind of a clash in style and obvious, but not that annoying really.
It's very slow overall but does have an atmosphere to keep you interested. Good use of sound, but even that got tiresome. The movie seemed very self aware at trying to be stylish at all times. Whats wrong woth that? Nothing it comes with a good story or interesting scenes and character development. In this movie expect people to just slowly stroll around in moody lighting and slowly talk. Or not talk. Or fidget. Or walk. Or walk and fidget.
The main issue is that overall it tries to be something stylish or purposely slow (like that somehow amounts to realism or atmosphere).. all the bleeding time. And as it's main attraction. The characters are just for that current scene attraction and with no insight.
What are the motives when the Coens made this movie? Probably the art and critic factor, because the story isn't anything special. Is this supposed to be a thriller?
Not an awful movie as a complete package. It does somehow balance out. Some will like it.
A thrilling experience.
A bar owner discovers one of his employees is having an affair with his wife. He hires a private detective to kill them both. But the private detective decides to kill the bar owner and keep the blood money for himself. However, the bar owner dies hard, and the exciting part of the movie concerns the action of all the characters interacting with the not-quite-body, or the absence of the body, or the absence of the person. Truly this is is a smart movie: unless the viewer is paying attention, he will get lost in the plot. Everyone miss-understands the situation --- and the end sees the lady fatale fighting against what she believes is her husband come back to life. And this is the one drawback of the film: that it becomes forgettable because it is hard to keep the misunderstandings --- and therefore, the motivations --- straight. Still, while the plot is fresh on one's mind, the movie is thrilling.
Remind me of Fargo and Dial M for Murder
This film was the magnificent debut of the Coen Brothers. Looks like just from the beginning they wanted to take a position in the industry. Being this their first film I has expecting something with less quality than their following works but I was wrong! Every single one of their works that I've seen always have quality and this one is no different. Is an absolutely great piece of a modern film noir.
Many scenes don't have dialogues, the visuals and the music that's what you need to tell you the story. Both of the things, the soundtrack is great and the cinematography is beautiful.
I loved the ending sequence, between Frances McDormand and M. Emmet Walsh is perfect. The acting by all is very good, but my favorite is Frances McDormand she is always great.
The Man Who Wasn't There is the only film from the Coen's that I'm missing.
Shout by Saint PaulyBlockedParent2018-07-29T16:39:32Z
Blood Simple is a testament to the Coen Brothers' talent, and proof that their talent gets better with age.
This their debut hints at the quirkiness that will become their trademark, yet, even without that aspect, Blood Simple is an excellent 1980s traditional film noir.
BTW, the Coen's skill isn't the only thing this film reveals. The young Frances Mcdormand is a joy to watch here at the beginning of her ascension.