Copyright © 2011
by James Clark

With its signature whiteout desolation and intriguingly wide-faced protagonist making difficult headway in its midst, Fargo (1996) seems to invite us to engage its ice-hard slipperiness in a carry –through including Antonioni’s Red Desert (1964). Though both films do indeed share a peculiar agitation, their wealth of strange complexities and beauties dictates separate investigations. Not that it wouldn’t be fun mixing a cocktail comprising cosmopolitan chic and a ripple where a kid decorates his bedroom with a poster for “The Accordion King.” But, along that very sightline we are snapped out of complacency, when the boy’s mom addresses the decadence of his report card in this way: “Do you know what “disparity” means? You’re not a D student [that is to say, a mediocrity; hold that thought]…That’s why you’re not going out [for the hockey squad].” His evincing a great difference between a potential and an actual outcome is a condition that takes us by the throat as emergent in the School of Hard Knocks which this movie puts us through (its copious blood and gore being only a relatively light foretaste of the real horror lurking within its square-dance patter).
Often thought to instil a current of film noir into the outset of the twenty-first century, Fargo’s crime narrative—occupying the lion’s share of the action—in fact shows errancy by pronounced exponents of material well-being with no touching redeeming qualities at all, the doom of which impresses us not with ardently contested aspirations undone (nor with a poetic justice), but as capping a critical mass of disparity into which the one and only seriously conscious entity, “Marge,” the small-town chief of police who closes the case, must struggle to make a life. (At the end, having just taken out the engines of a cataclysmic blood-bath, she comes to bed, joining her husband, “Norm,” a duck-painting and –sculpture practitioner of an artistry that must once have led her to believe he was a cut above the norm. The TV set is on, and he tells her, “They announced it.” Expanding upon that ambiguous gambit, it turns out the big news was his having had one of his ducks chosen for a 3-cent stamp. He’s a bit morose about this, since, after all, how many people buy 3-cent stamps? Marge points out that small denominations are in demand at times of rate increases, and this cheers him up a bit. She says, “It’s terrific! I’m so proud of you!” She would probably be trying hard not to recall how closely his heavily lidded eyes resemble those of the serial killer she just rounded up and jailed.)
As if to totemically exorcize a syndrome of diminishment, physically apparent in the flatlands of the Snow Belt (the university hockey team so many of the characters are devoted to being known as “the Gophers”), leading one to feel but a speck under that omnipresent sky, settlements of the Northern Plains are dotted with towering wooden figures representing an imaginary overachiever of the region’s Lakeland forestry, namely, the lumberjack, “Paul Bunyan,” and his fitting companion, a gigantic blue ox, named, “Babe.” Marge’s hometown and place of employment, Brainerd, sports a Big Paul, right by the two-lane on which a Howdy Doody-like car salesman, “Jerry,” would have hauled through a blizzard one of the new models, a Sierra—for a mountain-envious market—to the King of Clubs bar in Fargo to allow a couple of half-wits, “Carl” and “Gaear” to take possession en route to kidnapping his wife (the noted disparity-detector), for the sake of prying a ransom from her rich daddy to put to rest some understandably disparate business decisions. While some ragged reasoning—Carl, as we learn in what follows having a close affinity to the boob tube, happily repeating his latest cull, “I’m not gonna sit here and debate with you, Jerry”—vies with some lower-drawer Bluegrass (“Turn me loose and set me free”), our attention strays to a clutch of geriatric pool players and then (recalling its component of the Rockabilly ambient number, “Ace of Spades”) to Pulp Fiction’s Vince and Mia doing some bonding at “Jackrabbit Slim’s,” before our encounter with the larger (more Bunyanesque) and more violent operative, Gaear, asking from within the Sierra, “Where is pancakes house?”; and we will ask in our turn, “How does one (like Marge) survive amidst such an unending blizzard of enervation?”

On witnessing the credibility-confounding taskmasters—“You’re tasking us to perform this mission?”—in the process of waylaying “Jean,” we are given a brutal foretaste of the more pristine issue of entrapment. She is in the living room of her suburban house in the “Twin Cities” (that regional obsession with behemoths always on tap)—Carl will point out to a near-catatonic Gaear (reproving him along lines of the region’s loquacious forte and also inadvertently mooting an alternative, “That’s a fountain of conversation, man. Would it kill you to say something…to chat, keep our spirits up? Total fuckin’ silence! Two can play that game, Smart Guy!”), on the drive into the task, “There’s the tallest building in the Midwest, after the Sears Building in Chicago…”)—watching a local morning television show and brightening at the announcement of a contest to join the host and hostess on a “Riverboat trip down the Nile,” to shake things up. Immediately on seizing upon that escape, she notices a hooded figure at the window, he smashes it, and they both pursue her into her bedroom, shredded with terror that becomes more concrete in her pitching downstairs entangled in a shower curtain. They drive her (bound and shrouded with a black sack over her head) back up to the Brainerd district, arrive at a cabin hideaway (on Moose Lake), allow her to bolt from the Sierra and flounder around the yard like a chicken with its head chopped off, at which Carl goes into hysterics of glee and Gaear opens his eyes wide. Before reaching that recreational venue, the soldiers of fortune put on a display of the volcanic proportions of the normality they have embraced. (Even before setting out for the Twin Cities, they hook up with two hookers at the Blue Ox Inn, on the outskirts of Brainerd, do their transactions and then, each couple snuggled in adjacent beds like high school sweethearts, they soak up the gyroscopic assurances of “The Tonight Show.”) Driving North in the night, they are pulled over for forgetting to affix temporary tags on their dealer’s plates, Gaear blows away part of the State Trooper’s head, blood welling up as from a (n obligatory) mountain with volcanic pop, then, leaving Carl to dispose of the body, pursues a car whose occupants have happened by and seen the mess, finds it overturned, drills in the back the fleeing male driver and shoots at point blank range the young woman passenger trapped within.
It is at this point that Marge comes aboard and begins to give us a glimpse of how she figures amidst the land of such giants. It is, moreover, the carnage catching her flat-footed that allows us a close-up of her modus operandi. The phone wakes her up and she receives the report as if it were about kids smashing some big windows. “Oh…hey…where? Yaa…oh geez…Be there in a jiff.” She doesn’t feel it’s anything she can share with Norm, the panning shot over the art studio with its sweet ducks getting us started with the idea that the homebody is not up to being tasked with carnivores. “Oh, Hon. You can sleep.” He had prepared her a breakfast (eggs, of course) she didn’t have time to finish. So he ties into her leftovers, only to be tasked with her coming back in and announcing—with no apparent urgency —“ Hon, prowler needs a jump.” Getting an electrical charge from that drowsy panda is a disparity that starts us wondering how come comedy has so quickly supplanted horror. We cut to the snowy barrens where the witnesses lie mangled but Marge is struck by the muffin and coffee her subordinate offers her. “Oh! What you got there…?…Thanks a bunch!” He misses the point…but she does get around to referring to the crime scene. “Triple homicide…Aahh…gee…” Then, doing a bit of overdue sleuthing, she brings it all back to the world as it hits her. “From his footprints he looks like a big fella.” Being pregnant she has a bout of morning sickness into the snow, and then becomes happy to let her associate know, “Well that passed. I’m hungry again.” It begins to dawn on us that this straightaway transcending of malaise is a kinetic resource Marge has honed into a variant of folk art. (Still negotiating through her cobwebs, she looks into the overturned vehicle and all she can say is, “It’s in the head and the hand here. I guess that’s a defensive move.” But immediately after that she nails the whole choreography about being stopped by the cop and witnesses coming by and having to be removed. She wraps up her analysis, with, “I’d be surprised if our suspect is from Brainerd”—a touch that includes her ongoing testing of the allowances of her homeland.) While ostensibly the narrative launches a counterattack by forces of justice upon forces of evil, you can see that what’s really going on is Marge feeding some ungainly evidence into a navigational (righting) device only she, among her compatriots, knows how to operate. They check out the dead Trooper, having been dumped in a field, and she can only remark, “He looks like a nice enough guy”—hardly an impassioned cri de coeur from one upholder of the law to a fallen soulmate.

In contradistinction to that latter model of sensibility galvanized to the point of effectively obviating (offending) an easy going norm, Marge demonstrates, to strangely comedic lengths, a cleaving to the patois and reflexive cordiality of media-honed, facile domesticity. There is a brilliantly droll scene where the Chief, perhaps beaming in from Andy Griffith, interviews the belles from the Blue Ox for the sake of discovering the appearance and whereabouts of their hard-to-ignore clients. They tell her about their home towns—“I’m from Shasta…”/ “I’m from La Soeur (pronounced “le sewer”)—the latter even being so good as to give Marge a tepid taste of her high school pep song (“Go Bears”). The smaller girl describes Carl as “funny lookin’.” Encouraged to elaborate, she tells Marge, “He was like everyone, only funnier.” The bigger girl says that Gaear “looked like the Marlborough Man…”/ “They said they were headed to the Twin Cities…Is this useful?”/ “Yaa…you betcha!” Marge continues to smile warmly toward them. “Yaa,” she nods. “Yaa,” they repeatedly nod, grinning from ear-to-ear. Over and above the exigencies of successful interrogation, our bell-weather of justice sees fit to do justice to the social network now extant.
The Coens provide her and her neighbors with a staggering and often hilarious repertoire of buzzwords by means of which to assure that they are all on the same page. At the crime scene, regarding the mutilated trooper, she’s on her knees in the snow and her eyes have a sharpness we haven’t seen til now. “There was another one…smaller…It’s a real shame…” But, straightaway it’s back to the goofiness this jurisdiction finds to be as essential as oxygen. “I wonder if Dave’s open yet. I just wanna get some nightcrawlers [for Norm],” whose zeal for ice fishing with live bait appears to give his artwork a run for its money. (At this stage Marge’s zeal for sporting goods seems to exceed her focus on the two-legged nightcrawlers.) On the drive into town she gently points out to the second fiddle that he’s missed the point that the “DLR” in the Trooper’s citation book refers to dealer’s plates, and expertly exits the possibly disconcerting lucidity by telling a joke about someone who couldn’t afford personalized plates so he changes his name to coincide with his license, “J3L 2404.” Sharing tag-lines like that (only later does Carl get down to stealing a set of tags for the Sierra) supersedes taking a stab at communication rising above the level of a ten-year-old. (In a preamble to breaking the news about his daughter’s kidnapping to his father-in-law, Jerry rehearses by the telephone in order to maintain circulating in the same channel of readily accessible probity. “Wade, it’s Jerry…I don’t know what to do!…It’s Jerry…It’s my wife, Jean…” Then we cut to Carl assuring the State Trooper. (“I wanna be in compliance…in full compliance.”) A crowning moment of this eruption of self-consciousness tending toward a kind of muscle memory comes at the point just after Carl murders Wade and a parking lot attendant, and an unorthodox energy (action) has become compelling. A member of Marge’s supporting cast at the Brainerd cop shop interviews, on a farm village street with a big grain elevator looming at Big Paul proportions, a geezer who had been doing some part-time bartending and had been consulted, by someone fitting Carl’s description, about neighborhood call-girls. “This little guy says, ‘I’m goin’ crazy out at the Lake…Where can I get some action?’”/ “I say, ‘What kind of action do you mean?’”/ “He says, ‘Woman action, of course!’”/ “I say, ‘This isn’t that kind of place.’”/ “He says, ‘Are you calling me some kind of jerk? The last guy who called me a jerk is dead now, and I don’t mean of old age. You wouldn’t want to get into that?’”/ “I say, ‘You got that right’….End of story.”/ “How would you describe him?”/ “A little guy, funny lookin’.”/ “It’s probably nothing…looks like it’s gonna turn cold…A front’s comin’.”/ “You got that right!”
While you couldn’t say she turns cold, on following up the dealer, in the Twin Cities, about the car with the partly noted plates (tracing of calls from the Blue Ox zeroing in on precisely which dealer), Marge steps just far enough out of her homespun sweetheart routine to get some work done, under the auspices of getting something right, righting, as posing for her some modifications of the habit of entertaining the productive potential of those locked away in disparity. A prelude involves looking up an old high school flame, “Mike,” living in the Twin Cities, who had phoned her and wakened them on seeing a TV report of Marge’s leading the investigation. (The only glimmer of attention to the case, on Norm’s part, occurs when, en route to giving his nightcrawlers a workout, Marge mentions having to spend some time in the Cities.) Whereas—in part due to being pregnant—Marge’s approach to nourishment had tended toward all-you–can-eat buffets, and her wardrobe, in part due to the stylistic priorities of the Brainerd Police Department, put special emphasis upon beige, on appearing, wide-eyed and a bit troubled, at the hotel dining room (Mike had emphasized, on her saying, “Nice place!”/ “You know, it’s the Radisson, so it’s pretty good,” and she had smiled and nodded approval) Marge had clearly tried to depart the mold—touches of red in the beige ground, and ordering only a Diet Coke. Though the rendezvous is a disaster—Mike starts with, “I always liked you…I always like you so much!”—the mere step out of Norm’s orbit is what registers here. “Better times.”/ “Better times.” (Right after, Carl is at a cabaret table in the same Big Town [about to lean on Jerry for a jump in cash flow], assuring a bored hooker that with the featured superstar, Jose Feliciano, “…you’ve got no complaints.” Jose’s selection is, “Let’s Find Each Other Tonight.”) After hearing from an acquaintance that everything Mike had said was a lie, she is driving over to check out Jerry’s alibi for a second time and her look is pensive and a little bit angry. With a barely discernible flintiness about her patented smile, she opens with the uncharacteristic, “I’ll keep it real short,” and asks Jerry to prove that there is no missing vehicle, since the call to his employee (who head-hunted Gaear as a safe bet) and the dealer plates of the war wagon are “connected.” He (with Wade’s bullet-riddled body in his own car trunk—Wade having put himself in harm’s way with Carl and having in turn put a bullet through the latter’s jaw) comes across as a bit crusty for a guy who often deploys the Gabby Hayes cheer, “Yer dern tootin’!” and she responds with, “Sir, you have no call to get snippy with me!” Catching sight of him racing off the premises, she becomes totally appalled at this course of transgressing “getting together”: “He’s fleein’ the interview! He’s fleein’ the interview!”
The bozo in her employ might have seen no point in having a look around Moose Lake, but on this day Marge is no longer in the mood to trust the assurances of the Gabby Hayeses of the world (her repeated little congeniality about her domestic bona fides, “I’m carryin’ a load here,” coming back to haunt her) and she promptly comes upon Gaear stuffing Carl’s body into a wood chipper, blood spraying for a considerable distance. He tries to flee the interview by way of the frozen lake, she brings him down with a bullet into his leg from her pistol, and, as she drives him into the Station (he paying special but [as always] silent attention to the Paul Bunyan statue, with its axe like the one he used on Carl) you can see that, although she won’t be singing “Happy Trails to You” anytime soon, she has renewed—at a somewhat augmented level—her subscription to the hominess of Roy and Dale. She goes over with him her discovery of Jean’s body (in a previous scene, her bound and hooded presence before a warmth-providing open oven, her heavy breathing emitting steam through the black fabric and evoking a roast turkey, represents the film’s cruellest image) and then, in forcing herself to matter-of-factly complete the tally with , “I assume that was your accomplice in the wood chipper,” she’s spot on once more, as to a goofy chipperness, but with its weird edge now unmistakable. She quietly berates Gaear, “And for what? For a little bit of money. There’s more to life than money. Don’t you know that? And it’s a beautiful day. I just don’t understand it.” There is a cut to a convoy of ambulances and a truck pulling the Sierra, pounding through a snowstorm as the soundtrack tolls a furious requiem.
The end-point, featuring Marge and Norm (who comes across as by and large even scarier than the mass murderers—Carl driven [however ineptly] to “keeping up spirits” and Gaear zeroing in [without success] upon the physical outcomes of silence), finds her coming back to processing the odd little spark. Has there ever been a more troubled, less sentimental and, at the same time, more strangely thrilling cinematic anticipation of parenthood? “Heck, Norm. We’re doin’ pretty good.”/ “I love you, Margie.”/ “I love you, Norm.”/ “Two more months.”/ “Two more months.”






Two things I remember when I think of the first time I saw FARGO…
The film was released just after the summer months in 1996. I was at home and banging away mindlessly on the computer when I got a phone call from Sam. He told me that I was to take a shower and to get dressed and to be standing at the front door of my house at 930pm that night awaiting him to pick me up.
We drove out to a local cineplex. He would not tell me what the film was, the plot or who was in it. I had heard nothing of the film as I read the title on the marquee over the door of the theatre as we strolled into the auditorium. Sam went on about how the movie we were about to see was viewed by him the night before and all he was going to say was that I needed to see this in a hurry.
The lights went down, the screen slowly faded to a white blister of a snow storm and the shrill chord of a fiddle began what is now known as Carter Burwell’s immediately recognizable hillbilly theme for Marge Gundersen.
What followed, in all of its 1 hour and 35 minute running time, was a film that moved beyond the conventions of engaging movie making and story-telling and into the realms of transportive experience. FARGO so completely lead me into the immersion of its bizarre little world that I forgot I was in a theatre at all. It’s detail, naturalistic bleed from one sequence to another and focus on character situations and asides that really didn’t seem integral to the story all brought me closer to this place and moment in the times of these people to the point that I felt a relationship with them. I was whisked away from that cineplex and put right in the middle of the people of Bainerd and Fargo North Dakota and I was understanding the twanged lingo’s of these people that so many other audience attendees were snickering at as bizarre. I was reminded, in one foul swoop, that there were worlds foregn to me as close as only a few states away from my own home and that the details that make each culture and individual spectacularly different from the other are truly soemthing to marvel at and embrace.
Frankly, I sat in the cinema slack jawed that night, totally bowled over by a film that had the guts to be goofy and telling all at the same time and never, once, was apologetic for not giving us the typical that so many movie goers have come to expect after decades of desesitization by big budgeted no brainers.
I looked to my right, occasionally and noticed that Sam was always smiling as the film churned on. In many ways, FARGO is that rare perfect picture that never takes a wrong step and, while disguised at a thriller, is really something so much more.
The second thing I remember about FARGO is the review I read, just a day after my viewing of the film, by Roger Ebert.
The review was, through most of its paragraphs, a standard review of what could have been any film. However, in the last two blocks of typewritten words, he suddenly jumped into a section of priase on the films atmosphere and the realistic, bizarre homespun simplicity of it’s characters and the elegant, almost expressionistic attitude of the visuals. He was clearly loving the film and displaying his love for it.
But, then, something happened. The critic wrote a final sentence, completely out of left field and totally personal for the reviewer and not for the review. Succinctly, he smathered the words:
“FARGO is that rare film that reminds me why I love movies so much…”
In those simple fourteen words, he summed up, entirely, what Sam and I had been thinking all along as we sat in that dark room and pinching ourselves to see if we were just dreaming all this up in our sleep.
FARGO is, was, and always will be that really kind of flawless gem that make no wrong turns and reminds us all about the joy associated with great movies.
The Coen’s have made many films that have become favorites to audiences from around the world. Many of their films have entered into the venacular and have become part of the language when we talk about true art in this particular medium.
FARGO, though, is still their masterpiece.
Your response to Fargo has great conviction, Dennis, and it’s beautifully written. Moreover, I love the description of your being introduced to it by Sam. Over and above the superb screenplay and performances as capturing the homespun charms of the Upper Midwest, there is the absorbing dilemma of Marge as a cop and as a human.
I was born and raised just up the road from Fargo, in Winnipeg, and I too appreciate how well the Coens have captured the region’s emission of pleasantries. But the Upper Midwest for more than an hour and a bit begins to show a dark side. And the Coens have referred to this not as simply a kind of bad weather but as a horror to the likes of a sensibility intuiting something missing in the land of big skies.
Fargo is a masterpiece, I agree. And its mastery is more complex than the prevailing winds of the Upper Midwest.
A comment for the ages from Dennis, though I’m sure Jim himself will come up with a similar view. Amazing.
Of course Jim’s piece here is spectacular, and fully worthy of such feedback and embellishment. I did indeed see this film with Dennis back in 1996, and it left a lasting impression, one that has always had me thinking it is teh Coens’ finest hour. Today I am basically of teh same belief, though A SERIOUS MAN has come along to complicate things. The bizarre (often black) humor, the Minny accents, the great supporting characters (Macy is a favorite) and the excellent use of setting always made this unique, and the film embodies the Coens spirit and originality at its best. Great and wise use of the film’s masterful dialogue, which probably says way more than any extended analysis.
The dialogue is so rich and delightful, and it’s great to share an enthusiasm for it with you, Sam.
Fargo has to be one of the highlights of the Coens’ career, for sure.
A couple of days ago a friend loaned me the DVD for Barton Fink, and I was struck, not by a compelling narrative momentum, as with Fargo, but by the savaging of Clifford Odets and William Faulkner, the Eraserhead haircut and the affinities with Blue Velvet.
By the way, the format of the text here has been crumpled as we’re seeing it on our machines.
Fargo was one of those films that really got me to love cinema as a late teen. I still think it remains The Coen Brothers best film, just slightly ahead of No Country For old Men and True Grit. You wrote a great piece Jim and I enjoyed reading it.
Thanks, Maurizio.
In the hands of those expatriate Upper Midwesterners, the Coens, this narrative of trouble on the icefields is redolent of very intense personal energies that perform a great introduction to surprises coming across in film as in no other way.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I have to go down as saying I’m in total agreement with Sam and Maurizio on the point that this is the Brothers best film. It resonates with a kind of danger that Jim reminds us of in his repy above and its originality, offbeat but dangerous humor and unforgettable characters have stayed with me long after that initial viewing in the early fall of ’96 with Schmulee.
There is a desolation of both backdrop and character that is unparalleled in film these days. Frankly, many filmmakers have tried to emmulate this movies feel but have all fallen short and I think it’s because the Brothers have made it a point of honing in on this kind of bizarre natural behavior that is commonplace to them in their own personal lives (they themselves seem dangerous and bizarre, the types that are fascinated by shows like COPS and chuckle at strangeness of over-the-top crime). However, what grounds FARGO is this sense of familiarity and the details of the heart that shine through. No other secen in the film confirms this more than Margies meeting with her former high-school friend, Mike Yanaghita, and it’s here in the film that the strangeness of the landscape and the bizarre nature of relationships in a tough terrain bleed through to even the innocent and the pure of heart. It’s a strange little scene but it’s integral to the fabric of the film as it shows the lonliness and the dispair asscoiated with the barrain terrain of North Dakota and hints at why men sometimes go a little stir crazy and take drastic action to get out and away from a place often cut off from the world by tremendous, silencing snow.
I’m often reminded of THE SHINING when I see FARGO again and again. But, where Stanley Kubrick goes way over the top in his motifs towards horror and its grand nature IN FILM, the Coen’s are pushing through that all and really commenting on what it is, the silence, that drives people to that dark place of desperation. Watch9ing William Macy come unwrapped slowly, or Steve Buscemi burting into a powder keg of eruptive reaction, solidifies the theme of lonliness and want in a place that is anything but inviting for more than 5 months a year.
Dennis, your observations really help along a focus on the inimitable range of sensibility in films by the Coens, and particularly in Fargo. They do indeed thrive upon dealing with lives melting down, and the rare, tipsy coming to light of resolution and grace in contexts of social and physical wastelands.
And I have always felt, JIM, that part of the brilliance of the film is the BROTHERS plopping a basically simple protagonist into the middle of the whole melt down.
Macy’s character dreams of something more, the getting of big money so he can turn his lonliness to things and stature rather than running from the region. Buscemi’s character has the idea of runnig in mind, but his running requires more capital to persuade his exile from this wasteland he knows so well.
Marge, is the simpleton and she is fine with her surrounding (simpleton in the sense that she sees things in simple, no nonsense terms). However, while she won’t run she is more than willing to validate her stay in the barren wasteland of snow and social dead-ends by seeing through, seeing beyond the snow and the fields that stretch, seemingly, on into infinity.
“And, it a beautiful day…”
Those are soem of the last words that she utters before the screen fades to black and we are introduced to the savior of her existance (“two more months”). Beautiful days, a baby, and her world, SIMPLY, is as good as she and guys like Mike Yanaghita would have ever hoped for. FARGO is about getting around the bad cards the deck of life has dealt us and sometimes its the simple pleasures of life (buffets, nightcrawlers, ice fishing, coffee before work and eating ARBY’S roast beef and french fries) that really ring most magical.
Notice if you will the serenity in Norm, Margie’s husband in every scene he is in. The man never raises his voice, is totally compliant and seems completely content in painting and fishing and cooking the sheriff her breakfast every morning. Well, is this because Norm is some kind of imbecile????? Is Norm slighly demented or brain damaged.
No at all…
Norm is satisfied. He has found the simple pleasures in life through the simplest things in life. He doesn’t need or desire intense situations simply because he sees past the limitations of his environment, embraces his hermeticaslly sealed world and smiles at the simplicities that make him smile. He loves Marge, he works diligently in painting the best fowl on canvass and when his life gets a little “tense” he cuts a hole in the ice and veggies out with a fishing pole.
FARGO is about accepting fate, seeing past the glitz of temptations and accepting the what is around you…
Sorry about the spelling, my keybord sticks sometimes…
Once again, Dennis, you raise an important line of questioning, specifically about Marge. She does indeed seem a remarkably uncomplicated career girl, a bit more witty than her neighbors and colleagues, but determined to fit comfortably into their world. The episode you so aptly underline, with Mike, barely registers amidst the spotlighting of the killers still at large. But I do regard it as a little word to the wise that Marge is the wild card in this deck. As you say, Norm is satisfied. But although she seems remarkably unscathed by a dirty job that just got a lot dirtier, the trajectory out of her not sterling time in the Twin Cities and into the ugly mysteries of Moose Lake weighs on her and weighs on the viewer. Marge may be hanging in at Brainerd, but the atmosphere her actions have generated are, like a “cold front,” hard to ignore. When she remarks to Gaear, “I just don’t understand it,” she may seem to be occupying a normal motherly register apropos of her kids’ raising hell. But she’s dissatisfied about something else, in a way that will nag at her for a long time.
I TOTALLY DIASAGREE with you Dear JIM…
Marge is only nagged by the idea that something has come into Brainerd and caused a mess and a commotion. Her world is sent spinning the night she receives the telephone call that sends her from her bed and into the cold world of killing. I have never understood the idea that some think Marge is dissatisfied or, as you say, “nagged” by something other than the order of her world being set awry. Sure, Marge is a lot smarter than most but, as clearly defined by her deputy, and most of the others she makes contact with in the film it doesn’t seem too much of a stretch that Sam’s parrots are more apt to solving the mystery than they are.
Marge, as I have summized from numerous viewings, is about organization and straight line thinking, she’s about her insticts as Norm is about the same. When she’s hungry all she thinks about is where the nearest buffet is. When she’s sick all she thinks about is crouching over till her pregnancy pangs subside. The Mike Yanaghita moment is, singularly, Marge’s most telling moment as, like the murders, she’s caught off guard and pushed off the track of forward straight lined thinking. Once her girlfriend tells her the bizarro truth of Mikes current background does Marge slip back onto the forward track of her trajectory and views the incident as another moment in life that she’d probably verbalize with “I just don’t undesrtand it” the same way she boils down to Gaere later on at the conclusion of the film. Marge is very Vanilla. House, norm, Baby on the way, dishes in place, car in the yard and a bag of potato chips as she falls asleep to the mating of the dung beetles on Discovery channel. Life is good, she wants to keep it that way…
Also:
As for Marge being a career girl…
I always thought that Marge’s interest in police work was more from the curiosity of puzzles as wanting to enforce the law. I see Marge as a young student thinking it would be neat to be a detective because, “well, ya know, Ma, Pa, I am good with the Sunday paper jumbles and crosswords…”
Yaa Margie! Yaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!
I agree with Dennis here. I never saw Marge as unsatisfied with her life. She is a good instinctual detective who doesn’t aspire to much more or even advancing in her profession to a big city job. Having a normal stable life with a loving stamp selling husband is her ultimate goal. I think the Coen’s are trying to say that around all sorts of senseless violence and death, normal law abiding people can persevere (somewhat of the opposite message of No Country where good people get sucked up in the ugliness much easier). Dennis perfectly summed up the heart of the film when he writes…”Marge is only nagged by the idea that something has come into Brainerd and caused a mess and a commotion.”
Well, it’s true the darker interpretation definitely has to be teased out of the welter of normality you both accurately recognize. In a case like this, you have to rely upon where you think the film’s energies have been invested. There are specifics pointing in either direction. That volatility is what makes watching films such an adventure.
Another sublime essay here Jim. I think as you present more and more of your pieces on a steady timeline I like how we as readers are able to almost follow your track of viewing. Films you reference overlap from piece to piece no doubt because they are freshest in your mind. Soon the connections you make (however fantastic and insightful) are irrelevant, experiencing the journey of a filmgoer seeing and commenting on films for the first time is. It becomes something quite a bit more, I’m not even sure how you slither from one pick to the next (or one director to the next), but it all seems so curious and interesting to me.
God I hope their THE MAN WHO WASN’T THERE is coming soon. That whole monologue about the cut hair going to the floor and being swept up like the dirt (then the philosophical rumination that follows) … I just perk up thinking about how you’ll cover it.
It’s pointless to get into the sterile game of objective rankings, but I think they’ve made incredibly more personal, philosophical, and conceptual films. At least three in fact, so my tastes would lean towards those. Putting TRUE GIT anywhere near the top 6 is crazy talk though, that film’s a regression in their careers at this point.
It’s an amazing reward to me that you find my burrowing “so curious and interesting.” The twists and turns of masterful movies are a rare endowment, and I know your level of appreciation is keen and extends to other arts.
I’m really going to get focused on the Coens (after pieces on Red Desert and Poetry).
Time will tell my friend. True Grit will slowly be recognized as one of their best when more grass has grown under those cowboy boots. While the general public loves it immensely, hardcore snobbish fans need the slow ticking of a clock to fully realize what a great western True Grit is. I see that Peter “Doniphon” L. loves it and that is as good of an endorsement as any. Meanwhile 9 years later and no one cares about The Man Who Wasn’t There because it’s simply not a great film. I actually like it more than the typical Coen Bros admirer, but must admit it’s filled with flaws (idiotic sci fi plot anyone) which are inescapable. Keep screaming into the wind Mr Uhler. You will only get hoarse and hear nothing but your own echo coming back to smack you in the face lol. We all want to be different and like stuff no one else has any value for. I’m no different….. Heaven’s Gate, The Godz 2, Holy Modal Rounders, The Black Dahlia….. we all do it. Just fess up and swallow the hard truth that The Man Who Wasn’t There is loved only by those one or two real practitioners of crazy talk……..
Yeah, I’m picking MAN because I just want to be different, not because it’s their most challenging, artful, morally/philosophically concise film with there most tender beautiful moments (the leg shaving scene in the beginning is as moving as they’ve ever been), and it’s the most interesting film Deakins has ever shot with them. TRUE GRIT visually amounts to him on auto-pilot; a Western commercial, beautiful shots with little meaning. Nothing about that film is ambiguous or challenging meaning that it won’t age well because there isn’t anything repeated viewings will enhance.
I like MAN because it’s dense and insightful, being different is of little value to me. It’s not a pose I have to think about to strike.
I like THE MAN WHO WASN’T THERE but I’m afraid my positive response to the film was more for its visual dichotomy than it was for the acting and screenplay.
I’ll side with Maurizio that its really only loved by a few and those that do rank it very highly (I only had it midway in my preferential list) is because of the visual grandeur of the thing.
GRIT growing in status over the years? You might be right rabbit. The fact is that the film is impeccably well made and those looking for more of the typical Coen bizarrities and not getting them doesn’t detract from it being a fine movie.
Saying True Grit has no meaning makes me think you fell asleep at the theater lol. While I agree that The Man Who wasn’t There is filled with profound ideas, like This Gun For Hire, I think you fall in love with concepts more than how the movie unfolds and plays out on the screen. The Man Who Wasn’t There is philosophical weighty, but its also flat, partially tedious, poorly acted, and has a very haphazard flow to it. Movies need to be more than intellectually challenging to satisfy….. they also need to work as a piece of cinema and get their ideas out properly and effectively.
A soccer player can go upfield with incredible pace and intelligently survey who he needs to get the ball to. He can then realize with great vision that the perfect pass will lead to a sitter for his striker. The problem is that when he muffs his intended target and puts the ball in the fifth row, his heady attempt leads to a failed result. Based on almost everyone’s opinion of The Man Who Wasn’t There, the Coen’s muffed that particular pass big time. I do love what the film is trying to say, but it is not done with their usual panache and cinematic guile……
Well what can I say guys you do actually have to listen to it and think about what’s being said. If you haven’t done that then I’m spinning my wheels in the mud. If all you want is pretty shots bop over to Hallmark and look at the Silver Wedding Anniversary cards.
Poorly acted? Are we talking about the same film? So I feel asleep during TRUE GRIT, I must assume you were sleeping during the entire MAN and actually missed the entire film. To call that film poorly acted (with all the talent on display there) is to discuss another film. Look for acting, not characterization (characterization in place of acting is a common detriment to some of the Coen’s films).
To me it’s the sign of an oxymoron argument to concede that a film is ‘philosophical weighty’ and also ‘tedious’. I can’t see how anything of important philosophical weight can become tiresome. Oh well. Different strokes for different folks.
If Film is Art it is about concepts. Art should be conceptual, when it’s great it’s entirely conceptual. How’s that for a thesis?
I love what they are saying in The Man Who Wasn’t There Jamie. I just don’t love how it unfolds in that particular film.
And your soccer analogy is poor. In soccer there is one goal and one goal only: to score goals. In art, the goal changes filmmaker to filmmaker and then within that film to film.
I say this as a man that’s soccer a shit ton of class goals in my past rec season! (lol)
opps
“I say this as a man that’s soccer a shit ton of class goals in my past rec season! (lol)”
should read;
I say this as a man that’s scored a shit ton of class goals in my past rec season! (lol)
Tedious because the ideas are not supported by a overall successful film. Also tired of it’s tone and screenplay in key spots. Okay got to go….
I’m sorry but Assassination is way more concerned with Hallmark shots than True Grit is.
THE COEN BROTHERS: A Preferential List
1. FARGO
2. NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
3. THE BIG LEBOWSKI
4. A SIMPLE MAN
5. MILLERS CROSSING
6. BLOOD SIMPLE
7. THE MAN WHO WASN’T THERE
8. BARTON FINK
9. RAISING ARIZONA
10. TRUE GRIT
11. OH BROTHER WHERE ART THOU
12. THE HUDSUCKER PROXY
13. INTOLERABLE CRUELTY
14. THE LADY KILLERS
LOL Dennis! That’s A SERIOUS MAN, not A SIMPLE MAN. But ironically enough I’ve made the same mistake! Ha!
My absolute favorite Coens are Fargo, A Serious Man, No Country For Old Men, O Brother Where Art Thou and Blood Simple.
It’s truly amazing how this thread started slowly today and has finally exploded. It’s a testament to Jim, who has penned an enthralling piece.
Whoops, I didn’t even realize I made the mistake with the title!!!! LOLOLOL
Oh, well, we all know what I meant…
Dennis, I don’t know where to start, you’ve been utterly brilliant on this thread!
Not brilliant by a long shot, I just get pumped when it’s about a film that I consider one of the landmarks of cinema and a film that is a personal favorite. I cannot think of a year since that first viewing that has gone by that I havent revisited FARGO…