Miller's Crossing

1990 gangsta movie

Rating: 19/20

Plot: A movie about hats. Or, the story of a guy playing chess with himself. Or, a gangster Yojimbo. Take your pick, but I think it's a movie about hats.

"There's nothing more foolish than a man chasing his hat."

Coen brother movies, like classical music pieces I've never heard before. I'll hear something new to my ears; think about how it's always been around before, always been as beautiful as it is, and will stick around forever; and think about the genius that goes into the creation. The Coens are like virtuoso musicians. And they're contemporary, of course, making things in the present tense that have obviously not "always been around before," but that's how you know you're watching a masterpiece. This movie's considerably younger than I am, but it feels like it belongs in the history of movies, canonical and classic. This, like a lot of Coen Brother movies, will last forever. They're playing a music that is familiar, one that definitely fits snuggly in a genre, but it's a piece of music that will last forever because they hit all the right notes perfectly.

The right notes: That hat blowing through the woods in what we later learn is a dream sequence; Marica Gay Harden's Verna's open blouse; Leo's squeaking shoes; the slang, even when a "wart on his fanny" idiom doesn't register with one character; the looks of a dog and a little kid in a flat cap at a dead guy; dead guy's drooping toupee; the colors of that ladies room; Verna's right hook and the shake of her rump as she walks out of that room; the crack of a mirror; the way Turturro is dwarfed by the chair he sits in when we first meet his character; a fat kid's sailor outfit, an outfit he has to be squeezed into; Mike Starr, Kenny from Ed, and his size and the patience demanded as he prepares for a pounding; rumpus choreography; a match lit on a cop's badge; curtain transition; curtain transition again, majestically; gagging accompanied by "Oh, Danny Boy;" walks up flights of stairs in unison; smoke from a Tommy gun; dialogue with dialogue--shifts from Tommy to Leo during the revelation about Verna; an elongated scream that could very easily be the new--female--Wilhelm; a slowly-passing street car; blue-gray smoke; the sound of a stretching leather glove; a sly silver gun on a tiny table; bruised faces and the groaning of trees; a pair of nearly identical Italians sitting on the mayor's couch; Sal's shaving nicks; another hat on the stairs and an old lady concerned about her cats.

I'd always had a little trouble keeping up with gangster plots and characters until I realized they're a lot like samurai movies. This one is a lot like Yojimbo or, if you're a cowboy, A Fistful of Dollars. The plot's complex because you don't get the internal monologue of these characters and their motivations are often difficult. The Coens borrow from two Hammett novels and, of course, The Godfather since you really can't make a gangster movie since The Godfather without borrowing from The Godfather. This is the one that led to some writer's block which led to Barton Fink which made me give this a bonus point because I love Barton Fink so much. The characters are well-defined and brilliantly acted. You could always do worse than starting a movie with Jon Polito--that mustache, the way he smacks his lips as he prattles on about the ethics of fixed fights, establishing a sort-of theme right from the get-go. Finney's Leo is a great character, too, a boss so flimsy beneath his tough exterior that it almost seems like he's already bullet riddled. "Johnny, you're exactly as big as I let you be and no bigger" makes him Godfather-esque, but that's just the brawn talking. But Finney can punch, and Leo can shoot, evidenced by his escape from his assassination with one of the most amazing death scenes of all time, all machine gun chatter and absurd fire and jerking around. Byrne's Tom Reagan is a suitable Irish Eastwood/Mifune, foreshadowing with his "When I've raised hell, you'll know it," and almost exactly as smart as he thinks he is. I'm not sure Harden's worth a war, but she's really good here, too. Or maybe she is worth a war. She can tug on a cigarette, and as I mentioned, I did watch her walk out of that restroom. Eddie Dane seems like a composite of a bunch of other characters; J.E. Freeman plays him like a cliche, but it works, and his death is another absolutely ridiculous scene where the character's surrounded by antlers and a gorilla screams madly. Mike Starr's great although having him sing at the titular crossing wasn't the best move, and Tic-Tac (Al Mancini) is awesome, especially with his laughter during "hanky time." But check out John Turturro! Man, I love that performance! There's a little Jesus in his walk at one point, and he manages to create the most pitiful soul that I think you're ever likely to see on the screen during the scene at Miller's Crossing at the center of this movie. It's powerful stuff. I love these fragile characters in their tough-guy hats, and I love the story they find themselves in.

11 comments:

  1. Amazing review! You're absolutely right comparing the Cohens to musical composition (that "Jesus walk" analogy you gave to Turturro was brilliant as well). I do believe it is art to them, not just film making. They have a way at perfecting EVERYTHING that makes up what a film is. Of course, they admittingly have an entire team they rely on to help make the voodoo they do so well. Having said that, it always starts with a script and a story, and that's all them. Also, as I understand it, they try to do most of their own casting too.

    I'm no Cohens connoisseur, but I am an admirer. Your review brings up the most curious details within the film, it's as if I've watched it. That scene where Albert Finney blazes a tommy gun to the tune of Danny Boy is seriously one of the most beautifully bad assed action sequences I've ever seen. It makes "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" look like a kindergartner used poop for his finger painting and showed it to mommy. Memorable review for a remarkable film.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I keep forgetting that I'm not Cat Wall...sorry

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for the kind words, Cat Wall! Not a very nice thing to say about 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon' though. It's better than a poop fingerpainting.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Don't get me wrong: Crouching Tiger is an awesome flick! The story is good and the visuals are breathtaking. However, I don't think they always play hand-in-hand. In some parts the hyped up cinematography is just there. Is cool to look at, but it's not propelling anything else along (characterization, plot, etc). This is where Miller's Crossing kicks Crouching Tiger's ass. When I watch Crouching Tiger (and I've seen it several times), I do love what I see on the screen, but it's all a little two dimensional when the movie leaves me. I just sit and say, "man, that's cool what they did there." Miller's Crossing uses what we see on the screen not just as photo-art, but to help get an insight on what the characters are feeling, what mood/tone of the scene is, what their world is like. It's three dimensional. After I watched Miller's Crossing, I said, "I don't know how that scene could have been shot any differently." It's not just cool graphics, it's perfect film making.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I prefer the scene we're talking about in 'Miller's Crossing' aesthetically to the action in 'Crouching Tiger,' but I'm not sure I agree with your 2D vs. 3D argument. The visuals in 'Crouching Tiger' create this kind of artificial beauty. The "Danny Boy" seen in 'Miller's Crossing' is very artificial, too, but more designed to induce a chuckle, isn't it? I'm not sure that much flamboyance is really NEEDED in the movie, especially to show you anything about Finney's character, but its existence is the sort of thing that gives 'Miller's Crossing' (and really all Coen movies) that special flavor and personal stamp. I think the action scenes in 'Crouching Tiger' help give that movie its personality, too, although that type of wire-fu action had been used for a couple decades.

    I think I see it more as the Coens and Ang Lee making different kinds of poetry on screen. It's all poetry which is about the most non-essential thing humans have ever made, but without the poetry of these movies, the movies would be as flat as flat can be.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yeah, the Albert Finney/tommy gun scene does have a programmed laugh there at the end, so I see you there. And, yes, I admit that Crouching Tiger has so much going for it (which is why I used it for comparison). But, I think I'll use your own words to help me out: "the visuals in Crouching Tiger create [an] artificial beauty." I think that's about where it ended for me. It all looked like something I'd use as the wallpaper for my desktop in the late 90s. In all honesty, I think the story of Crouching Tiger is more long-lasting than its visuals. The Cohens use cinematography as a tool to help conjure their narrative. I'm not as certain that the writer, directer, cinematographer, and producer were not as congealed on Crouching Tiger. That's another pro that the Cohens have going for them: they're a do-it-yourself team, in a sense. It comes from their brains, is plotted down to script by their hands, and is realized on their movie sets. I think that kind of fluidity is noticeable. I'm a fan of Ang Lee, too (though, not as much as the Cohen bros). He kicks ass in all he does (I actually liked Face/Off when I first saw it). I don't know, I'm running out of fuel for this fire. Perhaps there wasn't enough there to begin with.

    I just couldn't agree with you more when you point out all of the poignant details in that movie. The autumn leaves of Miller's Crossing, the slicked back hair on Leo, the dankness of the hallway that John Turturro is shot in. It's so noticeably purposeful.

    And, you're right again when you plug these films as poetry. The both have an artistry and a specific point of view. However, when it comes to your musical analogy, Ang Lee is a little more "one-note" when it comes to the music he's playing on-screen.

    You think I got a hard-on for this movie, don't get me started on Goodfellas...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ang Lee didn't do Face/Off. That was John Woo. I love that ridiculous movie.

    http://shane-movies.blogspot.com/2011/07/summer-of-nicolas-cage-movie-15-faceoff.html

    Ang Lee is "one-note" in 'Crouching Tiger'? I guess you're right. I haven't seen that movie in a really long time and don't plan on seeing it in the near future actually because it's a little long and boring. But for that type of story, you don't need a lot of notes, do you? The tone of that one is just about right, isn't it?

    I think the Coens play a lot of notes in 'Miller's Crossing' but it all blends together to create something consistent. But since their films are capable of being so funny and so tragic and so exciting and so damn cool all simultaneously...maybe that's what you mean? They've got wiggle room within whatever genre they're working in. Ang Lee is working a little more predictably, sort of sticking with the rules in that genre? Does that make any sense?

    Ang Lee directed that first Incredible Hulk reboot and a gay cowboy movie. So he dabbles in other genres like the Coens. I usually think what he's doing is pretty boring though.

    What did you think of the movie 'Barton Fink'?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Eeek...I mixed up Ang Lee with Jon Woo? ... ... Well now I just feel like a racist.

    Ok, I still like Face/Off, but it makes way more sense now knowing that it was directed by Jon Woo. Especially his stylizing (the doves, the slow-mo, the blazing guns, and flying empty shell casings). With Ang Lee,to be honest, I thought Brokeback Mountain was one of the more powerful movies I'd seen in a long time. The story was completely original, the soundtrack was tasteful, and the acting was superb (though, the dry butt sex did warp my naivety). I'm not one for a love story, but I remember being highly invested in those characters by the end, and actually got kinda choked up...either that, or I was dry heaving from the dry butt sex...I can't remember.

    So, on to Barton Fink. That was the first movie I watched and physically waited to see who directed it. I was young (probably 12-13), and didn't know much about who helmed a movie and what kinds of different movies there were. I didn't understand genre. I just knew I like something or didn't like it. Barton Fink was a movie I started half way through on HBO one night and thought it was so bizarre, I had to watch the rest. I looked up the Cohen Brothers and found out they had done a couple of other movies I'd already seen (Raising Arizona and The Hudsucker Proxy). Fargo had just come out and I was just getting into movies and actors, so I checked that one out too (loved it). So, I rewatched Barton Fink from the beginning with an understanding of how the Cohens approach a story. There are unexpected delights. There's complete originality. They must have a way of directing actors that make it possible for those actors to complete gel into whatever world is being displayed. I remember watching Barton Fink and thinking, 'God, I've seen that actor in another movie and he's completely different! Now, some of that is the actor's ability to, ya know, act. But, I came to the opinion after watching Barton Fink that the Cohens have a talent of immersing the actors; creating a unique world filled with one-of-a-kind characters. For example, John Goodman (the darling of the Cohens) is on his game throughout that entire movie. I'd obviously seen him be over the top in Rosanne and Raising Arizona. But, he's so subdued in the first part of that movie; almost child-like. It was the first time I pitied a character he played. Another character I loved was played by Michael Lerner (who was nominated for best supporting actor that year because of this film). I'd seen him as the antagonist in Harlem Nights. It that he played a calm, cold, calculating, methodical, sound sociopath. Lerner pulls a 180 and plays a hyped-up, shoot from the hip, fast-talking, fidgety, laughable character in Barton Fink. Brilliant performances throughout. Jon Turturro's face and expressions throughout the whole movie should have gotten him an Oscar nod alone.

    The story took me another viewing (now 2 1/2) to completely appreciate. It's a little numbing; almost like writer's block is being given to the audience and turned into "viewer's block." Believe it or not, it's my 3rd favorite Cohen Bros movie (1. Big Lebowski, 2. Fargo). I only get excited about Miller's Crossing because of my passion for gangster flicks and the film noir genre. I think, cinematically, Barton Fink is a spark of genius. The only other person who attempts those kinds of movies is Charlie Kaufman.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 'Barton Fink' has a special place in my heart because it was the first "weird" movie that I really liked. That and 'Eraserhead' probably. Maybe there were others, but surrealism kind of starts right there for me. Those two were movies that made me appreciate when the artists put their unique stamps on their work.

    I like what you said about "viewer's block" there...makes perfect sense. The performances are always good. Turturro, I think, is so underrated. He is just so good in anything he does. Versatile, too. Specifically with the Coen brothers' movies...it seems they're always able to get a little something extra from their actors. A lot of it is probably the writing. You give an actor great dialogue and characterization, and they'll take advantage of the opportunity. There's got to be something going on though because they get phenomenal performances from their actors in every single movie. Nicolas Cage, Turturro, Bridges, Buscemi multiple times, Goodman as you mentioned, McDormand, Macy...the list could just go on and on.

    http://shane-movies.blogspot.com/2012/12/barton-fink.html

    In case you're interested...

    I know I made a Coen list in a comment somewhere on this blog. I can't find it, but it seems like I give all their movies a 19/20 which seems pretty lame.

    'Brokeback'...I only sort of liked that movie. I forget if it's on this blog or not. I've only seen it the one time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Oh, I found it. Here's how I ranked them.

    1) Lebowski 20/20
    2) Fargo 19/20
    3) Barton Fink 18/20
    4) No Country for Old Men 18/20
    5) O Brother 18/20
    6) Raising Arizona 17/20
    7) Miller's Crossing 17/20
    8) Hudsucker Proxy 16/20
    9) Burn After Reading 14/20
    10) Blood Simple 14/20
    11) The Man Who Wasn't There 13/20
    12) The Ladykillers 12/20
    13) Intolerable Cruelty 12/20

    That's kind of embarrassing though because I saw 'Man,' 'Blood Simple,' and obviously 'Miller's Crossing' since then and rated them all higher. Some of them went WAY up. So inconsistent! 'Man Who Wasn't There' would get a 17/20. So would 'Blood Simple' actually. Fink bumped up to a 19/20. I hadn't seen 'A Serious Man' yet which is another 17/20. There's a heated debate about that one when I wrote about it. And 'True Grit' hadn't been made yet. That's a 16/20.

    But these number ratings are really pretty stupid, and I wish I didn't even use them. I'm sure the others ('Ladykillers,' 'Cruelty,' 'Burn After Reading') would go up if I saw them again.

    Haven't seen the new one about the folksinger yet.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I liked this much more than I thought I would. It is tight, dark, intense, and filled with great performances. A 17.

    ReplyDelete