Skip to main content

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
(2018)

(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
"You seen 'em, you play 'em."

In the opening and closing chapters, the tales explicitly draw attention to the weights and measures and overriding system in which mere mortals operate, although tonally they’re not remotely bedfellows. Ballad is gleefully flippant and irreverent, even to the point of its protagonist's death, at which point Buster sprouts wings and a harp – in spite of being a mass killer – and ascends to the heavens, singing away just as before (perhaps he's granted admittance through the pearly gates because he has a good voice?) 


As the introductory tale, Ballad might be considered to wrong-foot the audience, so frivolous and playful is it, accompanying singing cowboy Scruggs, who talks to the camera à la another famous Coens cowboy (Sam Elliott in The Big Lewbowski), complete with same kind of delicious verbiage ("Known to some as the San Saba Songbird, I got other handles, nicknames, appellations and cognomens" – he objects to the label misanthrope). Tim Blake Nelson, previously of O Brother, Where Art Thou? makes for delightful casting as the unlikely crack shot gunslinger (I could see Bruce Willis pulling this part off with aplomb, back in his Moonlighting and Bruno days – equally, there's more than a hint of a Three Amigos-era Martin Short). 


Buster's a parody of the fastest draw in the West, maintaining the same cheerful disposition even when weaponless and faced by an armed Clancy Brown in a saloon (the solution is a hilariously bloody visual gag x3), or called to a duel with Brown's brother (Jefferson Mays), during which he shoots off his fingers before using a mirror for a final deadly trick shot. When Buster's subsequently bested in a duel, he’s philosophical ("Can't be top dog forever"), he and the victor engaging in a duet as he flies off; the implication is that, while the rules of the West are readily acknowledged, they’re also superficial and equivocal, such that, once in the hereafter "we can shake our heads over all the meanness in the used to be".


In Ballad at least, then, death is treated as irreverently as its central character; it's almost the classic reductive Coens pose, in fact, where by drawing attention to their "theme" in the text, they eliminate any further discussion of it. It's only as elastic as the story itself. And in this case, the story's a hoot.


Near Algodones
"Pan-shot!" cried the old man.

There's further flippancy in the James Franco-starring second instalment, although it's of a less overtly glib nature. This and the subsequent tale are the most to-the-point in the telling, taking the form of a narrative setup and subsequent punchline, with little room for anything else. Franco's Cowboy robs a bank only to be met by a surprisingly robust response from Stephen Root's Teller, suited up with a series of protective pots and pans: "That pan-covered son of a bitch back at the bank don't hardly fight fair in my opinion".


The joke here is that, having been granted a miraculous escape from the hangman's noose when a Native American war party make short work of the lynch mob – they leave him hanging – he is rescued by a "drover", arrested for rustling and returned to the gallows once more; we assume the dopey Franco must have some rare luck, like Tuco in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly ("First time?" he blithely asks a fellow guilty party), but when the lever is pulled, that's it for him. It's an effective rug pull, in that we're expecting something more; fate is arbitrary and inconsistent. Root's eccentric teller is the highlight of this one, though.


Meal Ticket
"The quality of mercy…"

The bleakest of the sextet, as Liam Neeson’s impresario tours towns with a limbless performing artist (Harry Melling, best known as Dudley Dursley). Aside from his performances, which consist of recitations from the classics, the Bible and the Gettysburg Address to varyingly sized audiences, the proceedings are near silent, so there’s mundane repetition to the (lack of) developments. 


I was looking for a clue to the connection between these two characters, or how Harrison ended up in his state, but none is forthcoming; as such I wondered at the visit to the prostitute, where she asks "He ever had any?" and Neeson replies "Once". Did he mean he "generously" paid for him once, or is there a more sinister story behind it? I suspect, though, it's as simple as it appears, particularly given the title. The impresario has wearied of the burden of Harry, such that when he comes across a mathematical chicken ("The calculating capon! The pecking Pythagorean!") wowing the crowd, the equation is simple; a human life is worth less than that of a chicken, particularly when it fails to bring the punters. So Harry is thrown from a bridge into the river below and the chicken takes his place in the back of the wagon. 


It isn't a particularly nuanced or satisfying tale, exerting the force of a blunt instrument. But it does emphasise a different tack in terms of the morality of the yarns. Where in the first two, outlaws could be regarded as receiving their comeuppance, here, unless there's information withheld from us, an innocent party is coldly dispatched for pecuniary gain, and there's no consequence for the guilty man concerned.


All Gold Canyon
And in all that mighty sweep of earth he saw no sign of man nor the handiwork of man.

Another perspective might be seen to intrude in the fourth tale, based on a Jack London story. For the most part, it plays out with the slow, sure pace of its predecessor, as the inimitable and always authentic Tom Waits – a gold prospector – sets to work in an idyllic valley ("Where are you, Mr Pocket?") There's every indication that the surrounding environment reluctantly endures his presence and returns to its carefree existence when he is gone.


But being one who spends much of his time alone in the wilderness, Waits has built his own codes and superstitions, which may or may not be valid; his decision not to steal an owl's eggs, given how it is giving him the eye (well, bar one: "How high can a bird count, anyway?") appears to earn him a favour later, when, after being shot in the back by a "measly skunk" (Sam Dillon) the owl hoots at a crucial moment, distracting the measly skunk.


One might suggest the prospector is merely the least destructive party, then, but the justice at work here isn’t about how right or wrong the man attempting to steal from the prospector is; it's based on how respectful of the valley the prospector is.


The Gal Who Got Rattled
"Mr Arthur had no idea what he would say to Billy Knapp."

Like the third chapter, this tale – by some distance the longest at forty minutes – features characters undeservingly undone by cruel twists of fate, but succeeds much better thanks to an engrossing plotline that shifts focus several times before its wagon train reaches its destination.


The quote under the introductory illustration for this one is also the final sentence in the story, a clue that the gal of the title (Zoe Kazan’s Alice Longabaugh) may not be making it to the end. In a sense, there is a law at work here, but it’s the one of the West, defined, as with the Neeson story, as dividing the weak from the strong; Alice has no agency of her own in a harsh climate, and with the sudden death of her brother she is at the mercy of the kindness or cruelty of those she encounters.


It's also the brothers' most blackly comic tale, pulling shifts in who we think is the protagonist and who is actually in control of events. It looks as if a tentative romance between Alice and wagon train handler Billy Knapp (Bill Heck) may resolve her problems, but it’s a prospect that doesn't please Billy’s colleague Mr Arthur (Grainger Hines), who will be left in the lurch if Billy settles in Oregon. And then there's her (brother's) dog, President Pierce, taken by Billy to be put down because of his barking, with Alice's blessing. The President manages to escape, and Alice discovers him watching prairie dogs; if not for President Pierce, Alice and Mr Arthur (who notices she’s missing and goes to find her) wouldn't have been attacked by Comanches, and Alice wouldn't have mistakenly thought Mr Arthur had been killed, so following his instructions to shoot herself to avoid capture ("She hadn't oughta to have did it"). 


One might read this as a crafty plot on President Pierce's part; he and Mr Arthur return to the wagon train together, while Billy, who conspired with Alice in the hound's destruction, is left with nothing. Is it coincidental that after both the Coens and Wes Anderson mistreated cats in recent movies (Inside Llewyn Davis and Grand Budapest Hotel respectively) they should make ones this year in which dogs are granted a free pass? Probably. Also of incidental note, the protagonist of Suburbicon was Episcopalian, and so is Zoe Kazan here. I'm sure they just like the sound of the word.


The switch in perspective that comes in this final sequence is deftly achieved. Peripheral character Mr Arthur moves to centre stage and his orderly approach to a deadly situation of Comanches on the warpath, juggled with the humour of them also falling down prairie dog holes, makes for a first-rate action sequence. Kazan delivers a memorable and affecting turn, although President Pierce is ultimately going to get all the sympathy votes. Because he's a dog.


The Mortal Remains
We know him, only at the end.

As with All Gold Canyon, The Mortal Remains offers a non-human perspective on life and mortality. It's also by far the most horror-tinged of the anthology, not in graphic content, but thematically. Indeed, I was reminded of the framing story to Vault of Horror (1973) – SPOILERS for it in the rest of this paragraph – in which five strangers find themselves in a gentlemen's club upon disembarking a lift; there's no way back into the lift, so they tell each other tales while waiting for help; when the lift door finally opens, there's a graveyard on the other side, into which they disappear as they exit (they're damned souls required to tell the story of their evil deeds for all eternity).


The Mortal Remains isn't quite as elaborate in purpose, but it's essentially a similar setup, of a party conveyed to hell/the afterlife, in this case a stagecoach consisting of Tyne Daly's proper Christian Mrs Betjamin, Saul Rubinek's cheeky Frenchman René, Chelchie Ross' Trapper and Brendan Gleeson and Jonjo O’Neill's reapers (which the Trapper takes to mean bounty hunters on account of the body on the roof).


There isn't much more to it that that. Rubinek was magnificent in a magnificent western, of course (Unforgiven) and following her outrage at the Trapper's assertion that "People are like ferrets", René has mischievous fun suggesting Mrs Betjamin’s clearly demarcated account of good and evil may require further contemplation on her part, and perhaps she should consider what her husband gets up to on all those lonely business trips ("Take it easy. He's just a Frenchman!" exclaims Gleeson when she starts hitting René). Gleeson and O’Neill make a good double act ("We're a duo, a tandem, a team"), and there are allusions to the purposeless of the whole shebang, as with the opener ("I do like looking into their eyes as they try to make sense of it… All of it").


It's a neatly told tale then, and likably performed, but you could hardly argue that it's particularly original.


Overall:

Has an anthology ever been made that wasn't uneven (well, there are probably some that are outright dire, but I'll exclude them for the sake of looking for positives)? The Ballad of Buster Scruggs is at its weakest engaging in a singular, extended sick punchline (Meal Ticket) and at its best when allowing the brothers to unleash their most unfettered comedic sensibilities (Scruggs) or giving themselves the time to let a tale breathe with additional melancholic complexion (The Gal Who Got Rattled). I doubt that this will be many people's favourite Coen Brothers movie – like the previous Hail Caesar! there’s a sense they know they're making something that's largely inessential, even unto themselves – but it still provides an effective primer for their range and versatility.



The tales in descending order of ranking:

The Gal Who Got Rattled
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs
All Gold Canyon
The Mortal Remains
Near Algodones
Meal Ticket

Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

  1. All Gold Canyon was the best one for me. Also, the happiest one. That's not the reason why it was the best one for me, but it still was great.

    ReplyDelete
  2. great article, thank you.
    in “the gal”, when you say that billy may have conspired with alice to get rid of the dog, i’m not sure the moral position is as cut&dried as that.
    we’re left with the ambiguous possibility that billy had a last-minute wobble and may have let PP run away, claiming on his return to be a poor shot. just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, that's just as valid a reading. Thanks!

      Delete
  3. It's "all the meanness in the used to be" not "meaninglessness". I'm not sure either why Buster is among the saved, but then all the stories are ambiguous the more you look at them. Still it seems to me that they're supposed to add up to a vision of life, and that as a whole this is probably the most ambitious thing the Coens have done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's "all the meanness in the used to be" not "meaninglessness" – thanks Jake, duly amended.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

He made me look the wrong way and I cut off my hand. He could make you look the wrong way and you could lose your whole head.

Moonstruck (1987)
(SPOILERS) Moonstruck has the dubious honour of making it to the ninth spot in Premiere magazine’s 2006 list of the 20 Most Overrated Movies of all Time. There are certainly some valid entries (number one is, however, absurd), but I’m not sure that, despite its box office success and Oscar recognition, the picture has a sufficient profile to be labelled with that adjective. It’s a likeable, lightweight romantic comedy that can boast idiosyncratic casting in a key role, but it simply doesn’t endure quotably or as a classic couple matchup the way the titans of the genre (Annie Hall, When Harry Met Sally) do. Even its magical motif is rather feeble.

Move away from the jams.

Aladdin (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was never overly enamoured by the early ‘90s renaissance of Disney animation, so the raves over Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin left me fairly unphased. On the plus side, that means I came to this live action version fairly fresh (prince); not quite a whole new world but sufficiently unversed in the legend to appreciate it as its own thing. And for the most part, Aladdin can be considered a moderate success. There may not be a whole lot of competition for that crown (I’d give the prize to Pete’s Dragon, except that it was always part-live action), but this one sits fairly comfortably in the lead.

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

Bleach smells like bleach.

Million Dollar Baby (2004)
(SPOILERS) I’d like to be able to say it was beyond me how Clint’s misery-porn fest hoodwinked critics and the Academy alike, leading to his second Best Picture and Director double Oscar win. Such feting would naturally lead you to assume Million Dollar Baby was in the same league as Unforgiven, when it really has more in common with The Mule, only the latter is likeably lightweight and nonchalant in its aspirations. This picture has buckled beneath the burden of self-appointed weighty themes and profound musings, which only serve to highlight how crass and manipulative it is.

I’d kill you too, Keanu. I’d kill you just for fun, even if I didn’t have to.

Always Be My Maybe (2019)
(SPOILERS) The pun-tastic title of this Netflix romcom is a fair indication of its affably undemanding attributes. An unapologetic riff on When Harry Met Sally, wherein childhood friends rather than college attendees finally agree the best thing to be is together, it’s resolutely determined to cover no new ground, all the way through to its positive compromise finale. That’s never a barrier to a good romcom, though – at their best, their charm is down to ploughing familiar furrows. Always Be My Maybe’s problem is that, decent comedy performers though the two leads may be – and co-writers with Michael Golamco – you don’t really care whether they get together or not. Which isn’t like When Harry Met Sally at all.

You're reading a comic book? What are you, retarded?

Watchmen: The Ultimate Cut (2009)
(SPOILERS) It’s a decade since the holy grail of comic books finally fought through decades of development hell to land on the big screen, via Zach Snyder’s faithful but not faithful enough for the devoted adaptation. Many then held the director’s skills with a much more open mind than they do now – following the ravages he has inflicted on the DCEU – coming as he was off the back of the well-received 300. Many subsequently held that his Watchmen, while visually impressive, had entirely missed the point (not least in some of its stylistic and aesthetic choices). I wouldn’t go that far – indeed, for a director whose bombastic approach is often only a few notches down from Michael Bay (who was, alarmingly, also considered to direct at one point), there are sequences in Watchmen that show tremendous sensitivity – but it’s certainly the case that, even or especially in its Ultimate Cut form and for all the furore the change to the end of the story provoked,…

You're always sorry, Charles, and there's always a speech, but nobody cares anymore.

X-Men: Dark Phoenix (2019)
(SPOILERS) To credit its Rotten Tomatoes score (22%), you’d think X-Men: Dark Phoenix was a travesty that besmirched the name of all good and decent (read: MCU proper) superhero movies, or even last week’s underwhelming creature feature (Godzilla: King of Monsters has somehow reached 40%, despite being a lesser beast in every respect). Is the movie’s fate a self-fulfilling prophecy, what with delayed release dates and extensively reported reshoots? Were critics castigating a fait accompli turkey without giving it a chance? That would be presupposing they’re all sheep, though, and in fairness, other supposed write-offs havecome back from such a brink in the past (World War Z). Whatever the feelings of the majority, Dark Phoenix is actually a mostly okay (twelfth) instalment in the X-franchise – it’s exactly what you’d expect from an X-Men movie at this point, one without any real mojo left and a variable cast struggling to pull its weight. The third act is a bi…

They went out of business, because they were too good.

School for Scoundrels (1960)
(SPOILERS) Possibly the pinnacle of Terry-Thomas’ bounder persona, and certainly the one where it’s put to best caddish use, as he gives eternally feckless mug Ian Carmichael a thorough lesson in one-upmanship, only for the latter to turn the tables when he finds himself a tutor. School for Scoundrels is beautifully written (by an uncredited Peter Ustinov and Frank Tarloff), filled with clever set pieces, a fine supporting cast and a really very pretty object of the competing chaps’ affection (Janette Scott), but it’s Terry-Thomas who is the glue that binds this together. And, while I couldn’t say for sure, this might have the highest “Hard cheese” count of any of his films.

Based on Stephen Potter’s 1947’s humorous self-help bestseller (and subsequent series of -manship books) The Theory and Practice of Gamesmanship (or The Art of Winning Games without Actually Cheating), which suggested ungentlemanly methods for besting an opponent in any given field, gam…

I should have mailed it to the Marx Brothers.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
When your hero(es) ride off into the sunset at the end of a film, it’s usually a pretty clear indication that a line is being drawn under their adventures. Sure, rumours surfaced during the ‘90s of various prospective screenplays for a fourth outing for the whip-cracking archeologist. But I’m dubious anyone really expected it to happen. There seemed to be a natural finality to Last Crusade that made the announcement of his 2007 return nostalgically welcome but otherwise unwarranted. That it turned out so tepid merely seemed like confirmation of what we already knew; Indy’s time was past.