Fargo's brilliance lies not only with its way of thrilling its audience but also adding a slight comical effect to quite a serious number of events. 'Jerry' (main character) has more to him than what first meets the eye, when we first meet him he seems an innocent but in the first dialogue sequence this is reversed and consequently plays out the main objective of the film. Jerry money problems are affecting him and he comes up with cunning plan to get the money. He pays two corrupt gangsters to kidnap his wife in which he hopes to get part of the ransom for her with his father rich in law paying for her daughter to be released. This subsequently doesn't go to plan and blood is shed.

I believed Fargo's dark aspects and comical effects to be very enjoyable and a worth while watch. Its integrity to entertain and thrill is somewhat mystifying and shows really what the Coens are capable of.

When choosing or talking about films by the Coen brothers, The Hudsucker Proxy would not be an obvious choice to make. However, this film is a witty, satire take on corporate American businesses and American films made in the 1950s.

The story takes on a typical image, another college graduate from another town in the middle of America, who moves to New York City to become successful and to gain everything he dreams of. This man goes by the name of Norville Barnes, from Muncie, Indiana. He lands himself a job as a simple mailroom clerk at 'Hudsucker Industries', however, when the owner jumps out of the window and kills himself things start to change dramatically. The company needs a new president, so Norville Barnes is appointed, taking on the duty of the imbecile that owns the company, so the other board representatives can wait till stocks go to an all-time low and they can therefore be richer than ever before.

But then there's the newspaper reporter, who sees through this plan and through luck and her simple womanly attributes she is able to sneak her way into the company and get an inside view on things, at the same time publishing her findings in the newspaper she works for, witnessing a rocky road to success for Norville Barnes and Hudsucker Industries.

There isn't anything too complex in this Coen brothers film, the camerawork is pretty simple and the emphasis is on the characters and the acting themselves. The story is a witty one, and you can tell that the Coen brothers are simply mocking 1950s America, such as the fast talking and rapid hand movements- a necessity to 1950s acting. The whole film represents life at this time, the costumes and the settings are very accurate, especially the characters and the views they portray.

The characters have been established very clearly, you feel sympathetic for Norville Barnes and his idiotic mind and the character of Sidney Mussburger is just simply cold throughout and you realise that there is nothing nice about the man.

Overall I really enjoyed 'The Hudsucker Proxy', for it's witty take on 1950s American business and acting and of course the talented skills of John and Ethan Coen to be able to make a farce that isn't totally ridiculous.

One of The Coen Brothers latest film came to our screens the Coen's have adapted the crime novel by Cormac McCarthy for the big screen with breathtaking look into the Crime Thriller novel. Starring Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem and Josh Brolin. The ostensible hero is Llewellyn Moss (Brolin), a Vietnam vet who stumbles across the aftermath of a drug deal gone wrong while hunting antelope in Texas. He takes a suitcase stuffed with $2 million in cash, Moss goes on the run. He realize that the suitcase is fitted with a tracking device. Following its signal is hitman Anton Chigurh (Bardem) armed with a cattle stun gun (which fires compressed air which he uses to kill his victims), Bardem's character has a menacingly calm demeanour which is portrayed very well in his scenes especially duing the scene with the gas station owner.

"O Brother, Where Art Thou?", a spin on Homer's tale of the Odyssey, is full of humour and wit. The film, made by the Coen brothers ('No Country for Old Men' ), gives a great reinterpretation of Homer's Odyssey, setting it in the Southern States of North America during the Mississippi State Elections during the depression. George Clooney gives a great performance as the central character Everett McGill (Odysseus in the Odyssey), one of three weird and eccentric characters that escape from a chain gang and set off home... Clooney plays up the character but does not overdo it. Released in 2000, the film has amazing music and cinematic shots, and lots of humour, which hold the viewer's attention for the whole film. Nominated for two Oscars, it is a thoroughly satisfying but subtle film for all the family.

I have chosen to review Big Lebowski as I feel it is the polar opposite of the Coen Bros spectrum in filmmaking. Whilst No Country presents a much darker, sinister side of their work, Lebowski has a lighter, more psychedelic feel. The plot concerns slacker Jeffrey Lebowski, played to perfection by Jeff Bridges amidst a host of Coen Bros. usuals, such as John Goodman, John Turturro, Steve Buscemi, etc. The film chronicals the kidnapping of another Jeffrey Lebowski's wife and the slacker Lebowski attempting to retrieve ransom money and the wife. Whilst the plot spews into many different tangents, the focus here is obviously on character and mood. It is essential a crime comedy of the highest accolade and is sprinkled with the Coens signature style. All the stars create character unique to the film and this is what serves the film's edge and flair. Unconcerned with following a mesh created by other proteges to the genre, they constantly leapfrog between genres and styles, with Crime, nostalgia, noir, dream sequences and comedy all seemlessly branching off one another. I think the ten year gap between this and No Country measures a huge difference in their style and growth as a directing team

I watched No country for old men by the Coen brothers, at the Picture House, with my friend. The reason I was drawn to watching this film was that I had heard a lot about it. My boss had seen it in Australia before it's UK opening, he said that he was put of by the trailer but was pleasantly surprised when he went to see it. A friend had also told me that it had been very well received in America. I liked the fact that it had tried to be different by using no non-diegetic sound, this did not occur to me during the film but it was later when I was told it, that I realised. I felt that having no music made very little difference, this aspect of the film must have been hard to sell as often music can add greatly to a film. The script was extremely well written with Tommy Lee Jones character talking in a very cool and smooth way, one problem with the dialogue I found was that because they were talking in strong Texan accents it was sometimes quite difficult to understand what they were saying. I feel that it is a film well worth watching twice as to truly understand everything. The character of the serial killer was very haunting and demonic, his voice was perfect for the character and his ominous gas canister was a nice take on a murderers tool. Overall I enjoyed the film very much and will definitely consider watching it again.

I found a link about the directors - the Coen brothers.

Considering a largely dry run of films by the Coens recently as they dip themselves into genres unknown, such as Intolerable Cruelty and The Ladykillers, I thought that No Country was not only a revitalising return to form, but far more depth and character than any of their work yet.

By keeping the plot simple, the Coens allow themselves a lot of room to develop mood, character, setting and set pieces. Everything entertwines so perfectly, with the cat-and-mouse of Llewelyn Moss and Anton Chirgurh (Played to perfection by Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem) becoming the story's centre, with dozens of sub-plots which dig deeper into the themes of the films. It feels like the Coens do not indulge in anything too much. No big money shots, no expensive actors, everything in its right place and making perfect sense.

Throughout the film, I felt completely engrossed in what was happening yet had plenty to think about after the film has ended. I would recommend this to any self respecting movie-goer who wants a film that takes them by surprise.