Blood Simple

Starring: John Getz, Frances McDormand, Dan Hedaya, M. Emmet Walsh, Samm-Art Williams, Deborah Neumann, Holly Hunter (voice)(uncredited)
Directed by: Joel Coen, Ethan Coen (uncredited)
Rating: R
Genre: Drama, Thriller
1984

Times Seen:
Tim: 1

Summary: A jealous husband (Dan Hedaya) hires a shady private investigator (M. Emmet Walsh) to kill his wife (Frances McDormand) and her lover (John Getz).

Review:

Tim: Blood Simple is a noteworthy film for multiple reasons- chiefly, it's the directorial debut of Joel and Ethan Coen. It also marks the acting debut of Frances McDormand, and it launched the career of Barry Sonnenfeld. This is a movie that's absolutely worth seeing for those reasons. I really wanted to like it, but I struggled. This might be a reflection of how I'm not nearly as enamored with the Coens as much of the world. This is a decent movie- it has some big strengths, but it has "first film" drawbacks as well. In the end, it got awfully close to good, but just misses it.

It was pretty easy to write the summary, but the movie takes its time letting the story unfold. The Coens are certainly willing to let this film simmer. Their reluctance to rush is one of the stronger traits of this film. It gives the film an atmospheric quality and it makes you think the Coens were more confident in their skills than they probably were. For its flaws (which I'll get to), this is still a movie from competent filmmakers.

The story is fine. I can't say I really cared about any of the characters, but I recognize that flawed, complex characters are what the Coens deal in. The characters might not be overly memorable, but the Coens focus more of their energy on the relationships between them. That's a strong instinct and it serves the movie well, although they aren't explored deeply enough. I think in subsequent years, the Coens would get better at examining these kinds of relationships and mining them for drama. Here, it's still very early career and the story is never as powerful as it could have been.

The cast is a bit hit-or-miss. John Getz felt miscast in the lead role. He's a wooden actor and didn't convey nearly enough emotion. His wide opened, blank stare just didn't do it for me. This movie would have been significantly better with a strong actor in this role. It's one of the big issues here. It was fun seeing Frances McDormand making her acting debut here. She would obviously go on to much acclaim, but I have to admit I've never been overly fond of her. There's something about her that I can't connect with. She has talent, but she's never been one of my favorites. She mumbles her words a bit too much here and hasn't figured out how to command our attention on screen. However, it's a performance that is solid enough that it's not surprising she would go on to a bigger career.

The supporting cast is more of the "hit" portion. First off, you have the great M. Emmet Walsh in a wonderfully sleazy, larger-than-life role. Walsh attacks this role and hits the right notes- he's charismatic, yet has this underlying hostility that speaks of danger and immorality. It's a wonderful performance, the best of the film. I loved that Walsh got to play this role and that he played it so well. Dan Hedaya is especially strong as well. This role plays squarely into his wheelhouse, but you can't fault it for positioning Hedaya where he's most effective. You absolutely dislike his character, but you applaud him for bringing such a sordid character to life. I wish the main characters were as good as the supporting ones- you'd have a much better movie.

I had some issues with the story. You can definitely see some of the Coens' strengths emerge here, but it felt like their talent was still raw and unpolished. The story is both simple and surprisingly complicated. However, it felt like multiple aspects of the movie didn't quite click. Hedaya's characters' fate is a bit farfetched. It's confusing and it doesn't fully make sense. It's one aspect of the film that asks a lot of the audience. Even worse, later on there's a worthless dream sequence that doesn't hold up to scrutiny and detracts from the film more than it adds. There's also aspects of the story that feel like they're not fully realized. There's this super cool moment with a lighter than makes you sit up. However, not much happens after that. You think it will result in this incredible moment, but the moment never comes. The conclusion of the film is cool, but the pace isn't quite where it should be.

As a whole, I had mixed emotions about Blood Simple. It's worth seeing because it's an important movie for what it meant to so much of the cast and the big careers they would go on to have. As a film, though, it's obviously that of early-career writer/directors. I thought it was a decent movie. It didn't do enough to really impress me, but it did show quite a few flashes of promise. As a whole, it's worth seeing, but it's probably remembered more fondly than it should be.

Rating 1-10
Tim's Rating: 6.5



If You Enjoyed This Movie, We Recommend: Raising Arizona, Miller's Crossing