| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From director J.J. Abrams comes the next installment in the Star Trek saga, Star Trek Into Darkness. See it at Cinemark theaters now and pre-order on Blu-ray, 3D Blu-ray, DVD, and the Exclusive Starfleet Phaser Gift Set. Shop Star Trek Into Darkness and more in the Star Trek Store. Learn more |
Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
Joel and Ethan Coen make movies like nobody else's, but even by their standards A Serious Man is in a class by itself: a complete original that's one of the brothers' best. After a deeply weird Yiddish folk-tale prologue set in 19th-century Poland (and framed in the old 1.33:1 format), the picture shifts to the region and era of the Coens' own upbringing, a Minneapolis suburb in 1967. Larry Gopnik (a superbly concentrated portrait in comic anguish by Michael Stuhlbarg) is a college physics prof facing a welter of crises and distractions: review by the tenure committee, son Danny's bar mitzvah, a cryptic-verging-on-sinister protest from a Korean-American student, the alienation of wife Judith's affections by widower Sy Ableman, the ongoing encroachment of brother Arthur and his sebaceous cyst--and don't even mention the proto-Nazi who lives next door. All these, and more, form a screenplay of such intricacy that the blackly comic tensions of one shaggy-dog narrative strand leap synapse-like to another; the movie becomes a symphony of metaphysical dread. Working again with world-class cameraman Roger Deakins and editing, as always, under the pseudonym Roderick Jaynes, the Coens maintain impeccable control over the movie's look and timing. This is more crucial than ever, given that in the precarious universe they define, "actions have consequences." Then again, so does nonaction; not ordering "the monthly main selection" from the Columbia Record Club means you've ordered it. The main-title credits almost flaunt the fact that most of the cast members will be unfamiliar to us (though they all deliver); best known are Richard Kind as Arthur, Adam Arkin as Larry's divorce lawyer, and Michael Lerner (the studio boss in Barton Fink) doing a hilarious, wordless cameo as Solomon Schlutz. Special praise is due Fred Melamed, seizing the role of a lifetime as the unctuous Sy Ableman; Amy Landecker as Mrs. Samsky, the multifariously zoned-out siren who's Larry's other next-door neighbor; and Avi Hoptman as Arlen, Larry's mealy-mouthed academic colleague who can't resist hinting at the latest rumblings from the tenure committee, even if he can't really say anything. --Richard T. Jameson
Product Description
Academy Award®-winning directors Joel and Ethan Coen return to their comedy roots with this original and darkly humorous story about one ordinary man’s quest to become a serious man. Physics professor Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg) can’t believe his life: His wife is leaving him for his best friend, his unemployed brother won’t move off the couch, someone is threatening his career, his kids are a mystery and his neighbor is tormenting him by sunbathing nude. Struggling to make sense of it all, Larry consults three different rabbis and their answers lead him on a twisted journey of faith, family, delinquent behavior and mortality in the film critics rave is “seriously awesome!” (Michael Hogan, Vanity Fair)
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
218 of 245 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Schrodinger's cat and the curse of free will - A serious analysis
January 29, 2010
By GP
Format:DVD
[This is an attempt to interpret the complex narrative of the movie. Please read this *after* you've watched the movie - else skip to the last line :)]
Larry Gopnik is a professor of physics who teaches his students about 'Schrodinger's Cat' - the idea that the fate of an entity remains undefined right until the moment an agent acts and 'collapses the wave function,' so to speak. Gopnik believes that the story of the cat serves no purpose other than to illustrate a mathematical truth - and yet, strangely enough, Gopnik's human fate is no less uncertain and contingent than that of Schrodinger's hypothetical cat. For example, the very moment Gopnik "acts" to accept a bribe and pass his Korean student, his telephone rings, and he receives ominous news from his doctor. By this time, the strange causalities in the movie will have compelled us to ask if Gopnik's phone would have rung had he chosen differently. As Gopnik comes to realize, the "truth" of mathematics and numbers - be it in the form of Physics, the Mentaculus, or the Kabbalah - is beside the point. What is of essence is the human story.
To be sure, ASM is not an amoral thought experiment about actions determining outcomes. The movie takes a very specific moral position: "Receive with simplicity everything that happens to you." If you willfully "act" in defiance of your fate, you will reap the consequences of your actions.
Gopnik is a man who almost never acts. As Michael Wood points out in his LRB review, Gopnik lives in a world where "agency always belongs to someone else." Agency belongs to Sy, to the wife, to the son, and even to the Columbia Record club that makes you pay for taking no action at all. On the few occasions that Gopnik chooses to act, he meets with disaster. His refusal to accept his neighbor's encroachments into his property culminates in the bizarre death of a lawyer. His "road rage" - brought on by the sight of the Korean student - causes him to lose control of his vehicle and, via some twisted Schrodingerian logic, "cause" the death of Sy Ableman. Finally, Gopnik's refusal to accept the burden of his own legal expenses brings down a grave illness upon him. The moral of this tale seems to be: there is less suffering in passively accepting one's fate than in actively meddling with it - a credo of inaction, similar to the Christian doctrine of quietism and the more ascetic interpretations of Karma.
And yet there is a delicious ambiguity concerning the theological foundation of this ethical vision. When Rabbi Marshak speaks to Danny, we wonder if we are hearing the settled wisdom of an ancient tradition, or the contemporary wisdom of a serious man who has just "received with simplicity" the truthless truth of The Airplane. Marshak's chamber, interestingly, looks more like the study of an amateur biologist, than that of a religious cleric.
ASM embodies the Judaic vision of tradition as a repository of stories. It has a "Russian Doll" structure - a story within a story, where the outer story echoes the inner one. What the dentist Sussman's story is to Gopnik, Gopnik's story is to us. Just like Gopnik, Sussman too is a "serious man" coping with a crisis that has turned his life upside down. Such stories - which constitute the tradition - acquire significance through signs and tokens whose obscurity invites interpretation. The teeth in Sussman's story are referenced in Gopnik's story - we see a large model of teeth in Rabbi Marshak's chamber. And very mischievously, the background score chosen for the Sussman narrative is by Jimi Hendrix - a man famous for expressing himself with his teeth! "What does it mean?" Sussman asks the Rabbi, awaiting a revelation. The Rabbi is honest enough to admit his cluelessness - and so the mystery remains - only to be transmitted to Gopnik, and then to us - the last hearers of the story. Just like Gopnik, we too are addressees of the message that drove Sussman crazy. We too restlessly await an epiphany that will abolish the mystery.
At one level, this is a story about a father, a son, and the transmission of tradition. Note the parallel between Danny's Bar Mitzvah and Gopnik's tenure - the rites of passage father and son have to undergo. Our anxious wait ends with a "mazel tov" for both of them. The "rite of passage" theme is similarly evoked by the intense and purposeful neighbor who, determined to make a man out of his pre-adolescent son, inducts him into the violent sport of hunting.
The narrative has a beautiful circularity. When the story begins, the father is talking to his doctor and the son is in the classroom pondering a debt he owes. When it ends, the father is still talking to the doctor and the son is still in the classroom, except that now the clouds are gathering, and some great judgment is hand. The father makes his choice and condemns himself; the son dithers as the tornado approaches.
Thanks to Coen Brothers' attention to detail, one chances upon new significances in every subsequent viewing. The Rabbi Nachtner sequence stands on its own as a stunning reminder of the Coen Brothers' mastery of their medium. The actors deliver stellar performances - Stuhlbarg creates magic with his face and his voice. The crouched, defensive man who negotiates with the Columbia Record club could not be more different from the tenured professor who is about to change Clive's grade. And as we have come to expect from the Coen brothers, characters tend to have comical tics. There's Gopnik's wife's rapid blinking when she is agitated; Sy's tendency to say "most important" in his mellifluous voice; and of course, the kid in the bus who has just discovered the joy of expletives.
To call this movie a masterpiece would be to state the obvious. This is the Coen brothers' subtlest and most cerebral work yet. It is a serious work of art.
Larry Gopnik is a professor of physics who teaches his students about 'Schrodinger's Cat' - the idea that the fate of an entity remains undefined right until the moment an agent acts and 'collapses the wave function,' so to speak. Gopnik believes that the story of the cat serves no purpose other than to illustrate a mathematical truth - and yet, strangely enough, Gopnik's human fate is no less uncertain and contingent than that of Schrodinger's hypothetical cat. For example, the very moment Gopnik "acts" to accept a bribe and pass his Korean student, his telephone rings, and he receives ominous news from his doctor. By this time, the strange causalities in the movie will have compelled us to ask if Gopnik's phone would have rung had he chosen differently. As Gopnik comes to realize, the "truth" of mathematics and numbers - be it in the form of Physics, the Mentaculus, or the Kabbalah - is beside the point. What is of essence is the human story.
To be sure, ASM is not an amoral thought experiment about actions determining outcomes. The movie takes a very specific moral position: "Receive with simplicity everything that happens to you." If you willfully "act" in defiance of your fate, you will reap the consequences of your actions.
Gopnik is a man who almost never acts. As Michael Wood points out in his LRB review, Gopnik lives in a world where "agency always belongs to someone else." Agency belongs to Sy, to the wife, to the son, and even to the Columbia Record club that makes you pay for taking no action at all. On the few occasions that Gopnik chooses to act, he meets with disaster. His refusal to accept his neighbor's encroachments into his property culminates in the bizarre death of a lawyer. His "road rage" - brought on by the sight of the Korean student - causes him to lose control of his vehicle and, via some twisted Schrodingerian logic, "cause" the death of Sy Ableman. Finally, Gopnik's refusal to accept the burden of his own legal expenses brings down a grave illness upon him. The moral of this tale seems to be: there is less suffering in passively accepting one's fate than in actively meddling with it - a credo of inaction, similar to the Christian doctrine of quietism and the more ascetic interpretations of Karma.
And yet there is a delicious ambiguity concerning the theological foundation of this ethical vision. When Rabbi Marshak speaks to Danny, we wonder if we are hearing the settled wisdom of an ancient tradition, or the contemporary wisdom of a serious man who has just "received with simplicity" the truthless truth of The Airplane. Marshak's chamber, interestingly, looks more like the study of an amateur biologist, than that of a religious cleric.
ASM embodies the Judaic vision of tradition as a repository of stories. It has a "Russian Doll" structure - a story within a story, where the outer story echoes the inner one. What the dentist Sussman's story is to Gopnik, Gopnik's story is to us. Just like Gopnik, Sussman too is a "serious man" coping with a crisis that has turned his life upside down. Such stories - which constitute the tradition - acquire significance through signs and tokens whose obscurity invites interpretation. The teeth in Sussman's story are referenced in Gopnik's story - we see a large model of teeth in Rabbi Marshak's chamber. And very mischievously, the background score chosen for the Sussman narrative is by Jimi Hendrix - a man famous for expressing himself with his teeth! "What does it mean?" Sussman asks the Rabbi, awaiting a revelation. The Rabbi is honest enough to admit his cluelessness - and so the mystery remains - only to be transmitted to Gopnik, and then to us - the last hearers of the story. Just like Gopnik, we too are addressees of the message that drove Sussman crazy. We too restlessly await an epiphany that will abolish the mystery.
At one level, this is a story about a father, a son, and the transmission of tradition. Note the parallel between Danny's Bar Mitzvah and Gopnik's tenure - the rites of passage father and son have to undergo. Our anxious wait ends with a "mazel tov" for both of them. The "rite of passage" theme is similarly evoked by the intense and purposeful neighbor who, determined to make a man out of his pre-adolescent son, inducts him into the violent sport of hunting.
The narrative has a beautiful circularity. When the story begins, the father is talking to his doctor and the son is in the classroom pondering a debt he owes. When it ends, the father is still talking to the doctor and the son is still in the classroom, except that now the clouds are gathering, and some great judgment is hand. The father makes his choice and condemns himself; the son dithers as the tornado approaches.
Thanks to Coen Brothers' attention to detail, one chances upon new significances in every subsequent viewing. The Rabbi Nachtner sequence stands on its own as a stunning reminder of the Coen Brothers' mastery of their medium. The actors deliver stellar performances - Stuhlbarg creates magic with his face and his voice. The crouched, defensive man who negotiates with the Columbia Record club could not be more different from the tenured professor who is about to change Clive's grade. And as we have come to expect from the Coen brothers, characters tend to have comical tics. There's Gopnik's wife's rapid blinking when she is agitated; Sy's tendency to say "most important" in his mellifluous voice; and of course, the kid in the bus who has just discovered the joy of expletives.
To call this movie a masterpiece would be to state the obvious. This is the Coen brothers' subtlest and most cerebral work yet. It is a serious work of art.
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
What makes this wry comedy special isn't the humour. Although you'll have a smile on your face much of the time (certainly not at the ending), there were only a couple of laugh out loud moments. Rather, it's the thought-provoking and stimulating storyline about a Jewish college professor, Larry Gopnik, whose life seems to be unraveling, and who seeks spiritual guidance in vain.
His wife is leaving him for another man. His psychologically impaired brother has moved in, stirring up even more domestic turmoil. He is up for tenure but someone has been sending anonymous letters of complaint about him to university officials. He has to deal with a difficult Korean student, and the student's father, who offer to bribe him in exchange for a passing grade. And he has money problems.
Gopnik comes across as something of a pathetic sap who could solve some of his problems by just standing up for himself, but his ultimate fate is apparently beyond his control. The ending could have been written by Schopenhauer. Even though I don't agree with, or like, the movie's message, I still respect and admire the way it has been put on film.
Aside from the fact that it probably helps to be Jewish (I'm not) when digesting the film, the only problem I have with it is that I kept waiting in vain to find out the significance of the film's beginning: a supernatural(?) scene in what appears to be 19h century Poland. I don't know if I missed it, but I was unable to see any connection between this opening and the rest of the movie.
With all the garbage that is churned out by Hollywood nowadays, A SERIOUS MAN is a real gem of a flick, albeit an ultimately depressing one.
His wife is leaving him for another man. His psychologically impaired brother has moved in, stirring up even more domestic turmoil. He is up for tenure but someone has been sending anonymous letters of complaint about him to university officials. He has to deal with a difficult Korean student, and the student's father, who offer to bribe him in exchange for a passing grade. And he has money problems.
Gopnik comes across as something of a pathetic sap who could solve some of his problems by just standing up for himself, but his ultimate fate is apparently beyond his control. The ending could have been written by Schopenhauer. Even though I don't agree with, or like, the movie's message, I still respect and admire the way it has been put on film.
Aside from the fact that it probably helps to be Jewish (I'm not) when digesting the film, the only problem I have with it is that I kept waiting in vain to find out the significance of the film's beginning: a supernatural(?) scene in what appears to be 19h century Poland. I don't know if I missed it, but I was unable to see any connection between this opening and the rest of the movie.
With all the garbage that is churned out by Hollywood nowadays, A SERIOUS MAN is a real gem of a flick, albeit an ultimately depressing one.
71 of 87 people found the following review helpful
By David
Format:DVD|Amazon Verified Purchase
Yes, it's not for everyone. A strong grasp of both Jewish tradition and quantum physics would do the potential viewer well in getting the absolute most out of the film. But, as someone who is by no means an expert in either area, this one hit me on quite a base level in its unflinching and very true-to-life depiction of a man's life coming apart at the seams and all the existential angst that ensues. The wonderful thing is, A Serious Man is not only deeply resonant and moving, but quite hilarious as well- in that dark, dark way that may be just a little too dark for some.
The Coens have always caught some flack for their supposed misanthropic elitism; or, in other words, what has been seen by some critics as a sort of contemptuous mocking of the characters they depict onscreen, the two directors never fully granting their filmic creations emotional sympathy. If it was previously easy to debunk this claim, it is now, with A Serious Man, a piece of cake. Has there been a performance in recent years more gut-wrenchingly honest and genuinely pathos-exuding than Michael Stuhlbarg here as protagonist Larry Gopnik? That the narrative thrust of the film is essentially centered around all the horrifying and humiliating events that befall Gopnik does not necessarily mean that the Coens thumb their noses down at this character. If we take into consideration the personal nature of the film (set in a time and place very much like when/where they grew up, and populated by characters probably not unlike those they knew), then it comes as no surprise that A Serious Man is the most studied and 'serious' Coen brothers film to date.
Simply in terms of sheer film-making craft, this is the Coens, and certainly cinematographer Roger Deakins, at the peak of their respective crafts. The recreation of a late 60's heavily Jewish Midwestern locale is pitch-perfect (minus a few very small anachronisms). Not a scene feels wasted, not a shot superfluous; the picture is beautifully symmetric in structure and full of little rhymes and rhythms and repetitions, plenty striking and quasi-iconic images (Stuhlbarg on the roof as pictured on the DVD and promotional poster being one of many), and lots of likely soon-to-be classic dialogue infused with both the Coens' trademark deadpan humor (a la The Big Lebowski) as well as the film's broader thematic concerns.
Then there's the ending, or perhaps as some would say, lack thereof. Not unlike the ambiguous note that No Country For Old Men went out on, the final moments of A Serious Man will probably leave many angered, many confused, and many disappointed. But I don't think there was any other way to close such a film, one largely concerned, as it is, with all the great uncertainties that plague life-- what more appropriate way to end it than with the greatest cinematic uncertainty of all? The final shot is, I think, one of the most haunting in cinema history. I've seen the film three times in the theater, each time leaving awestruck and emotionally drained as the various events of the film, its haunting score and its devastating philosophical implications swirl around my head.
A Serious Man, then, is truly a serious film, with the (black) humor only arising naturally from the utter tragic unfair-ness of life as seen through the protagonist's eyes, and not forced on the situations irreverently as in a lot of films. Given the uncompromisingly bleak nature of the film, perhaps it's best summed up by an old and rather cliché platitude (not unlike the one the film somewhat ironically opens with): When you feel like crying, laugh instead.
The Coens have always caught some flack for their supposed misanthropic elitism; or, in other words, what has been seen by some critics as a sort of contemptuous mocking of the characters they depict onscreen, the two directors never fully granting their filmic creations emotional sympathy. If it was previously easy to debunk this claim, it is now, with A Serious Man, a piece of cake. Has there been a performance in recent years more gut-wrenchingly honest and genuinely pathos-exuding than Michael Stuhlbarg here as protagonist Larry Gopnik? That the narrative thrust of the film is essentially centered around all the horrifying and humiliating events that befall Gopnik does not necessarily mean that the Coens thumb their noses down at this character. If we take into consideration the personal nature of the film (set in a time and place very much like when/where they grew up, and populated by characters probably not unlike those they knew), then it comes as no surprise that A Serious Man is the most studied and 'serious' Coen brothers film to date.
Simply in terms of sheer film-making craft, this is the Coens, and certainly cinematographer Roger Deakins, at the peak of their respective crafts. The recreation of a late 60's heavily Jewish Midwestern locale is pitch-perfect (minus a few very small anachronisms). Not a scene feels wasted, not a shot superfluous; the picture is beautifully symmetric in structure and full of little rhymes and rhythms and repetitions, plenty striking and quasi-iconic images (Stuhlbarg on the roof as pictured on the DVD and promotional poster being one of many), and lots of likely soon-to-be classic dialogue infused with both the Coens' trademark deadpan humor (a la The Big Lebowski) as well as the film's broader thematic concerns.
Then there's the ending, or perhaps as some would say, lack thereof. Not unlike the ambiguous note that No Country For Old Men went out on, the final moments of A Serious Man will probably leave many angered, many confused, and many disappointed. But I don't think there was any other way to close such a film, one largely concerned, as it is, with all the great uncertainties that plague life-- what more appropriate way to end it than with the greatest cinematic uncertainty of all? The final shot is, I think, one of the most haunting in cinema history. I've seen the film three times in the theater, each time leaving awestruck and emotionally drained as the various events of the film, its haunting score and its devastating philosophical implications swirl around my head.
A Serious Man, then, is truly a serious film, with the (black) humor only arising naturally from the utter tragic unfair-ness of life as seen through the protagonist's eyes, and not forced on the situations irreverently as in a lot of films. Given the uncompromisingly bleak nature of the film, perhaps it's best summed up by an old and rather cliché platitude (not unlike the one the film somewhat ironically opens with): When you feel like crying, laugh instead.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
Worth repeated viewings
Over the years I have enjoyed re-watching this marvelous movie; it never ceases to captivate and inspire more essential questions. The comedy is subtle, witty. Read more
Published 6 hours ago by Bokehburger
1.0 out of 5 stars
Hard to follow
Hate to say it but not for me and I doubt it's for you either! If you have to see it rent it ,I made the mistake of buying it!
Published 10 days ago by paul k powell
4.0 out of 5 stars
But I didn't do anything
"Kafkaesque ...is when you enter a surreal world in which all your control patterns, all your plans, the whole way in which you have configured your own behavior, begins to fall to... Read more
Published 11 days ago by Doug Anderson
5.0 out of 5 stars
Got to watch it
This belongs on the list of films to watch before you die! My compliments to the Coen brothers. Keep up the good work.
Published 22 days ago by Rob
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Seriously Good Movie
A great movie by the Cohen brothers. It is smart, funny, sarcastic, serious and tragic all at the same time. Great entertainment from the Cohens. Read more
Published 24 days ago by Bruce F Stacy
5.0 out of 5 stars
Serious?
This was so serious about a guy who's life is falling apart or changing in ways he never thought, but everyone's life does that. It is good to see his perspective. Read more
Published 29 days ago by Frances R. Johnson
4.0 out of 5 stars
An Afternoon Movie Break
This was a great movie for a lazy Sunday afternoon. The story line made you re-evaluate your life; what your goals were and who in your life was helping support your goals. Read more
Published 1 month ago by Jessica Lew
5.0 out of 5 stars
A great movie
The thinking man's depressing movie. This is one of the most depressing movies I have ever seen. However, where "Requiem for a Dream" and "Dancer in the Dark" beat... Read more
Published 1 month ago by OmegaLazarus
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great Movie!
This is a wonderful movie. I Believe I watched over 10 times. There are very subtle nuances in the movie which I did not fully appreciate until I goggled the movie and read what... Read more
Published 1 month ago by MZ
3.0 out of 5 stars
Complex, metaphor-driven story about religion and emotions makes for...
"Demanding at many parts to say the least but at least I can say that I have seen the Creating 1967 and Hebrew and Yiddish for the Goyim features on the DVD. Read more
Published 2 months ago by Pitlochry Blues
Look for Similar Items by Category
|
