Hail, Caesar!

Nice form, you simply have to give it to the Coens, they know how to play with film and it's very enjoyable to watch. For example, those dance scenes were absolutely great, excellent capturing of the era, I was entertained by some of the numbers, they have great actors here, but the whole thing just doesn't work for me and it's kind of meaningless. (2016-11-15)

It's a bit disjointed, it doesn't hold together, there are funny scenes, then less funny ones and then completely dull ones (the Soviet submarine). But as a whole, it's still a nice excursion to a time I love more than anything, the Golden Hollywood of the 1950s, when cinemas were ruled by naive westerns, even more naive sci-fi B-movie and swords and sandal movies. And I'll say one name: Alden Ehrenreich. I like this kid a lot, he's gonna be a star one day, trust me. (2016-10-03)

There's a great idea behind Hail, Caesar! that is worth honoring, but it takes a wrong turn. The plot involving the communists, in which George Clooney (a standby of Joel and Ethan Coen) plays the fool, is not funny at all, no matter how hard you try to laugh. But the saddest part of it all is that the film, which is supposed to express love for the golden age of cinema, ends up portraying it with an almost satirical perspective, as a result of a comedy of errors. (2016-03-01)

I really don't know what the Coen brothers were trying to say with this star-studded genre hybrid, but the effect of this film missed me by a very large and centrifugal arc, which is a shame, because at first glance it seemed like it was going to be a comic blockbuster that would rely on the cast and script. Unfortunately, there was acting was neither great nor very funny, which is not to say that everyone was lousy, rather, they were all playing to a weak script. Even though it was a comedy, I honestly laughed from the heart very few times – probably most of all at the scene in the editing room with Frances McDormand (too bad she didn't get more space). A film that is let down by its lackluster execution, considering all tose big names and the potential that was there somewhere. (2016-03-18)

I fell asleep twice, and quite deliberately, because this was unbearable. I haven't seen a more boring movie in months. There are about three good jokes and a lot of actors who probably enjoyed working in it, but otherwise I don't really know what it was supposed to be about. It's not funny enough for a comedy, not suspenseful enough for a whodunit, and terribly ordinary and unimaginative for a "Hollywood is full of idiots" type of satire. It tackles everything from knocked-up celebrities, the advent of television, the Cold War, economics, career ambitions and communist writers, but it's sorely lacking in lightness or any kind of distinctive identity, and all the scenes straight out of 1950s movies (the musical act, the fooling around in the water, the cowgirl) need to be cut by at least half. I'd quite like to hear what Clooney, Brolin, Johansson, Hill and Tatum had to say about the result when they first saw it. It will probably only entertain undemanding cinema-goers who are satisfied with familiar faces and the fact that it all looks quite nice. An annoying film. (2016-02-25)