Ave, Cezar!

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. (03.10.2016)

I was counting on the fact that this movie would be reminiscing about the old Hollywood from the middle of the last century. The fact that it would have a billion never-ending references was also a given. But the fact that the Coen brothers arrogantly thought that we all know everything about Hollywood and that we would not only understand all the references but that we would also laugh at them; well, they were greatly mistaken. The movie actually isn’t that funny and that’s despite the fact that Josh Brolin with his producer have the main role, which could in and of itself create a dozen of infinitely funny scenes. But the humor couldn’t be drier than a martini in the Virgin Islands. A pity, I like the Coens, but this movie was horrible. (15.06.2016)

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. (25.02.2016)

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. (01.03.2016)

It's actually another feature-length Jewish anecdote from the Coen brothers, this time on the subject of belief in anything (in God, the Party, oneself, Hollywood...) and how and why it can be denied to the point of being denied. However, unlike (for example) A Serious Man, I would say that this is a much more accessible anecdote, in which jokes so dry that they almost make you gag alternate with those that provoke incredible bursts of laughter. I enjoyed it very much and the period atmosphere, abundantly supported by Deakins' beautiful cinematography and Burwell's easily recognizable music, was downright magical. "Hobie Doyle? Are you also a communist?" (08.03.2016)

I'd still look elsewhere for the weakest Coen, but, of all their their underwhelming films, Ave, Caesar! reeks of untapped potential by far the most. A film with such polished details, great cast and a flexible production design that is only accentuated by one Roger Deakins simply deserves a more coherent story structure, a better-developed central motif and certainly more punchy humour, which is masterfully offset by a powerful touch of irony in every shot and dialogue, but given that this is supposed to be a comedy first and foremost, there aren't many really funny moments in the long 100 minutes. The brothers try to parody too many things at once, and at times the result is a tired mess that hardly moves forward and is really only kept afloat by the stars: the energetic Clooney, of course, but most of all the fantastic Josh Brolin, whose tiny gestures and confident elegance once again reveal that he has grown into a Hollywood star of the first magnitude. (26.05.2016)

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. (18.03.2016)

I’m not excited about this film by the Coen brothers, but it didn’t depress the hell out of me either. It's true that it was sometimes boring, but I do admit that I enjoyed some moments a lot (the mermaid, the illegal communist writers' group, Laurence Laurentz and Hobie Doyle). Especially the character played by Alden Ehrenreich was great and the scene where he meets Laurence blew me away. Overall, it was quite average. (14.11.2017)

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. (15.11.2016)