Review of Barton Fink (1991) by Kylie P — 07 Feb 2010

From May 7, 2008:

Barton Fink was definitely intelligent: not in that earth-shattering genius sort of way, but it was smart and multi-layered and encouraged the viewer to react to some surreal situations. It also had that dark undercurrent that seems to punctuate many of the Coen brothers' films.

Barton Fink worked on many levels that did not really seem to intersect. It was like lasagna, actually: distinct layers of noodles, meat, and cheese that work well together but are totally separate, parallel even. On the one hand, the film was about the writer's journey, and what was enjoyable to observe were the little details, the sounds of the empty hotel that seem to haunt and plague Barton as he struggles to write a "wrestling picture." The peeling of the wallpaper; the long, empty hall of unshined shoes; the picture of the woman staring at the ocean waves; all were a sensitive examination of the writer's mind and journey in the occasional struggle to create. In fact, the hotel became something of a visual metaphor for Barton's particular creative dilemma, and it was kind of brilliant to sort of make the surrounds its own supporting character.

On the other hand, the movie is about what happens when an ordinary man gets caught in extraordinary circumstances and how the ordinary man reacts. The murder investigation throws the viewer for quite a loop, and the movie takes on a very surreal flavor as Barton struggles to piece together his shattered perceptions.

Of course, on still the other hand, the film is about how things are not what they seem. Shattered perceptions, particularly of the ideals that the common man or even the thinking man develops in his mind, are a dominant theme. This movie worked so well because the twists were effective.

The performances in this film by Turturro and Goodman were outstanding. Especially impressive was John Goodman, who is known for his comedic acting, but he played the gregarious though decidedly "off" Charlie with skill. John Turturro has always been one of those character actors that seems to find the center of his role so completely that suspension of disbelief is not even a question. Barton was a sympathetic character despite his cerebral qualities because he experiences real emotions, which Turturro seemed to portray with ease.

The pacing in the middle of the film, however, seemed to slow to a bit of a crawl, when the beginning was already sort of ambling along at an easygoing trot. Perhaps the choice was made to dull the viewer's senses a bit before the ensuing events unfolded, a choice that did not seem necessary given that the film was already moving at an almost methodical speed, drawing the viewer into the logical, frustrated, creative mind of Barton. Also: what was in the box?! Why was it never opened? As with Lost in Translation, secrets like this can be a little annoying. Barton may not have wanted to find out or further shatter his already broken perspective, or maybe the lesson is that some things are better left secret and unknown, and ideals and fantasies are better suited to one's comfort and well being. With all of the attention to the box, though, the lack of reveal left the story seemingly incomplete. Even with the beautiful ending frame, which was simply poetic, the viewer may still be left asking, "That's it??" Also, what happened to the no-doubt over-torched hotel? And what happened to Chet, the Steve Buscemi character? He was so eager, after all.

All in all, is a good one, and it makes one think. Any writer can appreciate Barton's unusual journey.