Review of Blood Simple (1985) by Jake F — 26 Jun 2009

For brothers Joel and Ethan Coen, "Blood Simple" was but the beginning of a lengthy, successful, and Academy Award-winning career that has spanned well over two decades, and promises to continue with the premiere of "A Serious Man" this October. As a film, it manages to be entertaining if not extraordinary, but as a debut, it showcases a remarkable amount of potential.

If the film errs, it does so in that it can't quite manage to disguise the machinations of its storytelling, and events seem to take place because they are written to, rather than following a natural progression. That flaw aside, though, "Blood Simple" creates an extremely tense atmosphere of violence and betrayal, one that, if not always believable, is certainly compelling enough to keep your eyes fixed on-screen for its brisk 99 minutes.

The action is set into motion by an affair between Ray (John Getz) and his boss's wife Abby, played by Frances McDormand in her first starring role. When her husband (Dan Hedaya) learns of her infidelity by way of a less-than-savory private detective, portrayed by M. Emmet Walsh in an excellent part, things begin to take a deadly turn. At its outset, very little in the way of exposition is left unexplained, and all the major players are clearly, almost too clearly, laid out. But as plans are hatched and lines drawn, the complexity ramps up considerably, though not so much as to be out of hand.

Plot-wise, the story has its share of twists, requiring viewers to keep track of both what has actually happened and what each character is aware of, as major moments hinge on questions of ignorance and awareness. The trouble with such a carefully fabricated structure is that it not only feels, but is forced. It's simply unnatural for characters to keep silent or to choose not to reveal certain plot-points to one another solely for the sake of increasing tension.

And though the Coens succeed in milking from this precisely formulated tale a great deal of intriguing dramatic conflict, they damage their narrative credibility in the process. The story never feels real. It exists in a carefully-penned, unreal universe, and though impressive, it can never transcend those limitations. One sequence, however, despite its improbability, is so incredibly gut-wrenching that the film deserves to be seen on its account alone. Saying anything more would mean spoiling something extraordinary.

As far as resolution goes, the film weighs in with the perfect amount of answered and unanswered questions, right down to the final cut to credits in ambiguous, Coen brothers fashion. Still, the issue of implausibility plagues the storyline almost in its entirety, even up to the conclusion. Timing, especially, seems just too painstakingly orchestrated to be authentic, weakening the impact of what are otherwise powerful, tense situations.

In examining "Blood Simple" as a whole, something peculiar about going back to a filmmaker's, or in this case, a pair of filmmakers, first effort arises. Whether it's truly there or not, you'll find yourself catching glimpses of their later work, the early foundations of their established style. In "Blood Simple" you'll see the deftly-maneuvering plotting style of "Miller's Crossing", an incinerator foreshadowing "Fargo"'s infamous wood-chipper, and a setting quite comparable to that of Best Picture-winning "No Country for Old Men", right alongside scattered traces of their now-iconic dark irony. But as far as whether or not these were truly hints of things to come or merely the product of a film critic's overactive imagination, it's impossible to know. Either way, "Blood Simple" is a film that deserves to be seen, not solely on account of its own merits, but for the fact that it marks the starting point of a renowned, unique cinematic legacy.