Genres

Visitors Review

Kevin Carr 2012-05-16 18:26:59

It's not the best film in the Coen Brothers' library, but like almost any one of their films, it's better than most movies out there.

2012-05-16 02:50:08

Not THAT funny

Oveview: Usually when George Clooney and Brad Pitt are in the same movie together there are too many countless funny moments to remember, but Burn After Reading only has so manyPlot: The plot to the movie is alright, a little idiotic but thats what you get for a comedy. Osbourne Cox, a Balkan expert, is fired at the CIA, so he begins a memoir. His wife wants a divorce and expects her lover, Harry, a philandering State Department marshal, to leave his wife. A diskette of Osbourne's musings falls out of a gym bag at a Georgetown fitness center. Two employees there try to turn it into cash: Linda, who wants money for elective surgery, and Chad, an amiable goof. They try to sell the disc back to Osbourne, who has a short fuse, then they visit the Russian embassy. To sweeten the pot, they decide they need more of Osbourne's secrets. Meanwhile, Linda's boss likes her, and Harry's wife leaves for a book tour. All roads lead to Osbourne's house.Acting: The acting in this movie is actually very good, no awkward or stiff moments that really stood out to meBottom Line: If you want to rent it, go for it. The movie is funny, just don't expect to laugh at every scene.

Pablo Villaca 2012-05-16 04:56:29

Influenciados pelos mesmos clichês que comprometem tantas produções do estilo, os próprios personagens de Queime Depois de Ler parecem não saber diferenciá-los da realidade.

2012-05-15 22:25:39

Burn after watching

First off, reviewing a popular movie negatively is never a popular choice. Disagree with me all you like; reviews are opinion based, and this is my opinion. That's all it is. If you loved the movie, don't take my review personally. The Coen brothers usually make a fantastic movie. "Raising Arizona", "Fargo", and "No Country for Old Men" are all five star films in my book. Even their lesser known movies are great, with the exception of the boring "Lady Killers". Coming on the heels of "No County for Old Men", my expectation level for "Burn After Reading" was high. Not unfairly high; I didn't expect another award winner, jut an entertaining movie with a quality story and descent acting. What I got was a fairly pointless melodramatic movie with characters it was hard to empathize with, like, or want to see succeed. No, this is not an awful movie that is impossible to watch (well maybe during Clooney's ridiculously camera-aware mugging near the end of the film) but it isn't up to the Coen's usual standards either. All the elements of a good movie are there: quality name actors, a plot that is a highly sarcastic take on a pumped-up spy thriller, and the Coen's typical evocative camera work. What's missing is that cohesiveness that makes a movie not just a collection of good ingredients, but a finished product. This is a movie about stupid people doing stupid things. There is no real plot; the characters careen about in their self-absorbed turbidity, digging themselves deeper and deeper into trouble. Each character seems totally incapable of self examination. The characters do not grow or change at all during the entire film. Black comedy is something the Coens are usually adept at. Unfortunately, in this film they seem more concerned with shock value and impressing the viewer with their sly wit. It feels like they are snickering with glee over their own intelligence at having imagined such sad, stupid, and shallow characters. Every character in the film is remarkably unlikable with the possible exception of John Malkovich's recently fired, drunken, former CIA employee crotchetiness. Clooney, who I usually think does a fantastic job, (see "Syriana" or "Michael Clayton") is almost unbearable he's so self absorbed and aware of the camera. He even appears to be mugging at times. Pitt's character is funny, but doesn't stick around long enough to be more than a footnote. The acting isn't bad overall, it just that the characters are so miserable that it's hard to appreciate it. This is a movie you can definitely watch just once. I know I'll likely get lit up for giving a relatively popular movie a negative review, but honestly, if Fargo is a 5, and No Country for Old Men is a 5, how can you put this movie in the same league as those films? Even 4 stars seems excessive for a movie as light as this one. I can't argue with 3 stars if you really liked the movie, but the reality is that I didn't like it at all and never will. Rent this one if you have to see it, but don't waste your money buying it.

Karina Longworth 2012-05-06 12:14:04

Burn After Reading may not have the sparse majesty of No Country...but in its own way its an even more brutal assignation of moral confusion.

2012-05-05 18:04:53

Coen Do Better

This review is from: Burn After Reading (DVD) This movie is piece of fluff that I'm sure was a blast to make but just doesn't come across as worth watching. Too many parts seem to have been created to give various character actors a little screen time and the result is confused and unsatisfactory. If you like the stars and anything Coen you'll probably be happy enough but they've done so much better.

rburkem 2012-04-28 00:36:35

Avoid Without Seeing

I lose patience with movies that throw plot devices at you that aren'tsupported by "real world" rules. This is one of them. For example, twoof the characters are having an affair and the male character is in thewoman's bedroom while she is away. The male character accidentallyshoots a third character hiding in her closet. It's a "bullet throughthe brain" head shot that leaves a mess all over the place. Afterwards,we learn that the body is disposed of in a river. It's clear that themale character never tells the female character what transpired in herhouse. But wait a minute, remember it is her house, and the shootingoccurred in her bedroom closet, and she's clearly a fastidious personwho would notice anything awry. How did the shooter get the closetcleaned up so quickly that she wouldn't notice? Clearly, some of herclothes would have been spattered, too. Also, the third character brokeinto the house by breaking a glass panel on a rear entrance to unlockthe door. So, in the space of presumably a few hours the shooter'scharacter got rid of a dead body, cleaned up blood and gore all overthe wall and carpet of a closet, cleaned any affected clothing that gotspattered, then cleaned up the broken glass from the rear door andreplaced the glass panel. This movie is supposed to be set in the realworld, that is, it's not an alternative fantasy universe where physicsdon't apply. But here's a key plot development that doesn't pass a realworld test. This isn't the only plot element that doesn't make sense,just the worse. If any of this is explained in a Deleted Scenessegment, then we didn't bother watching it.

i_love_chaos 2012-04-27 17:15:46

very good..... almost brilliant

the acting in this is remarkable. George Clooney, Brad Pitt, JohnMalkovich, Frances Mcdormand and Tilda Swinton are flawless in this.directed and produced by the Coen brothers, so knowing all that you allknow your in for a treat. the brothers have made better films but thisis far from there worst. now for everyone of you that have seen thetrailer to this and got the impression that its a laugh a minute filmthat you can watch with all your friends, its not. yes it is prettyfunny but it has a fairly complex story to it. now i hope by sayingthat i don't give the impression that i'm discrediting the film but thefunny parts in the trailer are about the only funny parts in the film.but i didn't want to watch this film for the humour. i wanted to watchit for the big cast in it plus the directors. this film is very wellmade by them. everyone should see this film .......8/10.....j.d Seaton

poe426 2012-04-26 18:38:23

Slow movie about slow people moves very slow...

I was coerced, I tell you, into seeing BURN AFTER READING. After theletdown of NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, I swore off Coen brothers movies.Having my arm twisted, however, I agreed to attend one more. The mostexciting thing about this one was the leg cramp I suffered midwaythrough. With the notable exceptions of RAISING ARIZONA and O BROTHER,WHERE ART THOU?, I've been underwhelmed time and again by thehighly-touted Coen bros. Like Kevin Costner and Quentin Tarentino andWill Smith, add nausea, the Coens seem to have made careers forthemselves by displaying little or no discernible talent. If this isyour idea of good writing or good acting or good direction, enjoy. Forme, it's just one more sign of the coming apocalypse.

2012-04-26 09:52:02

Best Coen Bros Film Since Fargo. The Characters Are Probably A Little Too Close To Home For Comfort...

Many of the Amazon reviewers of "Burn After Reading" fail to understand, or they resent, if only dimly understood, the point of all Coen Brothers films: to provide an entertainment in which the audience can feel comfortably superior to characters that are in over their heads. All the stylistic and character aspects that many reviewers construe as flaws are in fact the entire point of watching a Coen Brothers film. Where else, other than as a Amazon film reviewer, can one feel so smugly superior and amused at the strivings and shortcomings of others, while celebrating the satisfaction of the bully, with the balm of comedy and farce, than in a Coen Brothers film? Not all of us can be paid to feel that way, some of us have to pay others, like the Coens, to provide us with two hours or so of escape to these wonderful sentiments. "Burn After Reading" is in fact yet another deliciously perceptive jab at the American reverence for and addiction to optimism, excessive self-esteem and non-judgemental behavior. The reason a lot of reviewers don't like this film is because the characters are probably a little too close to home for comfort.

zebra782 2012-04-24 08:58:47

Tense, Brilliant.

To say that this film is Brilliant is the least to say about it, god iam so lucky i had a chance to see this.every thing about it is so great the characters, the acting, and ofcourse the screenplay, it's funny, bloody violent and surprisingly verythrilling, i just wish to know how on earth did the Coens come up withthis mess? unbelievable.the stars of show are: 1- Malkovich: a veteran scene stealer, he isstill got it and the Coens helped him delivering one of his mostbrilliant performances in a long time.2- Clooney: oh my god he is just a natural, no need to tell him what todo at all, just tell him what to say and leave the rest to him, you'llbe really amazed.the rest of the cast are also good, with a special note to Brad Pitt,this is the funniest i've ever seen him.i didn't expect much from the Coens, hell i didn't expect them to evenmake another movie this year after their big party last year with (NoCountry for old Men) i thought they would take a rest for year or twocelebrating with their Oscar statues before making such a lightproduction but they did it and they did it fine, really fine.

cppguy 2012-04-24 00:43:37

Overrated

I won't give this film 1 star. There was some good acting and it wasprofessionally made. That said, when the central character Ozzy (JohnMalkovich) has been given lines literally no more than repetition ofthe F-word, and when we're expected to take this as a group of stupidpeople doing stupid things, but they all seem to be smart actors' campyportrayals of stupid, you have to wonder what you're doing watchingthis film. Dilbert does things so lame that Dogbert can't have funmocking them. That's how this film felt to me.I might as well point out some of the fun bits. The exchanges betweenthe CIA people (David Rasche and J.K. Simmons) are the only trulyclever comic bits with good acting combined. Get a few laughs from thatand over Linda's (Frances McDormand) body obsession, but the rest ofthe film is a waste of time.Brad Pitt's attempt to be a hunky, but stupid, protagonist fail. I feltlike I was watching the worst of Charlie Chaplain, Forrest Gump andJethro Bodean rolled together. Could Brad do it? I suppose. But in thisfilm, he didn't. He's dumb as a box of rocks, but can probe a CD andclarify the difference between Mac and Windows formatted CDs. Badwriting; bad acting.Find something better to watch.

Andy-411 2012-04-20 20:28:19

Not funny--a complete waste of time and money

It is hard to believe all the good reviews this movie has been getting.From the trailer, I expected a solid comedy. Instead, I saw a moviewith thoroughly poor acting and a script that sounded like it waseither non-existent or written the night before the movie was shot.There is an awful lot of swearing for no reason. The storyline ishaphazard at best and looks like a bunch of separately shot scenesscrambled together without much planning.The "jokes" don't come across as funny. I didn't hear a single laugh inthe entire cinema. After half an hour, I had enough of this nonsenseand walked out of the cinema. Normally, I tend to stay for a movie Ipaid to see even if I don't like it. But this one was painful to watch!In a nutshell, it was a waste of my time and money. I give it a 1 outof 10...

Foxy 2012-04-20 14:26:46

Best Coen comedy since Arizona

One of the best dark comedies I have ever seen. The story is all over the place, yet the Coen brothers find a way to bring it all together at the end. This movie contains great acting including superb performances by Brad Pitt and John Malkovich. Viewers that do not enjoy dark comedies or movies that do not follow linear plots will not enjoy this movie.

chunga95 2012-04-16 17:39:45

Good mix of weird-funny and plot.

The Cohens, once again, remind everyone why they are still mavericksafter more than twenty years of film-making. "Burn After Reading" isdefinitive Cohen brothers and is fairly entertaining. It is by no meanstheir best comedy, but the movie provides a few laugh-out-loud momentsalong with their usual penchant for stupid and quirky comediccharacters.The one thing that's missing in "Burn After Reading" is the littlelaughs. When compared to "The Big Lebowski" or "Raising Arizona", thereisn't the usual sharply-funny dialogue to propel the comedy. To besure, the characters are sharply written with good dialogue and a tightplot. It's just that the little quirky moments that made us laugh inthe other Cohen comedies don't work this time. J.K. Simmons' sceneswere my favorites, but I really enjoyed all the characters.This movie probably won't become one of the Cohen classics, but it'sstill a decently funny comedy and is definitely worth watching. As acomedy I rate it a 7/10, but for entertainment value I give it a 9/10.

2012-04-16 00:57:58

...Just a Terrible Movie!!

I'm not sure what movie these other reviewers were watching when they posted the 5 star reviews. My wife and I finished watching the movie 5 minutes ago and I just have this bitter taste in my mouth after reading the critics 'reviews' on the back of the dvd holder at the video store that encouraged me to waste $4. In short, my wife lasted about 45 minutes into the movie before she left the room. I finished...as I kept thinking it might get better...it didn't. People keep writing that it is a 'dark comedy'...but I didn't think anything was funny in the movie!! It does have a dark 'Fargo-esque' quality to it (and I enjoyed the movie Fargo), but it is in no way funny. Here's a short run-down on the movie...about 10 or so actors in a convoluted story line that tries to interconnect their actions that are mostly misguided or mistaken I guess. The problem is 1) the script is awful and 2) the actors 'dumb-down' their characters to such a point that they are unenjoyable to watch. Anyways, if this review keeps just 1 person from renting (or especially buying) this dvd than the 10 minutes it took me to write this review was well spent...rent at your own risk...

2012-04-11 20:43:02

Brilliant!

This movie was great, and merits several watchings to pick up all the nuances. Very funny and a great cast.

threebumblebees 2012-04-11 03:04:53

An absolute waste of time

This movie was horrible, a complete and total waste of an hour and ahalf. The plot is bizarre, and every character in the movie is horribleand impossible to liken to, making it a painful watch. Do not wasteyour time by watching this movie. At the end, I was left feelingconfused and shocked that such an awful film had been nominated for twogolden globes. The acting was weak and the characters horrible andunlikeable. The ending conjures many loose ends that are never tied up.Most of the plot didn't make sense or was completely ridiculous. At thebeginning, it captures your attention only slightly, but the charactersbecome so horrible to watch and the plot so boring that the whole filmbecomes unbearable to continue watching. I would strongly recommend youdon't waste your time or your money. Terrible film.

Kam Williams 2012-04-07 19:20:05

Alternatively mirthful and macabre, while poking fun at both modern mating habits and the paranoia of espionage culture, this sophisticated social satire is a refreshingly-intelligent diversion designed with the more cerebral cineaste in mind.

Roger Ebert 2012-04-06 22:20:42

It's funny, sometimes delightful, sometimes a little sad, with dialogue that sounds perfectly logical until you listen a little more carefully and realize all of these people are mad.