Student Film Reviews

Film reviews from theaters, couches, and film festivals

Home | All Reviews | Festival Courses | Film and Media Studies | SBCC | | Log in

1. James Chambliss 09.22.08 / 7pm

   Interesting review, most of which I agree with. For me the film felt a little flat except when it was Dormand and Pitt. That coupling worked well as their ineptitude was shown in such a comical way. Most of the film is easy to forget, but Pitt’s character will be forever etched in my mind, throwing his arms around in joy as he works out on the treadmill. Many times before I have seen Pitt play more serious roles. This was a welcome departure.
2. Lauren Jennings 10.04.08 / 1pm

   It was an interesting point you made in this review that I didn’t pick up on when I saw the film. You mentioned the characters playing more of themselves and bringing their own personalities to the roles. I went into the film not hearing too much about it, which I think really helped to form my overall opinion of the film. This was something you also mentioned. I agree with you that it’s best to go see the film not expecting too much, because it certainly delivered in my opinion. I really enjoyed it. I thought it was hilarious and I left the theatre still wondering a bit what it was all about. I’m a fan of this film though and I’ll probably be seeing it again soon.
3. Brittany Lough 10.05.08 / 7am

   I agree with the comment that this film is, ” far from bad.” I did not walk out of the theater thinking to myself, “Wow this is an award winner.” I walked out of this movie with a smile on my face. If you are looking for a movie where you can laugh a lot, this is for you. This film is so quirky, from Brad Pitt working out on the treadmill while rocking out, to the inventions being built in Clooney’s basement. The characters’ personalities make this film what it is. I have to admit that this is one of the few films that can get away with murdering off some of the main characters.
4. Beau Brigham 10.06.08 / 10am

   This film was simply brilliant. I went into the Arlington Theater to see this film with only hearing good things about it and having never seen a trailer. After I left the theater, I was content and happy. The Coen brothers did it again, made another interesting film to add to their work. The cast for this film is absolutely perfect. The diverse personalities of the characters is what makes this film so good. This film’s narrative structure reminded me of the film “21 Grams” because all of the different story lines that finally come together in the end. It’s interesting to compare this film to “No Country For Old Men.” I’m very surprised with how the Coen brothers can make such a serious film and then pull off film with so much humor. This is why I like the Coen brothers so much–because they are so versatile.
5. Evan Lanam 10.08.08 / 3pm

   I recently saw Burn After Reading and had mixed feelings as well. I felt that Burn After Reading and No Country were very similar, yet very different. First I will talk about their differences. No Country For Old Men’s plot was the opposite from Burn After Reading. It was a classic cat and mouse chase with minimal sub-plots and characters, with a straight forward style to it. Which made it very simple to understand. Burn After Reading has multiple sub-plots and characters making it more complex and difficult to follow. I liked both films, but felt that they ended too quickly. It is almost like the Coens will write their scripts not knowing the ending themselves, and when they feel the opportunity to end a film presents itself in their writing they end it abruptly. I feel their endings have deeper meaning than than just the obvious and that their movies are one big lesson.
6. Jameson Macaluso 10.13.08 / 8pm

   I went into this film with absolutely no expectations and knowing nothing much about it. I think the fact that I had no preconceived expectations made my experience very different than yours. I loved it! It was bizarre though – really funny, and really NOT funny at the same time. I thought Brad Pitt was great in his role, especially when he gets in the car with Osborne Cox – I just couldn’t stop laughing at him and that iPod of his. I suppose the killing tied in with the whole CIA angle, but it didn’t tie in at all with the comedy aspect. I definitely walked out of the theatre with a smile on my face, as the other contributors, but as I sit here writing this, I’m wondering, “What was that?” A definite, “Go See” in my book.
7. Sarah McIntosh 10.13.08 / 9pm

   I’ve always been a fan of a good comedy; although I had not seen many previews for this film, I had heard good things about it. I’ve been a fan of Brad Pitt and most of the films that he’s starred in, so when I heard he was playing a pretty ditzy person in this film, I figured it must be good. I didn’t go into the theater expecting it to be the greatest film ever made, but it seemed to put a smile on my face nonetheless. It was really good, and even when it hit it dramatic points, it was still able to make the viewer laugh, which I enjoyed thoroughly.
8. Joel Devries 10.16.08 / 7pm

   Overall I really enjoyed this film. I thought that it was exceptionally funny when Pitt and McDormand were on the screen with their naive yet incredibly persistent personalities. The way that the CIA handled the entire situation was just hilarious and really held true to Coen brother comedy. I definitely agree that you should go into the film without any prior opinions or expectations because its so hard to live up to the perfect vision you conjure in your head. Dark, hilarious, action packed, and witty, this film is just another trophy on the Coen brothers reel of fame.
9. Wyatt Feese 10.17.08 / 1pm

   I thought that this film was somewhat enjoyable and entertaining. I’d be lying if i said that i didn’t laugh at some parts of this film, especially when Pitt does his finger snapping dance in McDormand’s kitchen, but overall, I though that this film was boring. If It wasn’t for the talent and extremely funny personalities of the actors, this film would simply be a waste of 96 minutes. I think that this film will be forgotten in a month.
10. SARAREVILLE 10.17.08 / 6pm

    I thoroughly enjoyed this film and felt it was very entertaining in an odd sort of way. Pitt’s acting ability really shines through. He does an amazing job portraying a “goofball” gym employee, which seems very out of character for him. I was impressed by his and Clooney’s acting, the portrayal of their characters was very unified and realistic. As for the plot, it was a very odd tangled web of affairs. It was entertaining, although a little violent, as the cast dies off slowly. Overall, I enjoyed the film and was pleased.
11. EmilFendler 10.17.08 / 9pm

    I mostly agree with this review.

    The first thing I liked was the acting (with the exception of George Clooney). Tilda Swinton was her usual egotistical bitch-like self, which was great and very good for her role. Frances McDormand was also very good as the shy, yet open-hearted woman who just wanted to be loved. Richard Jenkins was exceptional as the awkward gym manager who loved McDormand, and Brad Pitt was hilarious as the weird and very stupid gym trainer. However, the best performance of the movie was that of veteran actor, John Malkovich. He was amazing and I think the film can be summed up with his line, “You are just another moron in a league of morons.”

    I know the Coen Brothers just got off of the success of No Country for Old Men, but this was a great, light-hearted movie to follow up with. Much better than the comedic failures of Intolerable Cruelty and The Lady Killers. I would recommend this movie to everyone, and I also agree that this was a great movie to start off the new fall season.
12. Brandon Molder 10.17.08 / 9pm

    I really was let down by this film. When I saw the previous I thought it was going to be a funny good movie. A half hour into the movie I already wanted to leave. During the movie I was waiting for something to happen, but nothing ever happened. It was a really boring story line. I think they could have made it a little bit better. I think the only thing that made this film good was the actors. I have never seen Brad Pitt play a role like he did in this movie, but I think he pulled it off really well.
13. alyssiareginato 10.17.08 / 10pm

    Dead on review. I knew that this film wasn’t going even to compare to No Country. Then again you shouldn’t compare it to No Country because they’re two completely different films. I didn’t expect it to be another Best Picture winner but it was still entertaining. Pitt and McDormand, I thought, completely stole the movie. They were so hilarious and it wouldn’t have been half as good without them. I think the reason why so many people were disappointed was because their expectations were too high. They were hoping for the film to top last year’s, but that didn’t happen.
14. RobbieMalin 10.17.08 / 10pm

    I can agree with this review, although I do feel that the film was a little better than it is being given credit for. Malkovich was hilarious throughout the film, as was the small role from J.K. Simmons. The rest of the cast was right on, as is to be expected with the caliber of the actors playing these roles. This film was nothing like most of the Coen Brothers films, and, as I watched it, I felt like something was going to happen, but it never did. The film is entertaining, but after the death of Pitt’s character, it seems to slow down and drag a little bit, because of the lack of comic relief. Overall, I liked the film and was entertained the whole time. However, I felt that it could have been another half hour longer, the 96 minutes felt like 45 minutes, and it’s over before you know it. I would recommend seeing this film.
15. devonstein 10.17.08 / 10pm

    I agreed with your point about high hopes. I have always been a fan of the Coen brothers, but left the theatre feeling somewhat dissatisfied after watching the film. I understand the Burn After Reading was intended to be a dark comedy, but all too often for me the film verged on playing a little too much like a drama. I wish the film would had picked a direction of either being serious or humorous, but I felt that when trying to strike a balance between the two, it left me in a sort of no man’s land. I agree with you about the top-notch acting, and I enjoyed the chemistry between Frances McDormand and Brad Pitt. When looking back on the film, I can’t pick out anything that I didn’t specifically like about it, but still I felt that it fell flat.
16. samuelmckaig 10.17.08 / 10pm

    I used to like the Coen brothers…until their last two movies. Now the Coen Brothers seem to be seeking awards and trophies, going for the “it makes so little sense it must be brilliant” film. The worst of this was “No Country For Old Men” which made me want to never return to a movie theater because not only did it make me feel bad for the future of cinema, but it actually made me feel more stupid for watching. This so-called comedy (Burn After Reading) only had one funny moment, and it involved an axe and a bold head. This movie made me actually feel bad about myself. There were NO unique, innovative, or even remotely well-done aspects of this movie whatsoever. The editing, cinematography, story, dialogue, acting, effects, sound design, blocking, and lighting were all mediocre to bad. There was nothing special about this film at all.
17. seanreedy 10.17.08 / 11pm

    I would agree that the film was promoted to be much better than it actually was. It is worth seeing, and the Coen brothers still delivered a good comedy. However, it seems like this “decent film” should have been much better, especially with the high amount of talented actors in the film and the brothers behind it. Once the brothers proved their talent with previous films, people began to expect more out of them, being more critical when the films are not worthy of Best Picture awards. However, it was still a good film, and the actors were all very good throughout. Hopefully, the next film the Coen brothers make will be best picture worthy, but this film is still worth going to see.
18. Stephen Smith 10.23.08 / 7pm

    This film has gotten a lot of comments and sparked a lot of good analysis. This is my two cents. The movie as a whole was mediocre. The acting by Richard Jenkins and George Clooney were the best. I loved the quirkiness and weirdness of Clooney’s character. His obsession with sex and that ridiculous contraption was just hilarious. The stupidity of Brad Pitt’s character was right on point, but he could have made that character the highlight of the film, and he did not. It might just be that there was a lot of hype around the movie, but I was disappointed. They did a very good job advertising for it and probably spent a lot of money on marketing. Overall it was worth seeing once, but probably not again.
19. Brooks Burgoon 10.24.08 / 10pm

    I thought that this film was going to be a funny, witty movie, with a story that really talked about nothing, like the Coen Brothers famous “Big Lebowski.” But after seeing this movie, I had to tell all of my friends that while this film has its moments (George Clooney’s character is my favorite) it is a very dark, depressing movie. The film was marketed like it would be the next Lebowski, but it left out the darkness that we saw in the Coen Brothers award winning film “No Country For Old Men.” I am a huge fan of the Coen Brothers and though this film was a curve ball. But, it was still great, and everything that you didn’t expect going into it, which I think is what the Coen Brothers do so well.
20. Katrina Murdy 10.27.08 / 8pm

    My roommate asked me to see this movie a week after opening night, and I agreed, but only because I had not seen any previews, knew none of the actors that would be in it, and had no idea what the plot and story would be like. I truly think that television previews for a movie are sometimes misleading, and it is much more exciting to see a film without any expectations. I loved how the Coen Brothers’ amplified Brad Pitt even more than he already is, showing that he can play almost any character flawlessly. I thought that the beginning of the film portrayed a comical, happy-go-lucky sort of movie, and was surprised when Chad gets shot. There were parts of the movie that threw in curveballs, and I liked that the dialogue was fast-faced and the movie was linear. The ending was shocking and abrupt. The death of Chad was never talked about, and Linda’s plastic surgery was never shown, but this leaves the viewer to think for themselves and create an ending in his or her head.
21. Alexis Fletcher 11.10.08 / 8pm

    I went to see this movie with my mom about a week after it came out in theaters and she warned me that the Coen Brother’s films are always a bit bizarre. I could not grip on what bizarre truly meant until after the film had finished, but I have to admit that a part of me truly fell in love with the characters. I thought George Clooney and Frances McDormand were amazing at portraying the quirky and odd personalities that the Coen Brother’s were looking for. Frances McDormand’s character partly annoyed at me at times because she was getting so deeply involved in government business just for the hope of getting plastic surgery. Brad Pitt’s character was my favorite, as he helped keep the movie light and airy and I was completely surprised at how fast and brutal his character was killed. Overall I thought the movie was good, but mostly because of the great acting.
22. LesetjaMohlabane 11.10.08 / 8pm

    This movie is definitely a good laugh, if you are willing to sit through an unconventional type of comedy. It is definitely Cohen comedy, and amazing acting which is why it is a must see if you are a fan of the previous works of the Coen Brothers. It has amazing acting and there are many unexpected surprises which keeps you laughing throughout the majority of the film. This movie is very well unified with many causes which create for hilarious effects, a typical Coen Brother tactic. All and all this creates for a diegetic world which keeps you at the edge of your seat. While many would say that the movie was overhyped, going in the movie with no expectations, I guarantee you will have a good laugh.
23. kylehufford 11.21.08 / 11am

    I agree with those who said they were let down by this film. Like Kevin Tran said in the review, it was given lots of hype and I was personally hoping for another Big Lebowski, or even something close. This movie was entertaining enough, it was funny enough, but I had been hoping for so much more. I am a Coen brothers fan but unfortunately, this one didn’t quite do it for me.
24. Marcus Perfjell 01.30.09 / 10am

    Your review is well written and you bring a lot of thoughts to the movie. I however didn’t like it that much, good story though since it almost didn’t happen anything through out the entire film but I still saw it, and thought it was OK. You got to love Brad Pitts acting, I sure will never forget it!
    I didn’t like the ending that much either, there was no closing part, just bang-boom over. Big disappointment.
25. Melanie Kirk 02.13.10 / 5pm

    I heard nothing about this film before I saw it and I found it hilarious. I love those dark comedies that are raw and about peoples real problems. I found each actor fit his or her roles perfectly. Even though there were some parts that seemed at a stand still I enjoyed the movie over all. The movie was only 96 minutes so I went by fast, which was a let down. I felt as if the movie suddenly ended, and it left us wanting more. Over all I enjoyed the film and would recommend seeing it.
26. Rachel King 10.25.11 / 6pm

    I really enjoyed your comparison of the two Coen Brother films and I agree with you on almost every single point that you’ve made. Because I am one of those people who saw this after No Country I was a little let down but overall I think that it was a good film and deserves to be watched and critiqued seperately from its predecessor.

Home | SBCC | Class Schedule | Film and Media Studies

Contact: Prof. Nico MaestuCopyright 2007-24 Log in