The Ballad of Buster Scruggs

Very weak Coens, hopefully they pick the weaker moment for the future. The stories are completely without a twist, there is only the adorable finger-shooting in the first one, the beautiful scenery in the one with the charismatic vagabond Watts, and here and there a typical Coen joke, but there are so few of them that they could be counted on the fingers of one hand of a sawmill worker. What I admire most about the Coens is the biting, caustic, ironic humour, which here is almost non-existent. Then the fifth and longest story is almost unbearable, it doesn't go anywhere, it's just such a cry into the wind and I have to repeat it again, without a single twist. (12/29/2018)

The Coen brothers have always had their own specific approach to storytelling and this short-story western is no different. The beginning, for instance, is an exemplary bliss. Buster Scruggs is a character you simply have to love because the things he does in the first short story are simply badass. Coupled with the specific direction style of the Coen brothers, it’s the bomb. But then the first story ends, the second one starts and things get incredibly boring. The stories don’t follow up on one another and there aren’t any great endings that could attract your attention… the stories simply flow and the original excitement about the director’s ideas gradually fades and all you are left with is Buster Scruggs himself. (02/28/2019)

Buster Scruggs had a good line of sight, but the Coen’s were sprinkling targets with very variable success. Most of the bullets ended up in the prairie. A disparate, unbalanced anthology that is meant to recall the romantic charm of westerns and the West, which has never been. Instead, it reminds us that the Coen’s are no longer masters of tonal equilibristics, eccentric dialogues and brilliant points. This film plays more on sentiment rather than skillfully creating it. Some short stories (trunk, gold digger) are downright awful and out of rhythm. Even though the moods change here, the overall impression is insanely monotonous, also because the Coen’s only vary safely. In the end, I remember with love the demented version of Lemonade Joe, the hangman blues of James Franco and the dog ballad... the rest is not even worth a spit into the dust. (11/25/2018)

The Coens may have a lot of filmmaking years under their belt, but reviving a half-dead genre and enriching it with a short story style is a very good idea and definitely makes for good entertainment. The first two stories are absolute carnage and the best of the western genre of the last ten years, with no sparing of black-sarcastic humour and a decent dose of violence, so I think it's a great pity that the remaining four short stories are much slower (I'd skip the third and sixth altogether). The fourth one impresses with the idea, the setting and the surprising finale, and the fifth one has a slower pace, but the action-packed ending is satisfying enough including an unexpected twist. Overall, then, I'm satisfied, it's playful, absurd, gritty, funny and smart enough to keep the viewer's attention, but if the whole film had stuck to the opening two stories, we'd be talking about the best film of the year. 70% (11/27/2018)

I had to strain to think back to a time when the Coen brothers last spoke to me so strongly, and the best I could do was No Country for Old Men. Even the related genre film True Grit was not as complex and did not cover as many subgenres as this one does. I am most grateful that from the very beginning this was a film and not a series, as originally rumored in the media, before the creators themselves shut down such rumors. This is exactly how, in seemingly unrelated stories bound by death, two hours, and a formal reading from a book, it clearly resonates how cruel, hopeless, and infinitely romantic life in the Wild West must have been. (10/24/2019)

Great. It seems to me, according to the feedback from the world and the database here, that the Coens have been making films mostly for themselves and me in recent years. But why would I mind that? Every short story was something different, and each was great. There was typical humor in unpredictable situations as well as melancholy thinking about people and about life, and I certainly don't agree that the short stories didn't have points, because they did. Just maybe they weren't as evident and literal as people would have liked. Yes, I thought that the gold-digger story with Tom Waits would be the last and that it would be a beautiful ending, but then, after it ended, the next one started and then came the last one (typical Coen anecdote), and I certainly didn't mind. (12/10/2018)

A Western anthology film by the Coen brothers that features six unrelated vignettes, each worth mentioning, but the combination of which can be slightly unnerving due to the mood jumps it involves (in addition to the digital camera which takes some time to get used to). So let’s review them from the beginning. The Ballad of Buster Scruggs: A crazy and surprisingly bloody comedy with a singing gunman (Tim Blake Nelson) that entertains by its brutal humour as well as the main character’s nicely written catchphrases and songs. I wouldn’t mind a longer version. 70%. Near Algodones: James Franco as a loser gangster whose funny attempts to escape the noose would be great for a feature-length version with a more sophisticated plot. The bank clerk with pans hung all over himself is the highlight. 70%. Meal Ticket: It’s a pity and also a bit shocking that, after the first two parts of the Coen anthology that please with humour, the unsuspecting viewer is then thrown into a relatively dark and depressive drama which can be seen as a parable about the death of true art and its substitution by cheap charlatanism that sells better. Interesting, but quite repetitive at times and incongruous with the general atmosphere. 50%. All Golden Canyon: A simple, yet heartfelt story about a gold digger, wholly based on the performance of a beardy Tom Waits and a breathtaking scenery. Heavily inspired by Jack London. 65%. The Gal Who Got Rattled: I dare to say this is the most interesting and Coenesque segment of all in terms of storyline. It builds up slowly and lets the characters unveil lengthily, but the unexpected ending makes it the most impressive of all the tales. 75%. The Mortal Remains: A philosophical conversation for the end. On paper, this might have looked like the best possible ending, but in reality, it’s rather tiring for the viewer. Too bad Brendan Gleeson was not used to the fullest. 55%. All in all, those two hours were enjoyable and the film was definitely not disappointing (unlike Ave, Caesar!, Coen brothers’ previous flick). It could have been much better, however, if only the fun from the first two parts had lasted the entire time. (11/29/2018)

The idea of short western stories by the Coen brothers with a great cast seemed very appealing to me, but the result didn’t quite live up to my expectations. The extensive runtime and weird endings without much of a point didn’t help either. I’m not going to pretend I didn't have fun. I enjoyed some of the stories a lot, others considerably less. Anyway, I'm glad I saw the film, but it isn’t worth more than a slightly above-average score. /"First time?"/ 3*+ (08/17/2020)