'Fargo' by Ethan Coen & Joel Coen Review: Looking back, it's good but a little overrated

I have seen Fargo before, many years prior, but with the creation of its television series which takes its concept and reaches new heights, it seemed like a good idea to check it out again and see how it holds up in comparison.

While its television series counterpart performs excellently, though some seasons more than others, it's to be expected given an increased budget, different filmmaking era, and the increased amount of time for the narrative to unfold with each episode clocking in at just under an hour long.

The Coen brothers hailed as some of the greatest filmmakers modern Hollywood has to offer, but I'm not so sure I'm willing to give them such credit; especially long into my adventures into independent and international filmmaking. This is to say that I went into Fargo with a completely different mindset as I did before when I first watched it.

I do enjoy many of their films, but to me, they feel a bit all too typical within the modern blockbuster framework. Meaning, if you've seen one of their films, you know what to expect. If you've also seen other blockbuster films, you still know roughly what to expect. Perhaps this is simply my perspective of modern cinema now, where the blockbuster style simply doesn't appeal to me much anymore. And the still rather large, but more unique stories that are told within Hollywood don't seem to surprise me all that much anymore.

It had been quite a long time since I had, so many elements within its narrative didn't really hold any memory with me. I remembered more from the first season of the television show than I did the film that came first. Though, that isn't to say that it's a negative thing, just that perhaps both time and preference are factors into why I don't hold such a fond memory of Fargo.

Fargo, North Dakota

I have a special place in my heart for films from the 80's and 90's. If you've noticed a pattern in my posts before, it's that I love 35mm film, and I also love films of the crime genre. Though, these days these two specific things seem to be less and less interesting. The best of the best are from an older period of time, sadly.

In Fargo's case, the film is more of a dark comedy than it is a crime film. Some might argue what the difference there is, but there's certainly a stark contrast between the film Heat and Fargo: a serious portrayal of its narrative to the audience. Ultimately, Fargo isn't a film that takes itself all that seriously, and that's where it shines best. It pulls you in with its obscene location of choice: the snowy, small town of Fargo. Naturally this makes quite a fitting location for a crime narrative, given it's not your typical expected location for a series of unfolding crimes.

It thrives on its ability to tell this story in a very minimalist style, where the white of the sky seems to connect with the white of the snow. This opens up the space and colour to reveal locations that are typically not an ideal location for shootouts nor where you'd typically find a couple of idiotic criminals scheming on how they'll make their next sum of cash at the expense of others.

Speaking of its criminal characters: the two are wonderfully cast and hold an almost cartoonish nature of idiocy. Where they get away with the most foolish of actions -- up until a certain point, that is -- and it works very well. Fargo, for the most part, is about a series of events unfolding one after another, resulting in its characters cornering themselves with the seemingly neverending bad luck that follows after each event.

Though, I have to admit that I prefer when this is done in a more serious manner, where the tensions can be felt in the audience. Where the suspense rising is done in a way that displays desperation and fear into the characters; I can't say I felt the same with Fargo, for it seems to come and go far too quickly. But I suppose that is in fact the point: a small crime that appears to be harmless to one person spirals out of control into a series of events that indeed do cause plenty of harm to others. Particularly, it maintains its interest by happening to the seemingly sweetest of people that we wouldn't assume could perform such actions in the first place.

This I believe does hold some authenticity to the structure of the narrative, even when the dialogue is focusing more on its characters and funny methods of speaking. If I had to choose a specific thing about the film that I truly enjoyed, it's the actors themselves. Their performances are a single driving force in the film. Each cast member is wonderful, fitting their chosen roles to near perfection.

Style and substance

While there's some creative use of camera angles in the film, there's not a whole lot that really stands out. It's rather simple filmmaking for the most part -- I could make the connection to Spielberg's style of directing in which it tells a story, but there's very little to the creative ways it is done. Sure, perhaps something may interest you, but it's far from attempting to set a new industry standard.

That is still not to say that there isn't anything in the film that is creative, I enjoyed many moments in which the camera focused on its wide, open spaces. Where the composition of the image was the focus in how it showed a character simply walking to their car. It plays into its ability to convey the feeling that these events could happen to anyone, anywhere.

But I feel there's a slight lacking of substance in moments. Where character development simply isn't given enough time to flourish. Some characters are given a significant amount of time to develop over others, and it leads to an inability to connect with them at times. This isn't as great to witness given the crime aspects of the film's narrative, but it's still far from justification to call it a bad film.

In fact, it certainly isn't. It's a great film, but it's certainly a bit overrated for what it does. There's elements of fun and creativity in what is an intentional choice to provide that, but it's not really a film you'll find yourself thinking about a few years into the future. Only once is it again placed in front of you are you likely to remember it. This is the case for many films, especially films by the Coen brothers.

They can be great to watch, but once you have watched it, and are given a little time to reconsider your thoughts, you'll notice that the film simply did all it needed and wanted to do: entertain you. It doesn't reinevent the wheel, neither does it aim to take you on a roller-coaster ride. It just comes, and then it goes.