Burn After Reading

English/96 Minutes/2008/Rated R

"Report back to me when things make sense." - CIA Superior

That line could be a mantra for our own CIA and “Burn After Reading,” the new Coen Brothers film is a darkly comic take on that world.

In the film, two bumbling gym workers, Chad and Linda (Frances McDormand and Brad Pitt), in need of money, stumble across the memoirs of failed CIA analyst Ozborne Cox (John Malkovich). Not knowing that what they have is essentially junk they attempt to blackmail Cox. Far in over their heads they set in motion a course of events that lead to violence and hilarity, sometimes in the same scene. Throw into this a philandering Treasury agent (George Clooney) who is sleeping with Cox's wife (Tilda Swinton) and you have a strange blend of musical beds and black comedy as only the Coens can do.

The performances are all great, but most of the characters are unlikeable. Mcdormand's Linda is an incredibly egotistical and shallow person. Her desire for plastic surgery leads her to do things she mightn't otherwise. She is so obsessed with “reinventing herself” that she is unable to see herself as lovable and is therefore unable to see the love of one of her coworkers.

Brad Pitt as Chad, her bumbling assistant, plays braindead (almost to the point of farce). There is not much for Pitt to do here but he makes the most of his screen time. Clooney as Harry is a philandering, pathological liar, but he manages to portray the character as a sort of stunted child who never suspects that what he's doing could have serious consequences. Tilda Swinton is almost wasted in an ice-queen performance that, while memorable, is not something we haven't seen before. Capping the cast is John Malkovich as Cox. He is a man who has been marginalized and abused by people he perceives to be his lessers and we watch as he slowly comes unhinged.

The film is very much about the failure of people to communicate at both the personal and the governmental level. People talk at each other, evasive and sometimes oblivious to the other party. A great example is the scene where Chad calls Cox to offer to return his memoir files. Chad is expecting a reward but Cox thinks he is attempting blackmail. Another example is a great scene where Cox confronts a man in his basement and they discuss what he represents.

At the national level we have Cox's superiors (JK Simmons and David Rasche) who act as a sort of Greek chorus to the goings on. When it is mentioned that someone has been murdered in Cox's house the superiors say “burn the body.” As things escalate the priorities continue to be the reduction of headaches.

Behind all of this is a great dramatic irony in which no one gets what they want or deserve but suffer the consequences of decisions made in haste. This is a recurring theme in many of the Coen's films, from Llewelyn Moss in “No Country for Old Men” to the McDunnoughs in “Raising Arizona” there is the recurring theme of unintended consequences. In “Burn After Reading” we see that governments, like people are always trying to minimize the consequences, even at the risk of doing greater harm. Recommended.

Rated R for Pervasive Language, Some Sexual Content and Violence

Bent

English/104 Minutes/1997/Rated NC-17

“Queer is out, queer is dead. Ra-ta-tat-tat,” says Greta (Mick Jagger) in “Bent,” a film based on a London play by Martin Sherman. The film is about gay playboy, Max (Clive Owen) who is caught up in the purging of homosexuals by Nazis in 1930s Germany.

Too save himself from worse persecution Max pretends to be Jewish instead of gay (which he has to prove in a rather grisly scene) and uses his family's money and his own wits to live a slightly better life than other prisoners in Dachau.

It is here that he meets and makes friends with prisoner Horst (Lothaire Bluteau) whom he corrals into the same work detail. Every day they move rocks from one pile to another and then back.

The two men try to find love and friendship even though they are not allowed to touch each other. This leads to some interesting scenes of verbal intercourse that are provocative but not all together sold by the players.

There are some wonderful images (the opening orgy in Berlin, a hat on an electrified fence) and some great performance moments (Jagger in drag is devilish), but these moments just make the ones that don't work more obvious. The writing is obviously meant for a small troop to perform on stage with limited props and personnel and the film suffers from this restriction.

Once the film leaves Berlin and moves into Dachau (played in the film by an abandoned cement factory, complete with ductwork) the level of believability plummets significantly. Also, as much as I love Clive Owen, this is not one of his best performances as he never reaches the intensity or honesty of Bluteau. In fact, it is Bluteau's turn as Horst that makes for the most memorable character, even though he doesn't appear until nearly halfway through the film.

The honesty, integrity and desperation of Horst are what ground the movie and push it into moments of brilliance. In one scene where the two men stand at attention, unable to face each other, Horst cries when Max's verbal love play turns aggressive. He doesn't come off as a preening queen, but as a lonely man who wants the comfort of love.

It is a testament to the players that these characters don't come off as farcical or one dimensional. Say what you will about the acting, but at least they are portraying homosexuals in a way other than the "queer eye" flavor we're all used to these days. I think what makes the movie engaging for us straight folk is that the humanity is stressed over the sexuality. We get to know these men as people, not just "gays." The best films about sexuality are this way, whether it's the dysfunction of "Closer" or the true-crime tragedy of "Boys Don't Cry."

Unfortunately the film is handicapped by its budget and its focused writing. With few extras and a less than believable concentration camp the story doesn't hold up. Also the idea that these two men would be left alone to work seems to stretch the credibility. I understand this film was low budget but if you can't effectively sell the drama on film, perhaps your story is best left on the stage.

The play, first shown in 1979 (with a young Ian McKellan as Max), was among the first to openly discuss the treatment of homosexuals during the Holocaust. It asks the important question “what's wrong with being homosexual?” and has lead to such projects as the documentary “Paragraph 175” about survivors of this persecution.

In this age of saturation of stories about the Holocaust and World War II in Europe, it is refreshing to see a different perspective. The Holocaust story has been told many times on film and it is becoming difficult for filmmakers to tell the story in new and engaging ways. Many either make a showcase of horrors (The Grey Zone), or decide not to show the atrocity (The Counterfeiters). “Bent” is a fresh perspective that is honest and non-exploitative and should be applauded as such.

I recommended the film but only as there aren't many of its type. There are better holocaust films and better films about sexual identity, but “Bent” does try and for that it should be credited.

On a more sinister note, while the film is NC-17 there is not much here to warrant it. What sex there is takes place in the opening orgy scene and nary a penis in sight. The offending scene is two men having anal sex, which we see from behind and there is some thrusting. You've seen much worse in R-Rated films. The rating is sad proof that there is still “something wrong” with being gay. Recommended with reservations.

Rated NC-17 for a strong scene of graphic sexuality, explicit sexual dialogue, some brutal violence, language and drug use