Burn After Reading

"Appearances can be...deceptive."

As I noted in my review of "No Country For Old Men" last November the Coen Brothers are responsible for more of my favorite movies than any other one filmmaker. Since 1984's "Blood Simple" they have turned out 10 great films, 1 pretty good one ("Intolerable Cruelty"), and only 1 that just wasn't very good (their remake of "The Ladykillers"). Their newest, "Burn After Reading," is film number 13 from the brothers. Which category will this one fall into?
Osborn Cox (John Malkovich) has a drinking problem. At least that's what he's told when he's fired by the CIA. He of course proceeds to tell everyone that he quit and when his cold wife Katie (Tilda Swinton) asks what he's going to do now his answer is, "I'll do some consulting...or maybe write my memoirs." Katie poses the very reasonable question, "Who would want to read those?" The answer it turns out is Chad Feldheimer (Brad Pitt), a dunderhead personal trainer who stumbles upon the disc that contains all of Cox's "secret files."
In the interest of helping out his friend and co-worker, Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand), who has no way of paying for her upcoming elective surgeries, Chad realizes he can give Osborn the disc back for the price of "the good samaritan tax." Chad and Linda's boss Ted (Richard Jenkins) is "uncomfortable with this," but the pair of positive thinkers are too simple to realize that what they're "engaged in is blackmail." They really believe they're doing something nice that deserves a reward. Harry Pfarrar (George Clooney) meanwhile, is a paranoid former G-man who's cheating on his wife with Katie and Linda simultaneously.
As Chad explains to Cox ever so stealthily, "Appearances can be...deceptive." The same is true of this film's plot. In the hands of most filmmakers, "Burn" would have been a fairly simple story with a few contrived twists and turns thrown in to make it seem more involved. As done by the Coens it's actually an extremely involved plot with several pieces and we're never quite sure how they fit or where this is all going. For me at least, it's actually too involved. Not in a "I just don't get it" kind of way, but in a it really slows down the fun sort of way. "Burn" takes its time getting off the ground. The first twenty minutes or so are rather slow and not nearly as funny as they ought to be. Once Pitt shows up it begins to kick into gear. He's never really done anything like this and he's absolutely hilarious. To do this within a year of "The Assassination of Jesse James" is all the proof one needs of the man's range.
Malkovich does a fine job but he seems to take a back seat as the film goes on and his character seems more interesting than the Coens really allow him to be. Swinton and Clooney do fine but don't do much that's terribly interesting. McDormand does a terrific job as Linda. This character is a far cry from "Fargo's" Marge Gunderson, but as in that film she provides a sunny outlook that serves as a great contrast to the rest of the proceedings. Jenkins, as always, is very dependable. I also have to make special mention of David Rasche ("Sledge Hammer") and J.K. Simmons as Cox's former CIA superiors who are trying (and failing) to make sense of this whole mess. Their two scenes together are comic gold and they're the most well-written scenes in the entire film.
In the end, "Burn After Reading" is a pretty good movie. The slow start and some rickety moments here and there hold it back from being the movie it could have been, which is the kind of movie the Coens usually make. So in short, Coen fanatics such as myself will be a bit disappointed but will definitely be glad they saw it. Plus it's nice to see a movie set in D.C. with absolutely no political ax to grind, and all the digs made at Seattle are just hilarious. It's no "O Brother," but you'll have a good time. 7/10.