INTOLERABLE CRUELTY Rating: (out of 5 stars) Director: Joel Coen (and Ethan of course) Producers: Ethan Coen and Brian Grazer (and Joel of course) Writers: Robert Ramsey & Matthew Stone and Ethan Coen and Joel Coen Director of Photography: Roger Deakins Cast: George Clooney, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Billy Bob Thornton, Cedric the Entertainer, Geoffrey Rush, Edward Herrmann Visit the IMDB page for full cast and crew.

Click on the photo to buy merchandise from Intolerable Cruelty.

Comment on the message boards.

Review by: Dan Tester
10/12/03

There are few things in the world of cinema that are more anticipated by me than a new Coen Brothers movie. I have never been let down by them (to varying degrees obviously, but always a thumbs up.) They are fascinating to me -- to pin them down to a "genre" is as easy as pinning down Anne Heche to a sexual affiliation. Their resume includes slapstick comedies, dark crime dramas, satirical crime dramas, 1930s homages, and of course, bowling crime comedies. Their style is so specific and immediately recognizable, regardless of the subject matter, that it is assumed lesser filmmakers would eventually try to rip them off. Their new film, Intolerable Cruelty, appears to be one of these kinds of movies. It has a lot of the Coens trademarks, but completely lacks any of the inspiration that has made them great. Intolerable Cruelty is like a bad Coen Brothers rip-off that the Coen Brothers themselves have orchestrated. It is shockingly bad. Not only is Intolerable Cruelty the worst movie the Coen Brothers have ever made, but I would go out on a limb to suggest that it is not, in fact, even a movie at all. It is a flurry of lameness that left me so mind-numbingly disappointed that I lurched out of the theater as if I had just succumbed to another Joel Schumacher film. The Coens have definitely taken on a new genre this time, but sadly, it is the one known as "Hollywood misfire."

Once every five years or so, you hear about an esteemed filmmaker who has had his final cut stolen by nervous studio execs who feel "they" know better how to "assemble" a film. It happened to Robert Altman with a Grisham adaptation -- I still saw the movie because it was Altman, was disappointed with the final cut delivered by the "studio," and was left wondering what kind of a film existed before this interference. Intolerable Cruelty feels like this kind of a movie. I have heard no reports of confrontation between the Coens and the studio here, but there can be no other explanation for this ungodly mess of a movie. Imagine Entertainment produced Intolerable Cruelty, so I don't know if Opie and that guy with pointy hair had "final cut" influence on the Coens here; if not, something appears to have gone horribly wrong with the universe.

That all said, George Clooney is great in this movie. Clooney has become one of my favorite actors currently working today, period. This is significant, because I couldn't stand the guy at first. His work on "ER" was such fluff, and his first few film choices seemed to doom him to McLean Stevenson hell. But then he matured, took some chances, and transformed in front of my very eyes with movies like Out of Sight, Three Kings, and O' Brother Where Art Thou? He became one of my curious favorites, and to be fair, he doesn't disappoint here. I kept thinking one thing as I watched Clooney in Intolerable Cruelty -- he is Cary Grant. He really is. Clooney is hilarious as the morally ambiguous divorce lawyer who is led astray, and it is just such a shame that his inspired performance is wasted as an isolated image in a montage of banality.

I have finally pinpointed the appeal of Catherine Zeta-Jones. Sure, she is incredibly sexy, with a body that will hopefully cure Michael Douglas of his sexual addictions, and she seems to have some talent (although her acting chops are hardly challenged here -- she is playing the same character she did in America's Sweethearts, but with less "inspiration" -- bad sign.) But it is the way she says words with the letter "R" in them. Just pay attention -- there is something really sexy about it. She is kind of like an incredibly sexy and exotic Elmer Fudd with cleavage. This is a strange observation I guess, but at some point, all I had to focus on in this movie was the incredible way Catherine said words with the letter "R" in them. Otherwise, sadly, she is completely forgettable in this movie. As is pretty much everyone else (hey, if you actually retain Cedric the Entertainer as a supporting actor and his character comes up flat, there is no joy in Mudville. The mighty Coens have struck out).

I am not even sure how to describe Intolerable Cruelty. It is an attempted comedy about marital infidelity and the legal ramifications. This is certainly a topic that is "ripe" with promise, but here the "fruit" is delivered on a withered tree. Is it possible that the Coens have intentionally made a bad film to satirize bad films? Is it possible they took the lead of Charlie Kaufman and his Adaptation script, which daringly presented a terrible version of Hollywood convention as it's final third to attack how terrible final thirds of Hollywood movies are? Could the Coens have actually taken it a step further though, and actually constructed an "entire" movie to satirize Hollywood convention? I swear to you, this is the only explanation I can think of, and I guess it comes from giving the Coens so much credit. There is "something" going on here -- I refuse to believe this is a serious addition to their filmography.

I have to admit, I am shaken to my very foundation after watching Intolerable Cruelty. The Coens were one of the few guarantees left in my world of film, and I hope they right the ship soon. Never, in my wildest of dreams, did I ever think that there would be a single day in my life in which a concept of "intolerable cruelty" would apply more to a Coen Brothers movie than it would my beloved Chicago Cubs. Life can be strange. Go Cubs.

But as always, it is only one man's opinion.

(A Universal Pictures release. Opened in wide release on October 10, 2003.)