User reviews

Beautifully observed vignettes which give believable insights into the lives of early settlers to the Wild West. Ironic, tragic and sometimes comic, each one is entertaining in its own way and serves as a reminder of the harshness of the time.

How do you rate a movie that is very well done, but you just don't connect with it at all? I love the Coen brothers, and I watched this with an open heart. Not every Coen brothers movie knocks it out of the park, but all of them are at least smart and interesting. The same holds true for this one, though I'm sorry to say that I found myself bored throughout most of it.

Six stories is a lot to process in one sitting. The problem for me was that I would be watching one of the segments, trying to understand its significance or find something to appreciate story-wise, and then we moved on to the next tale.

There was nothing wrong with it and I would consider watching it again some time with a fresh perspective. This movie did seem to have a grasp on itself and I trust that the Coens knew what they were doing. It was very unique and beautifully shot, but I think this one ranks low on the Coen's filmography. And if this wasn't a Coen brothers movie, I would probably be more dismissive of it.

The Coen Brothers are some of the most popular and also best movie directors currently working. They created one of my all time favourite movies in The Big Lebowski (1998), and some of the best movies of their respectable decades such as the cult hit Fargo (1996) & the Neo-Noir Western No Country for Old Men (2007). And now they return in 2018, together with Netflix, to present the most unique movie of the year!

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs tells six individual and self contained storys in the Wild West. As usual, the movie looks stunning. It is beautifully shot, has some of the best cinematography of recent years and it's just a joy to watch. Also the composed soundtrack is really fitting. As said, the movie is cut in six minor portions: The Ballad of Buster Scruggs, Near Aldgones, Meal Ticket, All Golds Canyon, the Gal who got Rattled & the Mortal Remains.

They do not have anything particular in common plot wise, but thematically they all tell the huge story of the Wild West - the dark & crazy, sometimes sad side of it. Because make no mistake, this is a really brutal movie. While the first story is very big on comedic relief, the later chapters get really dark, especially the third having a heartbreaking and strangely poetic ending. The fifth story was probably the most cinematic story, since it told a beautiful little tale that could've been easily explored in a regular film. And the last story is basically only one huge dialogue. It's remarkable at how the Coens write their dialogue - it's eventually only people talking about their lifes and out of nowhere the mood changes into complete danger and suspense. The acting of the over all many performers was great as usual, with especially notable performances by Liam Neeson, Tom Waits & Tim Blake Nelson.

There are a few tiny things that bothered me (would've liked a bit more of Gleeson), but these are minor concerns. The Coens are back with another tightly written, thought provoking and fully enjoyable movie that reflects on not only their recurring themes/patterns of violence & fantastic dialogue but also to tell the huge story of the Wild West in its most heartbreaking fashion.

This is the most unique movie of the year!

Six separate stories of life in the old west, all visually stunning, well written and acted, some more enjoyable than others. The first story, about the namesake Buster Scruggs, is by far the best. Fast, clever dialog, funny and pays homage to classic Westerns. It easily could have been expanded into a full movie. The second story, which is very short, is full of irony and quite good. The next three stories take a bleak and depressing turn, lose the humor and go on much too long. Another reviewer said it best that although they are well done, it's hard to connect to the characters or stories, and ultimately are boring. I hung on hoping some of the dark wit would return, but it never did.

The first 17 minutes were the highlight, and it went downhill from there. That first segment, "The Ballad of Buster Scruggs", was excellent. I could watch an entire movie based on that character, played extremely well by Tim Blake Nelson. It was interesting and funny.

"Near Algodones" kept me interested, and I enjoyed the characters, but there was no take away, so it kind of fell flat.

"Meal Ticket" was worthless and should have been cut altogether. It was extremely boring and sad.

"All Gold Canyon" and "The Gal Who Got Rattled" were enjoyable and interesting. Good characters and beautiful cinematography. Both segments kept my interest.

"The Mortal Remains" had some interesting dialogue but it fell off and didn't seem to have a point.

So one segment was fantastic, three others were pretty good, and two were completely forgettable. A mixed bag, but I generously give it a 6/10.

I am a huge Coen Brothers fan, and a huger Tom Waits fan. This is a little bit of heaven. Take time to watch and make your own mind up. I am so happy that the old times of being tied to a studio is gone. Netflix, et al, has provided us with independent and unique movies. But this particular independent movie hasn't suffered some that other have. This is prime Coen Brothers with an a-list cast.

I was fortunate enough to see this at the LFF with the Coen brothers present. During their introduction they mentioned how they wrote each chapter as a series of shorts over 25 years, and it certainly felt like this both in good ways and bad. Each story was completely different from the one either side of it and none were short of originality. Stories unfolded in the way only a Coen brother's film could - a style that I have always admired.

What was slightly disappointing was its lack of continuity. Each of the stories are completely contained and the final short was one of the most disappointing for me ending in quite an anticlimax. I understand these shorts are independent of one another but had they intersected in some way I think there could have been a much more satisfying conclusion. But the subversion of that expectation I also admire, my brain was just full of the interesting situations that could have unfolded had these characters come into contact with each other - as per a Tarantino film. It could also have ended with a different short as the 5th story for me (and the gold panning segment) was arguably the best.

Aside from the story itself the film has great visuals, some amazing one liners and incredible acting performances - especially considering the lengths actors went to in order to get into character for just a 20 minutes segment of a film. Overall expect 6 Coen brothers shorts sewn together with the thinest fabric imaginable and a time at the cinema like you haven't had all year.

This movie has an accumulative effect. The stories range from funny to grim to harrowing to ironic to haunting to horrifying. You barely have time to recover from one before you're thrust into the next one. The format is set up as a dime Western book where we get to see six of the stories. There is a real authentic western feel to them. A real grit.

Bruno Delbonnel's cinematography is spectacular. Wide sweeping vistas, majestic mountains, stylized towns, all beautifully captured. There's also a surreal feel to some the stories. Imagine if 'Pulp Fiction' were all western stories. And on that train of thought, TBoBS succeeds in many areas where 'The Hateful Eight' did not. A great collection of short movies by the Coen Brothers.

I'm not really sure were I stand with this film, it started off really well, but just went down hill. I liked a couple of the stories, but some are just really weird. The cinematography is excellent. I stuck with it till the very end but was very close to switching it off but something just kept me watching it.

I would say its worth giving it ago, but don't be surprised if you don't like it.

I feel like the Coen brothers are daring us to dislike The Ballad of Buster Scruggs. At the end of each one of the unrelated stories I found myself asking, "That's it?" And yet I've thought about this movie more than others I've seen recently. These western sketches stick with you. What's the point? I don't know. But I enjoyed seeing it unfold.

I have loved the Coen Brothers since I was thirteen years old and have appreciated and admired their craft and style. Every film they make is wildly different from the other, while maintaining that same Coen Brothers feel. When I saw their last outing, 'Hail Caesar,' I felt a pit in my stomach. After so many years of making wholly original and engaging films, have they lost their luster? After watching 'The Ballad of Buster Scruggs,' I feel like I'm witnessing a slow but steady descent for the Coens.

This movie had my full interest with its first story; the unpredictability of the Buster Scruggs character had me wondering what he was going to do next. I expected him to be a recurring character that tied the stories together, but no such luck. Then came James Franco's story, which had a promising setup, a hilarious bank telling side character, and an abrupt ending that brought the story nowhere. Okay, I'm still interested. Then I was subjected to four horrifically boring segments that all went absolutely nowhere with no satisfying payoffs or memorable moments. I would have described the rest, but I struggle to remember anything about them.

I don't know what the Coen Brothers are doing anymore. What was the point of this movie? Was it to relay that all stories of the Wild West don't have satisfactory payoffs or actual endings? Was this movie a metaphor for greed? I mean, a majority of the characters get into their predicaments over greediness, but again, there's no payoff. The movie doesn't even end on a high note; the final story is just confusing, uneventful and yet presents itself like a revelatory thing. To see this movie get such high praise is baffling. There is no way anyone who enjoys an actual cinematic experience can claim they were interested the entire time. In fact, I'm sure the Coens dumped this film on Netflix because they knew people could fast forward the slower scenes, the sometimes overbearing dialogue and the many, many musical numbers that drag on for much too long and bear little importance to the stories being told. Take off your blinders and chill out-- This is not one of the Coens' best films, and it's most certainly not even close to being one of the best movies of the year.

I hope their next film is a good one.

Finally a movie that feels genuine start to finish and a movie that entertains. You are never sure where it starts and where it will end,all the characters immediately feel real without wasting any time. And perhaps most importantly, this is a movie that does not insult your intelligence like almost all other movies do.

This is a fantastic movie - beautifully shot and acted showing the dark and bleakly funny side of the lawless Wild West. If you love the Coen Bros (who doesn't?) then you'll love this.

The movie is made up of six different stories - so you get 6 for the price of 1!

Highly recommend.

The first part has a chipper Buster Scruggs (Tim Blake Nelson) who turns out to be a deadly gunslinger. Nelson is such an odd choice for a gunman which only highlights the comedic surrealism of the Coens. It sets a great tone for the rest of the movie.

A nameless cowboy (James Franco) gets caught in a bank robbery. He's strung up to hang when the posse is massacred by Indians. He's left to die when he is rescued by a cowboy leading some cattle. This seems to be the most obviously funny. Franco does some sly humor.

An Impresario (Liam Neeson) takes his armless, legless charge from settlement to settlement as a sideshow where he reads from the classics. This one is kinda boring and repetitive. The actual act is kinda boring, too.

A prospector (Tom Waits) arrives at a remote creek. He's alone in a place without people. He finds gold flakes in the creek bank. I love the beauty and isolation of this natural setting. There is a zen to his digging and the climatic event starts with an intriguing shadow.

Alice Longabaugh (Zoe Kazan) is with her older brother on a westward bound wagon train. It's a tough journey that culminates with a desperate fight against an Indian war party. This section starts rather bland. It seems like it's going for a slow romance when it suddenly turns into a old-fashion fight against the Indians. The fight is tense but it does reek of old westerns where the Indians are nameless savages.

A stagecoach is carrying five passenger and a dead body. The set is static. This one is the least compelling. With no background, the dialogue is meaningless. It's almost background noise. I don't care about these characters and the reveal has no shock value.

The Coen brothers are doing an anthology western. The movie flips through a book where each chapter is presented as a vignette. The last vignette is the most problematic and perplexing. It has few action beats. I can see the guys loving the dark quirkiness but it's not the one to close with. I'd probably close with The Gal Who Got Rattled and its shootout ending.

When they remade TRUE GRIT, the Coen Brothers clearly thought there weren't enough John Ford westerns -- I agree with them -- so they offered the audience one. With THE BALLAD OF BUSTER SCRUGGS they clearly think there aren't enough movies offering the strengths of the classic B and short westerns: open vistas, lone prospectors, wagon trains, bank robbers, cattle rustlers, gunslinging, moralizing singing cowboys who wander the barren west, strumming their "Radio King" guitars for their horses, and five people inside a stage yarning to each other. So they stuck together half a dozen stories, got their usual assortment of top talent and offered them to us. I am extremely grateful.

Their cinematographer, Bruno Delbonnel, offers us a variety of lighting. I was most impressed by his choices for "The Girl Who Got Rattled", which is staged like posters for WESTWARD THE WOMEN and lit like the covers for Louis Lamour paperbacks in the 1960s. There's an air of artificiality that pervades the movie. That's common enough for the Coens, who like to mock their dead cinematic peers, but. like HAIL, CAESAR shows their fondness for their subject.

WHY COULDN'T THEY JUST MAKE A WHOLE MOVIE OF THE TITULAR BUSTER SCRUGGS???? That opening segment is hilarious, unique, odd, violent, and beautiful. The rest is kind of all over the place, but that opening segment...dang.

I went into this collection with no way of knowing what I was getting into. I laughed so hard at certain points I thought I was going to pee my pants. Not too long after, I found myself sob out loud, once, in total heartbreak. I can't say I'm surprised that one or two critiques have lolled over their lazy brains to call this 'slow'...unless someone is having gratuitous sex and fouling up their ears with unnecessary explicates, few people can find entertainment in the quiet intensity between people when nothing is spoken. There is beauty in these vignettes. Realization and laughter and a myriad of emotional wealth if people would slow down for a half a minute and allow themselves to FEEL. Well done, Cohen brothers. Well done.

Portmanteau (anthology) movies are hard to pull off effectively. My favourites would be Amores Perros, Inaritu's incredible debut that uses three dog stories to loosely draw together his take on the fragility of love, and The Argentinian classic, Wild Stories, written and directed by Damián Szifron, united by a common them of violence and vengeance.

Other directors who have tackled the 'genre' effectively are Hitchcock and the celebrated triumvirate of Coppola, Scorsese and Allen for New York Stories. It's most widely used as a structure in horror.

Here, The Coen Brothers continue, for me, their hit and miss career with a near miss, but a miss nonetheless.

It's a six story Western. Part spoof, part serious drama. But the mix of genres they employ means that the whole is less than the sum of its parts. Some of the stories reach a conclusion when the stories are barely developed, others could last longer to make them more engaging,

By far the highlights are the opening Buster Scruggs spoof which is laugh out loud hilarious and the endearing "The Gal Who Got Rattled" featuring a stand out performance from Zoe Kazan, ably supported by her love interest Bill Heck (playing Billy Knapp) and old timer Grainger Hines as Mr Arthur.

Tom Waits puts in a good turn as a prospector in All Gold Canyon. But the story is daft.

The sixth and last, featuring Brendan Gleeson, is just not very good at all.

I'm not sure what's to blame here. Are the Coens just such royalty that they can't be challenged? Certainly a number of their films are just not very good at all but Fargo and No Country For Old Men are absolute classics.

I also felt the colourisation was overused and again variably effective. At its best it created a richness and depth that was highly appealing. At its worst (in the sixth segment) it just made everything murky.

I have higher expectations of Netflix's other big bet, Roma, That screens from 15 December. For now you'll have to be content with this curate's egg.