The Ladykillers

This movie didn't quite captivate me, and it doesn't measure up to its source material, even though it tries to appear more modern. Tom Hanks surprisingly shines in his role, as do the supporting characters, and the Coen brothers infused it with an interesting style. Still, I don't think it quite succeeds as a comedy. I didn't find it engaging, and the absurd ending didn't thrill me, even though I do enjoy absurd dramas. (31/03/2015)

The Ladykillers starts out quite promisingly, but the Coens gradually run out of steam. The jokes aren’t as effective as they would have liked, and since practically all of the key twists, including the final one, are based on them, the film jumps around on one foot until the closing credits. Only Tom Hanks and the old lady, who was excellent, deserve extra praise. (16/07/2004)

An excellent comedy from the masters’ workshop. A small, cute statuette that will amuse, please and caress the soul. It is not worth building this statue next to large statues such as The Big Lebowski or Fargo. The Coen brothers simply experimented with a lighter genre and created a simple comedy full of great caricatures. You say that caricatures have no insides? Well, their magic is on the surface. In Professor Dorr's perfectly trimmed beard, Mrs. Munson's cheerful face, in the general's icy calm mask... Such are the true poetics of this film. Black as morning coffee, jolly as a gospel choir, linguistically perfectly tuned, and full of excellent caricatures. It is not worth looking for depth in the film, because it is a brisk gag, a funny situation and, as always, ironic directing by Joel and Ethan... What more could you want than pure entertainment with the hallmark of independent cinematography and the glory of a Hollywood star? What more could you want than wonderful actors led by the excellent Hanks and the natural Irma P. Hall? I was divinely entertained and I even forgot that the Coen brothers have made better movies. (16/07/2004)

I like Joel Coen and Ethan Coen; they're among my favorite directors, but this one didn't quite work for them, and in my view, it resulted in their weakest film to date. It's noticeably weaker than the original version. Their characters this time are just superficial figures, and not even Tom Hanks in the lead role can save it. The biggest weakness is the screenplay overall; the quality of the dialogue is unsatisfactory, and the comedy simply lacks humor. Overall impression: 45%. (16/06/2006)

The plot of the weak script (I don't care that it's a remake), drowned in poor directorial execution, is not yet a clear example of the Coen brothers' softening; rather, it is a prime example of them confidently "missing the mark." Everything that happened in the film could be told in a few minutes, but fortunately, these two gentlemen tell it differently, and thus the sequence of darkly humorous situations, mixed with an abundance of absurdities as if taken from Murphy's Law, should theoretically not keep you waiting for long. However, the only genuine joke that could be labeled as typically "Coen-esque" seems to be thrown into the film almost casually and has nothing to do with the plot – I'm referring to the filming of a commercial for dog food. In a plot that resembles Ocean's Eleven too much, we also encounter characters who lack any sort of energy, and we don't get any good jokes from them, making the film unwatchable, prolonged, and incredibly boring. When it ended (just as I expected) I somehow couldn't help my inner disillusionment and the question crept in subtly: "Have the Coen brothers really gone soft?" (21/08/2005)