Barton Fink (1991)

Written and Directed by Ethan and Joel Coen

Born out of the Coen Brothers' frustration with writer's block, they took a detour from writing their classic Miller's Crossing, and wrote Barton Fink. Not a bad detour if you ask me. This film is an odd duck, it swept Cannes winning the awards for Best Actor, Best Director, and the Golden Palm, the only film to do so before or since. It got a few Oscar nominations, one for supporting actor, the others for costume design and set design. Since then, it's been virtually forgotton by everyone besides film buffs and Coen fans. I guess I can understand that, it's probably their least accessible film, but at the same time, I think anyone with a vested interest in film would love it, and I don't think I ever heard mention of it once when I was in film school, even though it's easily the most complicated and metaphorical film about the life of a person living in Hollywood. Maybe that's why they ignored it in film school.

Barton Fink (John Turturro) has struck gold with his most recent play on Broadway, and like anyone else coming up in the world of writing, he quickly ends up in Hollywood, working for Capitol Pictures, hired on to write a Walter Beery wrestling picture. The studio head, Jack Lipnick (Michael Lerner) and Barton's agent Ben Geisler (Tony Shaloub, in a career best performance) represent the leering madness of Hollywood, while Barton slowly tries to comprehend the world he has been thrust into.

Quickly, Barton realizes he is stuck, he has writer's block, he can't figure out what to write. In his dingy hotel room in Hollywood, he befriends traveling salesman Charlie (John Goodman) and the two share gripe stories about their lives in Hollywood, and how their careers have seemingly both hit a dead spot upon arriving in the city. Barton relaxes for the first time in Hollywood when he's with Charlie, as a liberal jew from New York, he finds solace that an everyman like Charlie can have such a positive outlook despite his shared disappointment with the city.

Further into his writer's block, Barton takes advice to seek out a fellow writer he admires, one W.P. Mayhew (John Mahoney) and Barton's disenchantment with the city continues when he finds out Mayhew is a slobbery drunk whose secretary has been doing his writing for him.

As Barton continues his descent into madness, he befriends Mayhew's secretary (Judy Davis) and the two share a common bond of feeling underappreciated. The only thing is, Audrey has come to accept her life at the bottom of the ladder, while failure right after success bewilders Barton.

To really analyze the film though, I must go into some material that may spoil the ending for people that haven't seen it. If you are they, and don't want the ending spoiled. Stop reading. Just skip down to the rating.






...gone yet? Ok, one more second...



The ending reveals that Charlie is actually Karl "Madman" Mundt, a serial killer who cuts off the heads of women. When Charlie leaves town for a while, Barton is questioned by two LAPD detectives, who warn Barton that Mundt is a very dangerous man, and that by associating with him, he is putting himself in danger. After a horrific ordeal, Barton can only write again when Charlie leaves him with a package, Charlie's personal belongings supposedly, and Barton seemingly draws inspriation from it. Later on, it is suspected that it is the head of a woman, after Mundt actually reveals his true nature to Barton.

In a surrealistic turn, as Mundt comes back to the hotel, as he rises up on the elevator fire is everywhere, it surrounds him and crawls along the walls of the hotel. Mundt guns down the two LAPD homicide detectives, and reasons with Barton. After all, they're still friends right?

Like the case in Pulp Fiction, it is never revealed, or supposed to be revealed what is in the box that Charlie left with Barton. It is open to personal interpretation, which has been percieved as a woman's head, Barton's mind/creativity, to something as simple as a symbol of Barton's trust of Charlie. In the end, we are led to understand that the entire film has been an allegory for the nature of Hollywood to stifle true talent. When Barton comes to Hollywood, he has, in effect, sold his soul to the devil, and the hotel he stays at, the city he's in, are both representations of hell. Hell for Barton is not being able to write, until he understands where he is, and becomes a whore unto himself, readily prostituing his work, instead of making a sophisticated picture as he set out to do. He didn't fulfill his contractual obligation to said devils until he accepted the fact that he had sold out. It goes on and on, and these are all situations and suppositions from my mind as a writer, many other people may gain many other different meanings.

As a writer, I love this film, it's a great metaphor for the Hollywood process, and it's a film that makes you think, and your thoughts are the only true answer, much like 2001: A Space Odyssey. For writers. On the other hand, I can see how this wasn't really accepted by commercial audiences, and how it has been largely forgotten by the public because of this nature. Miller's Crossing and Barton Fink are what I consider the Coen's best films that no one knows about, and the fact that they were made in a time of the Coen's own self doubt speaks something of their innate quality and the fact that these films aren't as celebrated as Fargo or Blood Simple.

The fact is, you will only get as much out of this film as you put into it, and I believe that's a large part of the fact that this film wasn't a huge success. It's yet another great film from the Coen brothers, and it speaks of their own inabilities and self-conscious thoughts on the creative process. As a fellow storyteller, I don't pretend to get what they were going through at the time, but I can still enjoy it for my own reasons, as it is one of their better pieces of speculative fiction.

9.3/10