And quite removed from the disjointed bar mitzvah, the storm coming at the end was a perfect harbinger of the son’s entry into the ritual of Jewish life, which the film portrayed as muddling on through the demands of ancient customs and modern problems. The Korean student exposed how things often are, it’s not an attack on equal opportunities or minorities. This specifically does was Hamlet quote suggests. It puts up a mirror to show the reality and not the stereotypical view of non-Chrsitian groups in the myth of America’s world-class ‘melting pot’ producing all the diversity and success. The shadow of it is this small town dysphoria and dysfunctioanlity which this movie proudly accepts. That to me IS its art. I felt sorry for the tortured voodoo doll that was Larry..a post-modern feature of the film is this anti-hero and victim.

I gave it 6/10 because it was slightly prolonged in parts.

PS. To ruin my barely existent rhythm I’d also like to say: Sy Ableman was a monster on an almost ‘biblical’ scale. I didn’t like him much :(

Fair enough.

In all of their films, the Coen brothers complicate, poke fun of, and even tear at their characters. Even their few “true” heroes, such as Marge Gunderson in “Fargo,” are comic characters, awkward at their best and tragically flawed at their worst. That the three rabbis were judged by some viewers to be buffoons in “A Serious Man,” then, doesn’t surprise me. Perhaps that’s what the Coens intended? That said, I felt that only the second rabbi – the one with the story about the goy’s teeth – was failing both at empathy and teaching (though his character and story were an important detail of the Job update). The young, junior rabbi who enthusiastically discussed “the parking lot” failed to connect to Gopnik, but his assertions were not false. He was simply too naive to have learned how to communicate such mystical truths, especially to a congregant in pain, likely not in the proper place for mystical levity about light reflecting off of asphalt!

Also, the optimism I mention may, I admit, be largely my own. (It could be a glass half full or half empty issue.) But I also feel that Danny Gopnik, the bar mitzvah, is a reason for hope. Something seems to happen to him in his encounter with Rabbi Marshak. Even his earlier struggle through a pot haze to successfully (and rather impressively, compared to most bar or bat mitzvahs) chant his Torah portion suggests a “coming through” or an “opening to.” His clutching the kiddush cup in one hand, the Walkman in the other, and then bringing them together is a loaded image, one that Conservative, Reconstructionist, and Reform Jews all embrace (albeit in their varied ways).

Sure, not long thereafter, Danny might die in a tornado…but G-d’s in that, too, just like It’s in the parking lot. It’s a dark, uncertain laugh (like so many in the film)…but it might not be a laugh at all. After all, we don’t know whether or not Schrodinger’s cat is alive or dead.

Still, I have a feeling that, had I watched the film on a different day, I might well have taken away the same read that you did. The Coens flavor all of their art with a cynicism and occasional nastiness that I just as often bemoan.

Thanks for following up!

These automatic updates are so good…I’d never check back without them.

, I think it’s a honest, even optimistic update on the Job story.

Optimistic? OPTIMISTIC? Job gets a replacement wife, replacement kids, etc, (as though that makes it all okay) but Gopnik gets a doctor’s call too serious too discuss by phone, and his son gets a tornado heading towards him. Which part of this is optimistic?

Don in Detroit’s point about the marrying of the traditional world view to the modern is excellent. I felt that Rabbi Marshak’s quoting of Jefferson Airplane was a clear nod in this direction. Don also says the rabbis are buffoons, HH, and I’d argue that the fact that he can’t remember the words or the members of the group suggests a more superficial scholarship than I associate with rabbis, or Airplane fans (I first saw them in ’65 [grin])

Glad you liked the film.

After reading reviews before seeing the film, I was surprised that the film was actually pretty respectful of all things Jewish. There was a reverance for ritual and practice even though the individual Jews were flawed. But aren’t we all flawed? That is one reason I find it hard to believe that this movie was racist when it ridiculed the foibiles of different cultures.

Though the rabbis were played for laughs — on my second viewing I had to agree they were buffoons — their actual advice was straight from Jewish tradition — and religious tradition generally.

What did you expect, that these rabbis would have the meaning of life? The Holy Grail? No way. Religion is a coping mechanism, to help us get through difficult times and to build a structure and community to hold us up. What answer could the rabbis have given to make them seem wise? Nothing could explain Larry’s problems.

The first rabbi suggests viewing things differently to live with them. Isn’t this classically Jewish? We are tought to be mindful, to live in the holiness of the moment, and to not overanalyze. Maybe this is insufficient, but it is what religion tells us. We can not know everything, we have to search for a way to see things that include enjoyment and make sense to us.

The second rabbi takes this to the extreme. He says there is no answer, so get on with your life. You’ll be better off if you don’t worry so much, or think you’re missing something. Your not missing anything. (The comment about who cares what happens to the goy, is not racist, it’s just that its totally besides the point).

The third rabbi says that life is hard and disappointing so just be a good person. Isn’t this a personal tikkun olam? You can only control what you do, not what is done in the larger world. Take stock of your own character and actions. Yes, it was delivered in a comical way, but it is a Jewish concept. Don’t wait for some reward, or until you understand what is going on to do something, just do it: do good.

Two more things:

– A Serious Man is not a good thing to be. Abelman is praised as a serious man, and he’s a real nasty shmuck. Gopnik says he is trying to be a serious man, and the rabbis tell him not to waste his time. But no one tells him not to be Jewish. Being Jewish isn’t just about being serious as we’re often taught when young: especially in the time frame of the film.

– There is an especially interesting visual that may be less than what I read into it, but I liked it. When Danny is given the kiddush cup as a gift from the congregation, he grabs it and holds onto it for dear life. He takes it with him to the rabbi’s study. When the rabbi gives him back his transistor he takes it with his other hand and holds it against the kiddush cup like a lulav and etrog held together. I think it is a great image of combining the traditional with the modern, which I see as the message of the film. We can have, and need, both and that is good as long as we don’t overdo it either way. They are both part of what we need to continue.

One last thing — I could keep going — I also liked that neither the teacher nor the rabbi stole Danny’s $20. That would have been consistent if the film was simply a joke, but the Coen’s didn’t take a cheap shot in this instance, nor would it be correct to see the film overall as a cheap shot.

Go see it again!

And the film didn’t strike me as existential (I’ve taught a few courses on it, too). Existentialism says that “the individual solely has the responsibilities of giving his own life meaning and living that life passionately and sincerely in spite of many existential obstacles and distractions.” But I don’t see any meaning possible in the absurdity of life as it’s presented in this film. It might well serve as an example of Nihilism.

You elide smoothly from” who knows?” why bad things happen to good people to “There’s no reason”. Be careful: those are two very different positions.

I think of Viktor Frankl, the existentialist author of “Man’s Search for Meaning” creating meaning out of his experience in Auschwitz. That is what existentialism holds a possibility… not the Coen’s kind of flatulent despair.

Don’t sell your own life so short.