The Ladykillers (2004) User Reviews

Good and Bad.

[northstar_36 · 5/10 · 2 November 2012]

As a remake this movie falls flat, as a stand alone movie its not too bad and will appeal more to a younger audience and probably mostly American one at that.

Here is the problem with remakes - If you make it exactly like the original then there is little point in remaking it, if you just change the country what is the point when the dialogue and the setting is the exact same almost, with a few words changed here and there... Coupling UK and Coupling USA is a good example... and also maybe Life on Mars. Of course these are TV shows but the comparison stands.

They made this movie very different to the original and shouldn't have called it a remake, or even The Ladykillers. In no way does this resemble the original, which is a classic and is still watchable today but set far in the past when TVs were black and white... is it better than this movie if you are comparing them as the same movie... the original blows this away without a doubt.

So bare that in mind when watching this movie. I wouldn't compare these movies at all, to be honest they are far too different to compare, the only comparison i can come up with is that they have the same name and some of the characters are similar... the scenario is quite different except that they are both about stealing money.

Not a bad or great movie by any means, and i think Hanks character tried to be like the Alec Guinness one, a little strange, and it didn't quite work, for me anyway...

BOREDOM KILLERS

[MadamWarden · 6/10 · 29 October 2020]

A fun little movie that is a good distraction in the time of Covid. Great to see Tom Hanks playing a villain. Who would expect that?

Some laugh out loud slapstick, some fun characters but definitely not up to the Coen Brothers usual standards

The Coen Brothers can do better than this

[zetes · 6/10 · 7 September 2004]

Of course, this is the remake of the 1955 Alexander Mackendrick classic starring Alec Guinness, in what is perhaps my favorite role of his. This Coen Brothers update is one of their weakest films, my second least favorite after the execrable O Brother. That doesn't mean it's terrible. It's actually quite decent. The direction and look are fine, the use of music is wonderful, and Tom Hanks gives a delightful performance. It would have been easier to simply copy Guinness' perfection, but Hanks creates something new. Irma P. Hall is good as the landlady (now a religious black woman from the South), and J.K. Simmons is funny as a demolitions expert, but the rest of the cast just stinks. Marlon Wayans is particularly annoying as one of the most stereotypical black characters I've seen in movies lately. Of course, the Wayans Brothers have been degrading their own race for more than a dozen years now, so what's new in that? The Coens make huge mistakes in their script. The original film has the heist finish up within its first 20 minutes or so, a fact which I highly praised back when I saw it. The Coens stretch it out to 1 hour 20 minutes, and then the last 20 minutes has the criminals trying to take care of the old lady. What a p*ss-poor choice, so bad that I can't believe the Coens, usually among the best screenwriters of their time, wrote it. 6/10.

A Coen gem

[harry_tk_yung · 6 June 2004]

Spoilers

Falling short of a Coen masterpiece (such a Fargo), The Ladykillers can be described as a Coen gem. The style is evident right from the opening shot. Where else can you find a garbage barge and a garbage dump transformed so magically by the movie camera into what looks like an idyllic paradise. Equally sparkling is the audio pleasure proffered, with the beautiful background of barber-shop like chorus leading into an on screen duet of snores of the sheriff and his deputy. While on that score (no pun intended), lively, exciting swinging gospel music provides excellent interludes as well as background throughout.

Knowing that this is a remake of a 1955 version lead by Alec Gunnies, I'll make no further reference to something that I have not had the pleasure of watching. Instead, I would make reference to the assembling of the team for the caper, an enjoyable prologue as found in many similar films, from the good old classic The League of Gentlemen to the more recent Italian Job (also a remake). The slight difference here is that instead of seeing the mastermind (Tom Hanks) actually recruiting each one of them, we are shown what looks like a cartoon quip of each, with some good laughs but at the same time highlighting their individual characteristics.

Tunnelling for a robbery is not new, and the classical one has to be The Red Headed League in the Sherlock Holmes short stores. Here, under the pretext of researching Renaissance music, Hanks and company rent the basement of a widow, played by Irma P. Hall. One source of amusement to the audience comes from the scenes between these two, the church-going Southern black woman whose every nuance overflows with simple, principled honesty (but earthly smartness) and the completely cunning crook who tries to wriggle out of her recognition at every twist and turn. Another contrast played upon a lot by the Coen Brothers is the Hanks' talking 'genteel' (as Eliza Doolittle would have said) and the proliferation of obscenity from the 'punk', the insider member of the gang.

Funny right from the start, this movie gradually reveals more and more of the Coens' brand of dark humour when eventually the title 'ladykillers' take on a literal meaning. An 'In competition' film at Cannes this year, this Coen gem is well worth checking out.

New version of the classic movie as entertaining and amusing as the British film

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 24 April 2006]

A band of botcher thieves (Marlon Wayans , Tzi Ma , Ryan Hurst) led by a cunning man (Tom Hanks) attempt a great robbing , but their scheme is foiled by an allegedly innocent old lady (Irma P. Hall) . They devise a perfect plan which is continuously spoiled by the inopportune intervention of the sweet little landlady .

The picture is a bemusing and droll comedy especially in the parts happen the antics and flops of the heist . The laughters and chuckles are varied and giggles are based on diverse personalities and differences among protagonists . It's an agreeable movie for the youth who will enjoy enormously and with lots of fun . Tom Hanks (in similar role to Alec Guinnes) is terrific as the leader , if you like Hanks manic performance , you'll enjoy this one . However , the profanities and bad taste language are in charge of Marlon Wayans (Scary movie) and other secondaries such as J.K.Simmons (Spiderman) , the Oriental Tzi Ma and the hunk Ryan Hurst are pretty well . Colorful and glamorous cinematography by Roger Deakins and enjoyable music by Carter Burwell (usual musician of Cohen brothers) . The picture is a good adaptation of the classic British film of the golden decade of Ealing studio , a droll black comedy with the same title and featured by Alec Guinnes , Herbert Lom and Peter Sellers and written by Willian Rose . The motion picture was rightly directed by Joel and Ethan Cohen . The flick will appeal to Tom Hanks fans and black comedy buffs . Rating : Better than average , worthwhile seeing.

Most directors would kill for this to be their worst regarded film

[Jeremy_Urquhart · 6/10 · 30 September 2021]

Of course it's not among the Coens' best, and it's also not as good as the original The Ladykillers, but this wasn't nearly as bad as I feared it would be.

JK Simmons, Tzi Ma, and Irma P Hall were all pretty great, it's visually quite nice looking (once you get past the fairly ugly CGI-heavy opening), and there are a few genuinely funny moments, even if the main plot takes a while to actually unfold, and there are certainly some contrivances/logical flaws.

Still, the Coens are great at making dark comedies about stupid and/or arrogant getting wrapped up in criminal activity - see The Big Lebowski, Burn After Reading, and Fargo. This one certainly isn't as good as any of them, but I think there's enough good stuff here to recommend to fans of the Coen Brothers.

Not an adequate remake, but rather a reinterpretation

[fuzzy_wunz · 8/10 · 11 May 2005]

Certainly, the Cohens have enough decency to know when a task should be left undone, and when that task is the re-creation and improvement of a comedy classic,they know better than to regurgitate old gags infused with modern flair, or do they?

I will admit that I did enjoy this novel retelling of the Mackendrick classic. I enjoyed Hank's brilliant, earnest, and flawless delivery. I also enjoyed Irma P. Hall's sincerity. I enjoyed the score, the locale, the warm-lazy essence of Mississippi, and the mythological progression of events that is so common in the Cohens' films. Most of all, I enjoyed the charm of this film more-so than its predecessor.

Of course, in deference, the originators deserve their due praise, but this is certainly no simple remake--it's a retelling. Retellings don't need to improve, dazzle, or impress by comparison--they simply are what they are, and this was enjoyable.

Fairly effective dark comedy

[wellthatswhatithinkanyway · 7/10 · 23 May 2005]

STAR RATING: ***** Unmissable **** Very Good *** Okay ** You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead * Avoid At All Costs

Marva Munson (Irma P Hall) is an up-front elderly lady who has just been approached by a charming, well-spoken Southern gentleman named Professor GH Dorr (Tom Hanks) to rent space in her house. Little does she know that Dorr and his associates, in the guise of a musical band, are plotting to rob a casino and are using her basement as an operating lair. When she finds out, however, it becomes a desperate quest to kill her before she blabs to the authorities.

The Ladykillers is yet another Hollywood re-make of another old (and British!) movie that was before my, and no doubt many others, time. So you can't watch it and appreciate it fully without knowing the greatness of the original (I just can't wait for the day when I'm a bit older and I'll be able to point out how new films are nowhere near as good as the ones they were re-making from my day.) Or maybe you can.

It's an alright film on it's own. I can see how some might say Hanks was over-acting, hamming it up and generally being rather embarrassing, but to me he just about managed to be as adept (if not quite as great!) as he ever was. The supporting cast are very good too, them managing to be more funny than the more assured presence of Hanks in the lead role. It's a funny film in parts, and distinctly Coen brothers all the way. And it seems to follow the engaging 'we-all-fall-down' premise from Reservoir Dogs with regards to the elimination of the crooks.

So yeah,quite good. Not brilliant and no doubt far from the Coen brothers best work, but fairly pleasing all the same.***

Remake? Mainstream? So what - it is a great fun:

[Galina_movie_fan · 8/10 · 7 October 2005]

I could not stop laughing and enjoyed it tremendously. Tom Hanks was simply delightful pretending to be refined, highly educated, charmingly polite and smooth talking Rococo music lover Professor G.H.Darr who in reality was a very dangerous, ruthless and devious criminal that assembled the most hilarious gang of thieves (each has his special talent) to dig the tunnel through his landlady's root cellar to a casino vault and to steal 1.6 million dollars. As good as Hanks was, he was completely upstaged by Irma Hall who steals the movie as Marva. She received many awards for her acting and very deservingly. I know that many Coens' fans don't like The Ladykillers because 1. it is a remake of the 1955 movie with the same title and 2. because it is one of their most mainstream films. I don't care - "The Ladykillers" has Coens' signatures all over - it is very funny, very dark, and uniquely beautiful visually - just remember the opening scene with two scary gargoyles and the garbage barge.

good fun comedy

[gottogorunning · 7/10 · 9 August 2005]

Much like Intolerable Cruelty before it, the Coens' latest film relies on presupposition: inasmuch as the former capitalized on its audience's cynicism about marriage to communicate its satire, this remake of Alexander Mackendrick's 1955 comedy/crime caper assumes of its audience a working knowledge of genre tropes-particularly with noir-to orient themselves temporally before it zooms off into left field with an oblique meditation on spirituality/small-town entrapment/genre films that is as methodical and dark as anything the Coens have done.

On first brush, the story is deceptively slight: an elderly church-going widow living in a mansion presided over by a portrait of the erstwhile patriarch is visited by an ingratiating figure looking for a room to let (Tom Hanks, who seems like he's shooting for the down-home erudition of Mark Twain and the preternatural look and appeal of Count Dracula). Like in Stanley Kubrick's The Killing, we are introduced to his would-be cronies, in a series of amusing situations that provides a glimpse of each character's personality and quirks. They begin drilling a hole in the cellar wall that will tunnel them directly into the riverboat's safe; along the inevitable way, they have some close-calls with the matriarch. They blow through the safe wall, the old woman discovers their plan, so they must kill her.

Predictably, greed and fear prove divisive and the crooks begin dropping like flies-but decidedly unpredictably, the little old lady seems enveloped by a godly force that thwarts their best-laid and seemingly ineluctable plans. Example: A killer looms with piano wire over her sleeping figure. Mere inches from her neck, a Jesus figurine leaps from a clock, causing him to swallow his cigarette, choke on her dentures in a beside water glass and fall headlong down the stairs when Pickles the cat darts before his legs. I'm positive many critics will jump all over this scenario and others subsequently like it by citing it as part and parcel of the filmmakers' obsession with murderdeathkill (I wouldn't argue that they often highlight scenes of death as punch-lines illustrating the futility of their characters, a peculiar trait of auto-assassination and self-critique that seems enlisted for entertainment's sake)--and it is that, but to think the film's implications can and should be swallowed there is a mistake; the situation depends entirely too much on serendipity.

As the bodies pile up, they are dropped from a bridge into a passing repository ship that moves languidly between the town and a trash-heap situated, ironically, on an idyllic island. The Coens' and cinematographer Roger Deakins are deliberately obscure in their depiction of the town--the downtown is a series of ramshackle shops with no signs of life, the police station is framed in medium close-up, a rectangle of bricks seemingly isolated, and the church sits atop a hill, an unspectacular white building--and signify it in a handful of archetypal shots, which signify entropy, a town without an identity, without spatial or temporal referent.

The criminals die in increasingly unusual and unbelievable ways--Hanks, for his part, dies in a romantic triumph, concurrently the sole living proprietor of the stolen booty and reciting to himself a line of Poe. Looking up, he sees a raven situated atop a gargoyle, and we see the foundation is crumbling. As he continues the recitation, the statue falls and knocks him headlong into the boat, cruising to the rhythm and exact timing of his death; trash in, trash out. Crime doesn't pay, right? By following this time-honored platitude in as subversive and postmodern a way as possible, the Coens' deus ex machina is one completely informed by and keeping in strict compliance with genre code--they may have cheated to get there, but the Coens have made a true anomaly: an intellectually lazy and meta-textually provocative portraiture of life as a poor, confined genre piece. The inanimate genre as empathic character.

Fun variation on a comedy classic

[ametaphysicalshark · 9 September 2008]

The original "The Ladykillers" is one of my favorite comedies, a gleefully macabre and witty classic with some outstanding performances, especially Alec Guinness' hysterical performance. It was also distinctively British. Now, I am not nearly as annoyed by remakes as many other filmgoers are- I merely find most of them unnecessary and hence avoid most of them. The only ones I respect are those that attempt to do something different. The Coens are probably my favorite living directors and among the more distinctive currently working, and they certainly put their own spin on an established comedy classic with this film.

I think that the poor reception this film got is largely due to its sense of humor. The Coens' dry wit present in several of their films is present here, mostly through the main character Professor Dorr, portrayed excellently by Tom Hanks in one of his better performances, but there's also a lot of low-brow humor, and not even distinctive or interesting low-brow humor, just 'haha he dropped an f-bomb' sort, which is really at odds with the rest of this film. Really, take out Marlon Wayans and his annoying character and you would have one of the best remakes ever made. Instead you've got this film.

"The Ladykillers", in spite of its awful reputation, is really not a bad film at all. It's got atmosphere, it's beautifully photographed, it's fairly amusing, and the majority of the performances are very good. It's inferior by the Coens' standards but still better than most comedies released in 2004. In addition, although it takes a lot of liberties with the original story, it recreates the most memorable sequences from the original with care and obvious affection, resulting in a hugely entertaining last twenty minutes in which so many memorable images from Mackendrick's classic Ealing comedy are translated to the American south.

This is a minor film for the Coens, but obviously one made with love and affection. It's fairly flawed, but it's also quite amusing and features and outstanding performance from Tom Hanks, an actor I don't normally think is particularly great.

7/10

The Lazybrothers

[skymovies · 7/10 · 17 June 2004]

So the Coen boys have taken the easy route by nicking someone else's idea and the critics have pounced. British critics especially, since they've dared to pilfer one of our Ealing comedies which is like sneezing over the Crown Jewels. But this remake isn't so much sacreligious as just plain lazy.

Overall, this is an enjoyable lark, but while the playfulness is catching and Tom Hanks is an eccentrically erudite delight, the build-up is staccato, the denouement feels rushed and the dialogue is hit-and-miss. Disappointingly, from filmmakers whose reputation is based on originality, there are precious few Coen moments here (and some of those are lifted from elsewhere, e.g. the portrait that changes expression – Young Frankenstein; the body part-snatching animal – Wild At Heart).

And since the Coens have obviously decided to stick with the original's tone of genteel mischief, Marlon Wayans' boy-from-the-hood is a huge misjudgement and ‘Mountain Lady' is a pointless distraction. There is also a terrible edit after Dorr's poetry recital which smacks of a hastily ditched scene. Come on fellas, don't get sloppy on us; we'll watch anything you care to make – with ‘care' being the operative word.

The Coens' fall from grace?

[itamarscomix · 6/10 · 24 May 2005]

Here we are, then - a new Coen Brother movie. That's always a cause for celebration - and this time they did it astoundingly quickly. I just saw Ladykillers, and frankly I'm slightly taken back by the bad reviews it got. Now, the way I see it, the film falls in a Grey area - it's far too commercial and mainstream for the Coens' fans, and too much of an oddball movie for those looking for a mainstream comedy. Certainly, this isn't the Coens at their best - there's no use comparing Ladykillers to masterpieces like Barton Fink, Big Lebowski, Fargo, Miller's Crossing, Hudsucker Proxy and O Brother, Where Art Thou? or even to lesser Coen projects like The Man Who Wasn't There, Intolerable Cruelty and Raising Arizona. In hindsight, Ladykillers probably is the duo's weakest offering to date. But even when the Coens are at their very worst, they're still the best around. Even when dealing with a weak storyline and one-dimensional characters - and for the first time in their career, the story isn't one of their own - their brilliant, one-of-a-kind scriptwriting and directing make up for it. Nobody writes - or directs - a dialogue like Joel and Ethan. And even though they weren't able to arouse sympathy for any of the characters - not even the charming old woman - they still created some unique, memorable, hilarious characters in the best Coen tradition. Tzi Ma (The Quiet American), Marlon Wayans (Requiem For A Dream), Ryan Hurst (Remember The Titans) and J. K. Simmons (Spider-Man) are each uniquely terrific as the band of robbers, and Irma P. Hall is wonderful and hilarious as a classic god-fearing Big Mama. The show-stopper is Mr. Tom Hanks who, as Professor G. H. Dorr, grants one of his most memorable performances. Tom Hanks' characters usually have a Tom Hanks attitude about them; for this role his disconnected from that, and truly I haven't enjoyed him this much since Forrest Gump. The Coens also do as gorgeous a job with recurring motives as they usually do - in this case, a cat, a hideous statue, and a portrait that seems to change a bit whenever you look at it. The surreal, oddball atmosphere of a Coen Brothers classic is still there - more so, I would say, than in Intolerable Cruelty and even The Man Who Wasn't There. The feeling and the style are there; unfortunately, as I mentioned earlier, the film suffers from a weak plot, which only become hilariously funny in the last half hour.

So you're more than welcome to follow the dozens of one and two star reviews on this page, if you like; I still think Ladykillers is well worth watching for Coen fans - AS LONG AS YOU REMAIN OBJECTIVE AND IGNORE THE COEN NAME ON IT! (Yeah, that's a tricky one, I know.) If you like the Coens' oddball humor and surrealism, just keep that 'oh, whatever happened to them?' thought out of your head and enjoy the movie. And I'm quite sure you'll enjoy it.

Slow & Shallow

[myreviewss · 4/10 · 11 November 2020]

The story continued going downhill throughout the movie. It's slow and shallow, two things that usually don't mix well.

This is one of my favorite movies and I used to watch it daily

[aymom · 9/10 · 22 February 2018]

First I do not understand why the movie was not rated well and receive poor reviews. The movie is simply hilarious and although I have seen it many times I still fall on the floor laughing at the Waffle house scene and the inevitable squabbling among the robbers, the donut robbery, and even the opening search for pickles. When I saw the grandmother walk down the street with an open umbrella on a hot but rain less day it reminded me of summer days in the south where parasols and umbrellas are used for dancing and portable shade. The Coen brothers are geniuses.

So disappointing. Hanks great though

[CrazyArty · 6/10 · 6 July 2022]

Comedy. A group plan a casino heist from the basement of a sharp old landlady. Stars Tom Hanks.

I have not seen the Alec Guinness original but this was pretty disappointing. I had high hopes for this classic comedy remake.

The script is not well written. Plus there is too much unnecessary swearing in what should have been a family movie.

Tom Hanks is very good, the only highlight in an otherwise disappointing movie.

The sacred and the very profane ...

[majikstl · 1/10 · 15 March 2005]

My recollection of the original THE LADYKILLERS is somewhat shaky, but I remember it to be a whimsical little comedy, one of those delightfully British films that celebrate English eccentricity, even in its dark and slightly murderous extremes. Made in 1955 and featuring such wonderful talents as Alec Guinness, Peter Sellers and Herbert Lom, it has earned a reputation as a minor classic.

One can only assume that the Coen Brothers never saw the original, or if they did they decided that to Americanize the tale they had to strip it of anything that might even vaguely seem whimsical -- or funny. As if to reinforce the continental notion that Americans are vulgar, their woefully inept remake wallows in tastelessness. The film does display the Coens' penchant for striking visuals and offers up moments here and there of genteel ghoulishness, but it's all superficial style. Beneath that facade the film is cruel and ugly and hateful and really quite racist. For no particular reason, this tired tale about thieves tunneling into a vault has been transported to the Mississippi Delta and populated with a cast of characters trapped in racial stereotyping of every sort.

Doing a crude parody of a southern gentleman, Tom Hanks plays unpleasantly against type as Prof. Goldthwait Higginson Dorr, Ph.D., a con man who finagles his way into a boarding house ran by Irma P. Hall as Mrs. Marva Munson. He hopes to commandeer her basement as the starting point for a tunnel into the counting house of a nearby casino. (Never mind that his "inside man" already has inexplicably easy access to the poorly guarded vault making the need for the tunnel questionable.) Anyway, the plot is tired and predictable, but workable if approached with a sense of clever good cheer (as proved by Woody Allen's SMALL TIME CROOKS). But that is not to be in this case: the Coens -- Ethan and Joel co-directing and co-writing -- try ham-handedly to blend macabre wit with the obscenity-laden ethnic humor of black exploitation films. As such, the film is constantly shifting back and forth in tone.

The stereotyping of Mrs. Munson as a no-nonsense Bible-thumping dowager is broad, and, at times, rather than being naive and slightly dotty, she seems just plain stupid. (She thinks Ph.D. is the spelling of Elmer Fudd's last name; that's how desperate the humor gets.) But Mrs. Munson is relatively inoffensive compared to the grotesque caricatures the film makes of the other characters. Especially offensive is Marlon Wayons' foul-mouthed Gawain, an utterly moronic homeboy, who seems to have drunkenly stumbled in from the set of SCARY MOVIE; his only function in the film is to insert multiple, achingly unfunny obscenities into every single sentence he utters. I suppose he is also meant to represent a contrast to the church-going, gospel-singing members of Mrs. Munson's congregation, but the juxtaposition of gospel and hip-hop, the sacred and the profane, serves no purpose other than to present two equally clichéd vision of African Americans. The Coens patronizes southern blacks, while also pandering to the lowest level rap music mentality.

What should have been a family friendly comedy develops into an R-rated insult. Wayons' unrelentingly filthy language is matched with jokes about bowel movements and a painfully unfunny gag about a dog suffocating. The only character worthy of sympathy is Ryan Hurst as the hatefully named Lump Hudson, a brain-damaged football players who is utterly irrelevant to the story except to be condescendingly laughed at for being dumb. And doesn't it say something that the Coens, once celebrated for their adult wit and sophisticated approach, have fallen to the pathetic level of naming a character Lump, just to get an easy laugh? By the time the film takes a murderous twist, it is difficult to care about anyone. I assume that Hanks' Prof. Dorr is supposed to be a lovable scalawag, but his posturing demeanor is as annoying as his compulsive snickering laughter; none of Hanks' natural charm seeps through. His band of cohorts are callous and one-dimensional. Even Mrs. Munson begins to grate on one's nerves, as she proves to be a dull-witted bully.

What is missing from the film is a sense of innocence. The Coens have proved they know how to embrace malevolence, but not since BLOOD SIMPLE have they shown the devilish wit of Alfred Hitchcock or Tim Burton or Charles Addams or Edward Gory or even Edgar Allen Poe. In their inexplicable attempt to mix modern film sadism with quaint British irony, they let the former suffocate the latter; and like the poor dog in the film, THE LADYKILLERS dies a slow and painfully unpleasant death.

Not as bad as some say....

[marcusedenellis · 9/10 · 17 March 2005]

This is not as bad a bad movie as many other would seem to want you to believe. It does not really bear comparison to the original because it has been made differently and updated for a modern audience. Tom Hanks, contrary to other comments I have seen here, is quite excellent in the lead role. His hammy, Poe-esquire disguise, is clearly compensating for the lack of intellectual gravity to which he so anxiously aspires. And, although I understand that Hanks did not watch the original prior to filming, it is a neat coincidence then that he chose to insert false teeth (see Alistair Simm in the original). The supporting characters are nicely fleshed out with some helpful introductory vignettes and although some of the film comes across as a little too "Uncle Tom's Cabin" at times; I think we can forgive the Cohens. There are some great laugh out loud moments of pure slapstick and some nice subtle touches of more gentle humour. This does not stack up against some of the more lauded of the Cohen's work - Fargo - Barton Fink - but it is an enjoyable and worthwhile slice of cinematic time. Beware of plenty of (uneccesary) bad language.

Not great, but good

[MLDinTN · 7/10 · 16 March 2005]

I consider this film to be a dark satire. It's about 5 criminals who use the hospitality of an elderly black lady to mastermind the robbery of a casino. Tom Hanks was very good as GH Dorr, a fancy talking man of many degrees. He sweet talks Ms. Munson and is the brains of the group. His entourage includes the general (whose introduction is funny with the fingers up the nose), the muscle ( a dumb jock), the explosion expert, and an insider at the casino. They meet in Ms. Munson's basement and pretend to play music while they dig the tunnel.

The arguments between them are funny as well as the ways they try to hide the scheme. And the gospel music was entertaining. It added to the film. Since the movie is more of a satire than a comedy, it's not laugh out loud funny, all through I did some; instead it just makes you smile with what they are up to. And once again Tom Hanks plays a great character and was a perfect choice.

FINAL VERDICT: This movie was better than reviews made it out to be when it was in theaters. I recommend it as a good choice if you're looking just for an entertaining film.

Yuck!!

[sophybliss · 1/10 · 8 May 2005]

This movie is the worst disappointment I've had in a long time. I love the original Ealing comedy this is based on & was so excited when I heard the Coen brothers were remaking it, with Tom Hanks to boot. What happened???

Several others have commented on the jarring changes in tone & this is a major problem. The scenes with the old lady evoke a 50's feeling, then suddenly you're in a casino with the F-word spouting every 5 seconds. What the heck is that?? What's the need for all the cursing at all? It's just not funny.

Tom Hanks is a mess. I think it's the script mainly, the majority of his lines are confusing mush. I read somewhere that he didn't view the original before making this, but his sniveling laugh sure looks like a poor imitation of Alec Guinness's monstrously funny snickers. You even get a little of the teeth movement, but again, nothing to compare with Guinness.

The other characters are uninspired & not as well drawn as the originals, with the exception perhaps of "The General" who came off pretty well. It's hard to compete with Herbert Lom & Peter Sellars, of course, but couldn't they come up with anything better than this? The munitions guy was the worst (yes, more than Marlon Wayons' stereotyped role) and his irritable bowel syndrome....gee, nothing like toilet humor to bring on the laughs!! You just don't care about these guys!

Lastly, the old lady character was okay, but no match for Katie Johnson in the original. She was too sharp, too strong. Most of the humor in the original came from the old lady being so dottily sweet, mild and (seemingly) frail. You could see why the police thought she was a little daft. Not so with the new character, I didn't buy it at all.

Don't waste your money on this one. Go for the original and, while you're at it, try some of the other Ealing comedies, too.

Great Characters

[Pasafist · 24 May 2004]

In the annuls of cinema, Character is king. Many can come up with a winning high concept idea but unless you fill it with a rich tapestry of Characters you've wasted time. For the greatest plot idea can become mundane if you've put the wrong character in the wrong place. Joel and Ethan Coen's THE LADYKILLERS is a mundane story that is saved by top notch and very rich performances. Mrs. Munson (Irma P. Hall, Soul Food) is a simple woman. She lives at home alone, she goes to church every Sunday, and she prays for the souls of those young kids listening to that "Hippity Hoppity" music. So when she rents a room to Professor Dorr P.H.D (Tom Hanks, Philadelphia) little does she know that her annual contribution to Bob Jones University will never be the same.

Dorr turns out to be a criminal mastermind, trying to pull off a simple casino robbery. He's acquired a crack team of losers and creeps to pull it off: Gaiwan (Marlon Wayans, Dungeons and Dragons) The Inside Man, Garth Pancake (J.K. Simmons, The First Wives Club) The Munitions Expert, The General (Tzi Ma, The Quiet American) the tactical man, and Lump (Ryan Hurst, Patch Adams) is the muscle. Will they pull off their brilliant plan? Only time and the two-hour running time will tell.

What the Coen's have crafted here is an acquired taste. The comedy is a little bit esoteric. The story plods along with almost reckless abandon, and they use swear words like their trying to buy a Ferrari with their swear jar. But something else is going on under the surface, a great character drama is unfolding.

Hank's overplays Dorr, but only to hide the fact that he might not be nearly as smart as he might claims. It's so subtle, and yet so garish I could see many thinking the performance is too over the top. But Hanks plays it so smartly and charming, you can't help but be enveloped into its complex layers.

I also liked how the Coen's screenplay polarizes it characters by playing the actors against each other. Dorr and Munson relationship works because it's the classic battle between brains and innocence. You may be able to quote Edgar Allen Poe, but if you can't do the right thing maybe you should get a real job.

The other great struggle is between Gaiwan and Garth. Gaiwan is a young black male with no conscience. Garth is a liberal white guy trying to knock sense into this stupid kid. Their escalating story builds from an almost a playful game of Older Vs Younger, but then raises the bar as it escalates into violence.

The Coen's have always had limited appeal because their films are dependent on audience involvement. You have to care for the characters; you have to put yourself in the characters place. Those who don't will leave the theater going that was weird, that was stupid, and that didn't make any sense. But that's why I like their films so much.

THE LADYKILLERS is worth the price of admission if you're interested in a silly and subtle character

drama but fails in plot. But boy it's a lot of fun, and if you give it a chance you might just walk away without that look of confusion you had on your face after THE HUDSUCKER PROXY.

**** out of 5

Southern discomfort

[=G= · 7/10 · 29 October 2004]

In "The Ladykillers", an erudite and refined Southern Gentleman (Hanks) takes a room with an elderly but sagacious black women in MIssissippi for the purpose of using her basement to tunnel to a vault full of gambling money with assistance from a group of four men, all stereotypical caricatures, who pretend to be an ensemble of musicians. This wacky comedy, imbued with the Coen's subtly sardonic humor, reverberates with prayer meeting gospel music and blatant unabashed silliness as the quintet of thieves set about to do their dirty deed. A not-for-everyone comedy which is long on style and short on story, "The Ladykillers" is more likely to elicit the occasional cluck of the tongue than boisterous guffaws. Entertaining though not memorable and worth a look by anyone into the Coen brothers off kilter sense of humor. (B)

Not so successful

[valadas · 6/10 · 22 October 2010]

This is a remake of the classical movie (1955) by Alexander Mackendrick of the same title. There it was a bank robbery which is planned and executed while here it's the planning an execution of a floating casino one. The British atmosphere is here replaced (let's say in passing with some success) by the Mississippi southern one with its typical people and the old Victorian landlady by an old typical black lady. This is not the weakest part of the movie and we must also stress the excellent performances of Tom Hanks and Irma P. Hall as the "professor" who leads the gang of robbers and the landlady who lodges him and his disguised "quintet" of musicians who are "rehearsing" Renaissance compositions. Nevertheless the succession of less convincing and somewhat artificial scenes withdraws most of the movie's possible funny side mainly if we compare it with the corresponding scenes of the classical movie of which this one is a remake. The final succession of gags by which the problem of the robbed money is solved is too hasty and a bit forced even if we must take for granted that a comedy is not to respect fully the logics of reality. Summing it up, it's a movie that amuses you a bit but has some flaws in its "mise en scène" that compromise its possible success and its classification as a good movie.

Another delicious offering from the Coen Brothers

[FilmOtaku · 7/10 · 8 April 2004]

While not my favorite Coen Brothers film – any film would be hard pressed to top `Fargo' – it harkens back to the deliciously wicked dark humor of that great film. Tom Hanks is wonderful as the ring leader of the (mostly) inept and colorful gang of thieves who plan to rob a riverboat casino – if they can get past Hanks' strong-willed, bible-thumping elderly landlady. The Ladykillers is quintessential Coen Brothers – a seemingly straight-forward plot gone horribly wrong, bizarre characters and since the Big Lebowski, a rousing soundtrack – this time it's gospel music that literally made me want to start moving my feet and clap. I found the character played by Marlon Wayons a bit over the top, even for a Coen film, but the other supporting players, (namely `The General') more than make up for that slight shortcoming. This is a hard one to recommend, because while I laughed so hard my stomach hurt through a lot of the film, the humor is so dark that if I had any sense of shame I would be embarrassed that I laughed as HARD as I did at WHAT I did.

--Shelly

An awful, dreadful, unfunny mess

[anhedonia · 1/10 · 26 March 2004]

I suppose it's a sign of how low Hollywood has sunk when the usually wonderful Coen Brothers resort to remakes. Actually, calling the Coens' "The Ladykillers" an awful, dreadful, unfunny mess is being unkind to films that are really awful, dreadful and unfunny.

This remake ranks right alongside Gus Van Sant's "Psycho" as the worst remake of a classic. The Coens have taken a marvelously droll and brilliantly understated and charming black comedy and turned it into a broad, charmless and crude excuse for a comedy.

Tom Hanks hams it the whole way. There's not a single funny moment in his entire performance. He could win the Best Actor Oscar every year for the next 25 years and wouldn't amount to half the superb actor Sir Alec Guinness was. And as much as I like Irma P. Hall, the Coens got her character completely wrong.

What made the original so good was sweet Mrs. Wilberforce's (played by the incomparable Katie Johnson) naivete and vulnerability. The Coens have transformed her into a tough-talking woman without an ounce of vulnerability, and the story loses all its charm and humor. Hall's character just doesn't work in this story.

Marlon Wayans grates as the foul-mouthed "inside man" - unable to extract any humor from their remake, the Coens resort to Wayans spewing profanity pretty much in every line of dialogue. I have no problem with profanity, but here it's just not funny. And where the profanity doesn't work, the Coens believe bathroom humor will, by giving a character Irritable Bowel Syndrome. This is what Ethan and Joel have been reduced to. The guys who've given us some of the best films in the last 20 years have sunk to this level?

The Coens' film has only two minor things going for it: a) a lovely cat named Pickles and b) a terrific gospel soundtrack. Save yourself the trouble - buy the soundtrack CD and rent Alexander Mackendrick's original on DVD. It's only March and the Coens have already given us one of the worst films of the year. We can only hope they got the remake bug out of their system. Unless, of course, since they are, after all, the Coens, they're planning on remaking "The Bicycle Thief" - in color, because De Sica didn't get it quite right the first time.