Making Sense of It: Analysis of The Mortal Remains (Final Chapter of the Ballad of Buster Scruggs)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 พ.ค. 2024
- A look at the final chapter in the 2018 Coen Brothers film The Ballad of Buster Scruggs. The structure, characters, and themes of the chapter are considered in relation to the rest of the film as well. Spoilers for this and other movies in the Coen Brother filmography.
The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
Directed/Written/Produced: Joel and Ethan Coen
Distributed by: Netflix - ภาพยนตร์และแอนิเมชัน
I always interpreted the three stories as a hint as how they died.
The frenchman: killed by his friend for losing all his money for him
The lady: killed by her son in law for being.....well you can see.
The trapper: killed by the native woman for being so unbearably tone deaf.
Very good my man! I too am a Vet...Viet Vet. Rode a Triumph 955i speed triple. Now, I wait for ...
Lol, poor trapper.
Not sure. It would seem to imply at least by one interpretation that the 'Reapers' murdered them all in the guise of harriers. And this is just them taking their quota in.
What if they aren't dead? What if the duo really are just some spooky bounty hunters. But the three people each become aware that there are reasons someone might want them dead and the bounty hunters may be distracting them before they thump.
This focuses on how people near death have to face the lives they've lived and judge themselves. Even the trapper regarded himself as different from everyone else (trapper/townsmen).
Everyone has guilt. Everyone knows their own guilt. We cope with this feeling of guilt differently. Some justify it as part of the natural human experience (ferrets). Some judge others as a way of justifying themselves (righteous). And some consider it all chaos and random and discount their own agency and responsibility (lucky). But in those final moments, we are alone with our thoughts and our guilt and if judgement were ever to come, it is rapidly approaching. Like bounty hunters sleeping in the same hotel as you, known to sneak up on their targets when least expected for crimes even they don't know... as long as they get paid.
But that's just a theory I've been contemplating after my last watch.
@@silasg3650 🫡👏👏👏👏👏👏💚
Just one note. When the guy looks at the three people in the carriage and says that he loves to see the look on their face when they realize what's happening... If you notice he also breaks the fourth wall and is looking at us... And it goes along with the point you are making about how death comes for us all.
Very astute observation! So that also provides another parallel to the opening chapter...it's the only other one where the 4th wall is broken. Thanks for pointing that out!
@@LanguageFilm No problem. what he's essentially saying, or what the coen brothers are actually saying, is that we are also realizing in that moment that we are becoming reacquainted with our own limited mortality. Very good analysis, and I definitely subscribed. Keep it up!
@@LanguageFilm I also want to point out that the old man who fought with the Native Americans as that girl was by his side, was like Tom Waits in that he didn't experience death either. The young man came to him speaking about wanting to get married, and to him, an old man who is acquainted with the finality of life wasn't the least bit interested because he knows how quickly one can get married and then die, much like what ended up happening to his soon-to-be wife. "poor girl, ya ought not have done it", meaning that because of his work, he was experienced enough to know when someone was a goner or not, and that such an innocent and untrained life had just been wasted simply because of her lack of experience. The couple represents naivety, and a coddled outlook towards the impending doom that surrounds them, whereas the cowboy represents the reality that we face. That's why they made Buster Scruggs look like Gene Autry and everything he experiences around him are the authentic Western perils that he isn't aware of until the good guy even dies in the end, noting that even Hollywood desensitized us in the early 50s and 60s to the implication behind all the people that were killed in the Westerns.
Hi, Rich. I am so glad that you understand.
How is your mother?
@@LanguageFilm have you done millers crossing? Up there with the best gangster flicks of all time for me
I just finished watching Buster Scruggs. Everyone on YT is mesmerised by the first chapter, but I found the entire film compelling - with all the chapters being equally strong.
The delicate love story between Alice and William was perhaps the most tragic. A 'modern day' Romeo and Juliet in a way.
I agree with you. I think The Gal Who Got Rattled is the best segment and also the most tragic thing the Coens ever put to screen (got a video on that one on the way!).
@@LanguageFilm Yes . That is the best part of this movie when all parts are amazing.
Is that true? I found all stories so compelling in one way or another and never before found Liam Neeson so despicable. The parallels of how he treats the poor boy as not even a pet but a tool rather than a human being showing more and more as the story goes on until he buys the chicken. The love story of Knapp and Longabaugh was so sad too, if only Arthur had said otherwise or been more careful to not get clubbed. The many things that could have prevented her death, just gutted me. The mixed feelings I had about her dog, how at one point I felt so sorry for Pierce only to feel he was responsible in some way for her death and yet partly responsible for Knapp and Alice speaking and growing as a couple. The film absolutely played well with my emotions and every story it's own, I don't see how you could only love the first story.
With that said, the first story is so perfectly played by Tim Blake Nelson, I could see and 100% agree with it almost needing it's own full length film. But nonetheless it doesn't take away from the rest of the tales. But, again, at the same time I get why people focus on that one the most. It's just the most fun of the stories and is so perfectly acted. But I feel that way about the prospector's story and love that it's the only one where the main character is spared death and a rotten twist. And with the added insight from this video, I'll be watching the rest or any more that come, I appreciate it even more than I did. I've been meaning to watch this film for years after seeing the beginning story on TH-cam and I'm very glad I did. It's stuck in my mind and I think it's on par with the Coen's best work.
Amen.
I wasn’t at all upset about the first story ending. It’s such an unusual movie and I loved it
Sad a lot of the stories were super sad but very well made it's an awesome movie reminding me of the movies that they used to make back in the day when I was a kid.
“Death smiles at us all. All a man can do is smile back.” - Marcus Aurelius
cool quote he never said that tho
@@therealharshlycritical how would you know. Or are you just so bored you are looking for an argument in fact who gives a FCUK if he did or didn’t say it it’s still a cool saying.
@@therealharshlycritical Whether he said it or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is if it's a Roman philosophy and culture. That's the more important question.
@@russcooke5671 it matters because people are giving credit to the quote. Marcus Aurelius said many great things and that quote is pretty good too, but he didn’t say that, so either give credit where it’s due or failing that, forget assigning the quote and let the words speak for themselves. Jesus Christ, shit matters even when you are too lazy to care about it
@@joegibbskins lazy. ??? Just not got time for the brainwashing BOLLOX.
Holy crap, when Thigpen is explaining how he distracts them by telling a story so Clarence can sneak up on them that’s just a blanket metaphor for the other parts of the movie that ended in death.
Is it?
@@ViktoriousDead not for you apparently...
@@nomadronin707cringe pfp, argument invalid
Are you saying that when Buster stomps the table after verbally distracting Mr. Krabs that it was actually these 2 influencing the entire thing which leads to Krabs being killed?
I honestly don't think the change in lighting signifies alive/dead. That was already done by the duo waking the trapper. The light change instead signifies the moment the souls and the audience begin to realize that they are dead. Especially given that the duo talk about how they bump off people and never do it to these three the whole trip. Because they already did it before the start of the scene. That's why the three are in the coach and the whole wake up part
Interesting viewpoint. I agree with you.
That is a good point. The trapper was alive until the point when he woke up. The waking could signify that the living body has passed on and if you look at the trappers response he initially is confused but the soul quickly fills in the gaps making him like the others believe they willingly boarded the coach.
I agree. It doesn't really make sense any other way.
I like this, only because I like to keep supernatural stuff to the latter part of death. If they died at the point of sundown it would mean that we could use near death experiences to set supernatural communication networks.
"Choke yourself when you get to the market, I'll meet you in Duo's stage coach to tell you what's missing from the fridge."
@MaestroAlvis I have a feel when the Lady is choking that is her death, she was merely sleeping and likely smothered to death in her sleep after receiving word that her husband had passed and gone in a negative generating denial and not making life well for her daughter. Rene on the other hand passed away peacefully in his sleep and right before putting his hat back on and entering the hotel made sense of it all.
"Because I could not stop for Death
He kindly stopped for me
The Carriage held but just Ourselves
And Immortality." - Emily Dickinson.
Bravo
"I leave the coup de grase to the wolves and Guilla monsters." - Buster Scruggs
I disagree that they start the trip alive. I think they are dead the whole time but are not aware of it or not fully. The way the lady keeps correcting herself from was to is when talking about her husband plus saying they have been separated for 3 years but now she is coming to him tells us (in retrospect) that her husband died three years ago. Her "coming to him" means she has died. The midway point is "the passage" that Thigpen mentions. He looks into their eyes when he talks about it because they are realizing they are dead and "negotiating" it.
Did anyone else think it significant that as the passengers enter the hotel, the lady and trapper go off to the darkened left, but when the Frenchman enters, he suddenly smiles, taps his hat, and walks straight ahead toward the lighted staircase?
Holy crap, thanks ,I didn't notice that!
yeah, he's found peace and acceptance.
He's the only honest sinner of the bunch. Why shouldn't he get heaven? The others are constantly trying to absolve themselves of responsibilty for their own faults. The Frenchman merely shrugs and notes that life is what it is.
@@bob7975man, I've been spending too much time in the comment sections of religious TH-cam videos. I'm developing a growing distaste for these simple poetic answers.
Nobody's personality is intrinsically their own. Each of these characters act the way they do because of the worlds they come from. You know the women had a strict disciplined upbringing that informs her behavior. And the trapper acts out the values important to his existence. I don't think the trapper's ignorance, or the lady's strict attitude are their own faults, ultimately.
I would be curious to know what you identify as religiously. If your comment is a reflection of your own views I would guess atheist or a kind of easy going Christian. It's like you're saying, if a person is a good person, that should be good enough for heaven.
This stance, is like Rene's character; charming and jovial. A happy, healthy middle ground between strict and ignorant. But, i'd argue, that if you're going to be wise about who deserves eternal torment vs eternal bliss, you ought understand to what degree people are a product of their environment.
@@Perditions not reading all that
Couple of thoughts:
1) I don’t believe the change in lighting signifies death. I believe it signifies the crossing of the Styx, so to speak. Once they’ve made the crossing, they all become aware that something is different, and that’s when the reapers begin to walk them through it all.
2) The prospector doesn’t escape death. On the surface, it appears he beat death and gets to leave with his riches, but as he hikes out of the valley, belting out his song, he is still bleeding out of the hole in his chest. He hasn’t beaten death, he just managed to get a few steps ahead of it.
You can't call the change in lighting "crossing the river Styx", because they're in the "boat" from the start. What were they doing in the "boat" if not crossing the river.
He’s meeting it on his terms. Ensuring that the greedy do not prosper, and the world is as rich as when he arrived.
@@MaestroAlvisthere is a point in a river where you are closer to the other siden than where you came from.
I never realized that. The fact that the Frenchman says "you can't play another man's hand" and Buster tried to. What a good observation
No, Buster did not try to. He refused to.
@@clownpendotfart he was going to until he saw it was a dead mans hand (aces and eights) then tried to back out
@@IronAlchemist6 He asked to join a game of poker, but not to play a specific person's hand. That hand was only available because the person who received it had folded & left, making it highly non-random. If that person had stayed in the game, he would have needed to receive an additional hand.
@@clownpendotfart buster asks is he can play and the other players basically say "only if you play his hand", which he accepted until he saw the cards so he was contempt playing another mans hand.
I remember this movie kept coming across my feed and I watched thinking it was more of a comedy. What a horrifyingly pleasant surprise I was in for.
It is kind of a comedy. I would say it is, outside of the 3rd and 4th stories.
I came for the meme. I left with, as you said, a pleasant surprise.
"First time?"
Actually, when you think about it, all of these stories were making us think that the main character's escaped death but then we learn that they did not (except for the gold digger who had a reverse effect).
Agreed! Nice point.
Prospector*
One happy ending was needed
What if the prospector didn't escape death? He got shot right through his chest, and he was old. What if the next events were just his ghost getting revenge seeing the murderer die, and wandering off to his happy afterlife doing more of what he always loved? While the murderer got an afterlife of being stuck in a hole with his gold and nothing else of light or beauty to enjoy.
I think you should have paid more attention to the dialogue of the Lady - you missed the clues that she knew her fate. When talking about her husband, twice she changes her tense from past to present, indicating that she knows he is dead and she is rejoining him - she even mentions Jacob's Ladder. I think the Lady is the one crossing over - not the trapper and the Frenchman. That's why she "requires assistance" to get off the coach and they have to open the hotel door for her. She dies during the choking attack. That is why the Irishman removes his hat and sings - and his name - Clarence! From It's a Wonderful Life. The role of the Lady was entrusted to one of the best actresses of all time - Tyne Daly.
I thought the fact that when Rene is about to step through the door it also pairs with what Thigpen said about trying to make sense of it all.
Also, just before he steps through the door he has a melancholic look on his face, almost scared. But then as he’s ready to enter seeing as the carriage has left, his only chance of escape, he accepts his fate slapping his hat as he closes the door behind him. It is only fair for him to be the one to do this as like he said in the carriage, “we must spin our own wheel and play our own hand”.
Great vid btw.
Excellent video essay, I love how you interpreted the gold miner's escape through the three travelers' worldviews. I'll leave a vote for A Serious Man
Thanks for the feedback! A Serious Man would be great and I'd love to make a video on how Hebrew is used in that movie...unfortunately, someone already beat me to it. I'd link the video but I forget which one contains the topic. Great choice, though. I know people who'd argue it's their best film.
Agreed, I literally clapped aloud during this part. Really great essay.
I got a few theories of my own:
1.) A few other commenters mentioned this, but I’m of the belief that sunset represents the realization of death, not dying itself.
2.) I believe that Clarence represents good/heaven, while Thigpin represents evil, hell. This is supported by the fact that when Clarence interacts with the other three characters, he usually calms them down and soothes them (His singing, his initial interaction with the trapper, etc.), while Thigpin scares them (Thigpin’s singing awakens the trapper, his story scares the other three characters, etc.).
3.) The body on top of the carriage, Mr. Thorpe, is going to heaven, while the other three characters are going to hell. Unlike the other characters in the carriage, he “rides above” them both figuratively and metaphorically. It’s almost as if the other characters are in purgatory while Mr. Thorpe is at peace. Furthermore, when they arrive at Fort Morgan, Thigpin suggests more than once “Let him stay in your room Clarence,” and once they open the doors to the inn, you can see Mr. Thorpe being carried up the stairs and in to the light, while the rest of the characters do not immediately follow (At least, not on screen).
Your third point is very true! especially because Thigpin said that "judging on what they are paying for him" it could signify the fact that he is wanted in Heaven as Jesus has arleady paid the ultimate price for Christians and he is at peace and accepted Jesus.
I took Mr Thorpe to be symbolic of each of them. "Us but not us" and Thigpin looks at them "the midnight caller gets him, never me." Additionally, he's not actually seen. He's already wrapped up, because, like each of them, their physical bodies are being wrapped and laid to rest.
Wild Bill was not killed because of the hand, it was the hand that he was waiting to play when he was killed.
I've always thought the 2 bounty hunters were the Coen Brothers themselves remarking that after their scene/movie is done the characters would cease to exist.
Thank you for this video, I think your insight into the general theme of both the last story and the movie as a whole is very enlightening.
There is one thing I wish to add concering the story of the gold miner:
1) Somebody DOES die. Not the gold miner, but the bandit. This is essential, if death is a thematic thread for all the stories.
2) The gold miner is the only protagonist capable of embracing a fundamental change to their habits. This is shown in how he not only sees the land he is searching as a means of getting a lot of gold, but as a prospect that requires planning and care, just enough greed for him to live a comfortable life, but no so much that he becomes avaricious. This is why he lets go of the tiny grains of gold in order to pursue the larger vein.
He also takes an egg for sustenance, but doesn't take the whole nest, out of a care for nature and an empathy for the birds. Nature is cruel and built on the taking of lives, but one needn't embrace this as a personal philosophy to inflict harm unneccesarily and unwisely. (if the birds' eggs are all gone, then the bird's children will die and there will be no more birds to take eggs from in the future. Perhaps a good lesson concering wildlife preservation and environmentalism in general.)
3) It's the bandit that faces the same trial as the other protagonists, and who meets his end due to his own habits. He is somebody that didn't do the hard work, ungraciously took the gold, and didn't bother checking the old man's corpse to "finish the deed" so to speak. He was lazy, and so was punished for this when the old man tricks him and kills him instead, a just reward.
The bandit may not have been the protagonist, but he received the same lesson as the other characters.
The "lucky gunslinger" lived by luck of the draw and a happy go lucky attitude that got him in trouble many times and which he narrowly escapes from each time. His luck had to dry up sooner than later, and rather than get an honest profession or settle down somehow as a man of his singing talents no doubt could, he died the way he lived. By the gun, his legacy gone and with a younger, quicker gun to take his place.
The bank robber had several chances to stop what he was doing, ignored all warnings, and yet carried on with his habit until it got him killed, all while he views the thing he could have had at the moment of death, a pretty girl to settle down with. (just a metaphor for not seeing what you want until it's in front of you at exactly the worst moment.)
The thespian, unfortunately, didn't really have much of a choice. I guess he's not so much punished for what he does, but for what he doesn't do. He has no control over anything in his life, except for his theater skills. And even while the odds are stacking against him, his audience grows thinner and thinner, and the man providing for him becomes increasingly desperate, he doesn't "change his tune", so to speak. He doesn't change his ways, most likely because he feels he lacks control.
His story ends in a fundamentally unjust death, but one that may have been prevented if he had been clever enough to know what was coming, and somehow had provided his caretaker with an alternative. Unfortunately, this wasn't the case. I guess all things considered, he was just unlucky, perhaps as a mirror to buster scruggs.
And finally, (ignoring the gold miner's tale), the story of the trail girl and her dog. I guess this is the most hopeful of all the tales, excluding the gold miner's. She appears to, despite the odds and dark circumstances, change her habits and generally move towards happiness. However, she does this almost exclusively by being passive and letting an outside force make all her decisions for her, a habit she acquired early on, it seems, as her decisions are made for her at the start of the story.
It's this habit of passively doing what you're told that gets her killed in the end. And regardless of how bad we feel about it and how unjust it all seems, she had her chance. She could have waited, could have used the "one bullet" to kill the "one native", even if the old man that was fighting the native did die. She could have lived on her own terms in that final confrontation, but chose to do as she was told, and end her own life tragically. Another very unfortunate case, but with a lesson about too eagerly doing what you're told and not grasping life firmly during times of crises.
So if the final story is indeed about humanity failing each time to change their perspective and their habits for the better, than this theme is still present in the gold miner's tale, and present throughout all the stories, in a certain degree.
Maybe the three passengers in the carriage at the end, were call backs to the other stories.
The gambler looked like the guy that was at the poker table with Curly Joe and Buster Scruggs.
The proper lady could have been the host at the dinner table with Alice Longabaugh.
The trapper could have been the crying guy on the gallows with the bank robber.
The body (Mr Thorpe) falls off the roof like the orator fell into the river. He also needed to be carried around.
Just a thought.
That really fits the Coen world view so I think you have hit the nail right on the head!
Good idea!
I like the idea that the corpse in the coffin is that of Buster Scrugs. That would make a nice bookends touch. Not sure the rest of the narrative bears it out however.
It's interesting, the first story clearly shows a spirit with a wound from a violent death. These three characters are older, and Irishman mentions frailty, as pointed here referring to predation of sorts on unhealthy. This is death in moments, not a single instant.
During Thigpens monologue and he looked at Lady, but also directly looked at the camera, I felt so called out and scared. Definitely one of the best stories in Ballad of Buster Scruggs.
I was so captivated by the dialogue in this chapter, I knew there had to be more to it. So glad I stumbled upon this video, and embarrassed to say I didn't realize they were dead the first time around!
A few generations back(first decade of the 20th Century), members of my family came to the US from Germany. They moved to Wisconsin and settled in as farmers. The eldest son fell in love with a local girl and after they were married the families moved to a farm with two farm houses and worked the land together. The matriarch of the girl's family was deaf/mute, but knew ASL. The matriarch of the immigrants didn't speak English. When they met at the common well they would have long non-verbal conversations. With gestures and movement taking the place of talking.
I really enjoyed this film. I can't recall the last great anthology film I've watched. Going into it, I thought is was going to be a comedic western based on moral compass and the times. Then Buster died and James Franco following which made me realize it was anthology. It was very well written with many underlying themes and different inferences. I also enjoyed your synopsis. Pieces like this are truly remarkable and breathtaking. Thanks for this.
This is a modern day Night Gallery, albeit a mild one. Could even be a Serling written Twilight Zone. The Coens are HUGE Serling fans, as we all should be.
I just like how the 'bounty hunters' are looking forward while the other passengers are all still looking back.
you mean in the direction of travel? when the frenchmen leans out to tell the coachman to stop, we can see the three passengers are actually the ones looking forward, and the duo looking back
Thanks for making this video. Ever since I saw this movie, this final chapter has been on my mind and to see it so thoughtfully discussed and interpreted is excellent.
Great analysis…my favorite episode in the series…other metaphors:
1) Gleason sings Irish Ballad “Unfortunate Lad” talks of young man’s fate… in Irish / Gaelic mythology fate and death is the goddess Morrigan…as they Travel to Ft Morgan
2) Arriving at Ft Morgan, note the door…the left door is decorated with an Angel whilst the right door is decorated with a Devil 😈
3) Another possible metaphor: Saul Rubinek plays the French Gambler Renee…Renee mean rebirth… 🤷♂️ perhaps another metaphor
I only watched the movie once while I was barley awake at my family's for Christmas, slowly passing out on the couch at 3am. Had no idea what the last story was about, but now it's definitely is far more compelling
I really enjoyed your analysis! I'm glad there are people like you to make sense of these brilliant movies as I don't think I would have taken the time and energy to rewatch and understand
this vignette has been on my mind for so long, and your How all six stories video popped up in my feed. Awesome work.
Subscribed! You don't know how happy I was to run into your analysis for this closing chapter. It was my favorite from the whole film. Very insightful stuff. Keep up the awesome work, my friend.
Well this was incredible! I searched for video essays, and most of the ones that came up I had already seen. Then I scrolled down to this one.
Thank you!
This channel deserves more recognition. Great production
Thank you so much for your brilliant analysis of this scene and the movie. I just re-watched TBOBS last night and came across your commentary and tbh I had no idea what I was watching until you broke down what was going on here. I'm not exaggerating when I say that your video has changed my perspective on life. I sincerely thank you. I wish that you would expand your analysis of movies and scenes to a wider litmus test than just language. I think you deserve so many more subs than you have right now. Maybe a wider spectrum of commentary would do that.
Wow, that’s really awesome! Thank you. I have been considering “branching out” from language and it’s great to hear that kind of feedback. I may give it a try! :)
Awesome video! I love analysis/deep dive videos! Great job ❤️
Very well done. I was a little confused on this one. I picked up a clue it two but couldn’t really piece it all together. Now it totally makes sense thanks to your explanation making it all the more enjoyable
So glad I found your channel. Great stuff man. Don't let the algo keep you down.
The Frenchman in the stagecoach and the Frenchman in the first chapter could be the same person at different ages. I noticed when I watched it the second time when he told the story about gambling.
Subscribed about 10-15 min.... Would've been sooner but I was listening from the shower lol
I absolutely LOVE film analysis.... Or any analysis really as long as it's intelligent and boy oh boy do you hit the mark!
Looking forward to doing a deep dive on your channel!!!
Keep up the excellent work, sir!
Definitely my favourite segment of the movie. So much food for thought...
brilliant. I enjoyed every bit of it. I enjoy these sorts of analysis/interpretation videos even when or if I have a different view. But again, lol, I did not even catch the inferences at all when I watched it. And I have only watched it once. But still, it really made me laugh at myself when thirty seconds into your analysis, I realized how badly I missed what was right in front of me as I watched it. hahahaha. I remember thinking of the last act, that I liked it a lot, and I felt like I knew something bad was about to happen at the hotel. But that is all surface level thinkings I had and then I felt slightly let down when the “surface level” did not fully resolve in the end. But at the same overall I liked the whole film. And also but now, I understand a whole lot better!
I remember randomly watching this back in 2019, being completely captivated by it the whole time, and thinking "holy shit this was an actually good original western film on Netflix." Then I saw the Cohen brothers in the credits and it all made sense haha.
I always assumed they were trying to creep the passengers out. Telling scary stories was a major form of entertainment back then. And considering how much more naive folks had been, it was easy to scare these passengers into believing they were dead. The windows in the Motel still say Fort Morgan Royal and I don't believe the bounty hunters would have only had to handle a single corpse if all of the passengers were truly dead.
I watched this specific part twice and I got to the conclusion that the duo could actually just be normal bounty hunters, the 3 didn't die and it was just a normal travel. Nothing really paranormal happens. People see everything as symbolism, but if you look at it in a literal way, it makes sense too. The sunset and the change of light could be just... A normal sunset. The bounty hunters could be just bounty hunters carrying a corpse. The dude that everyone thinks as death could be just a normal dude, we don't see his face anyway. The staircases with light coming from above could be just... Normal staircases. In my opinion this segment is an exercise on how you can manipulate everyones view on a story with good knowledge of moviemaking, use of lightining, soundtrack, acting, etc, without a real reason to believe on it.
@@gustaaavo Only problem the coachman never stopped or speak, the luggage are not deposed since they don't need it... yeah the corpse is weird, Rene accepted is fate, but it's more than probable a parable to death.
Also, something you probably didn't see, the door of the hotel has "gravure" representing hell and heaven, the angel and the beast, a parable where soul while rest in the diegesis of the movie, there is always a death in those stories.
If the end doesn't make sense, the death of Scruggs either....
I don't see this end manipulative, it's obvious if you see it another time... it's a Bro Cohen movie, they don't manipulate or make movie to do stupid thing like this, it's related to the movie, death and fragility.
This film is Nietzschean in its essence and in forgetting the fate of individuals, this is what the character explains about the storie, you don't know it yet but you're already dead.
The best story metaphors don't need to be metaphors to tell a good story.
@@gustaaavoSir I agree with you
Buster Scruggs is the corpse. Remember he was wanted man, he shows his wanted ad. They are the bounty hunters carrying his body
Its also interesting to note that Thigpen's portrayal is heavily influenced from Arthur Frayne from Zardoz, replete with directing lines to the viewer along with the fascination on stories and where they may go.
4k subs. YOU DESERVE MILLIONS!
Absolutely amazing
Ah, this is really well done. 👏🏼
i like to think that buster had a really fun talk with both personifications of death
Another thing you missed is that Surly Joe told Buster to play the other man's hand before he had a chance to look at it, Buster was simply checking to see if it was a decent hand.
Great video to make me realize what's important in life and stop procrastinating.
The little sculpture on top of the door as the 3 enter shows a goat on the right and angel on the left.
The song Liam Neeson sings in the woods is "Weela Waila", an old Irish song about a woman who lives in the woods who kills her defenseless 3 month old baby... Foreshadowing his cruel murder
I can't believe I didn't realize that. Thanks for sharing.
I usually don't like film or literary analysis because they frequently depend on what looks like circular logic. Thanks for breaking the mold. This was excellent.
What an incredible video! Thanks
Beat me to it boss. Beautiful. I couldn’t have done it the justice you did. Fantastic movie.. only realized this on the second time around… shhh
This channel is amazing analysis.
Anyone notice how at some point the three close their eyes for a moment at some point. That’s what solidified it for me amongst all the other clues. Ahhh brilliant.
I'd already heard the theory that the passengers are dead. I don't buy it. The reapers already have a dead body they're transporting on top of the carriage, and that body is completely distinct from the people in the carriage. Nor is it necessary for Death/the Grim Reaper to "distract" anyone before death: Buster Scruggs was looking directly at his killer as they faced off in a duel to the death.
"You did not wake me for I was not asleep" That could be the moment of death. He was awake, and then died and so his waking up was just him passing.
A brilliant short!
Brilliant analysis.
Excellent content. Intelligent analysis and thoughtful opinion.
Wonderful video. I loved it! Much watch teh film again.
Thank you for the amazing insight! I watched this movie once then bought it on DVD so I could study it more. Like a few Coen Brothers films I've seen, there is a lot to unpack, particularly the language. This is what makes them great films, in my opinion.
Might I suggest Miller's Crossing? The language alone is a treasure trove.
What’s the rumpus? I recently ranked all their movies based on my own personal opinion and that was my number one!
Excellent analysis
Good job. Don't confuse the existentialist philosophy of the trapper with a simple-minded lack of thought. Being self-aware without pretense speaks to why Tom Waits lives.
A duo both doing one job, the same but also distinct, distracting us with stories, who could those brothers, I mean angels be.
Great video.
Hope you do the other parts of the movie
Thanks! I’ve done a couple of other videos on the different sections, too, so check ‘em out if you haven’t!
This is a very smart, thoughtful analysis. Thank you.
One thing that distinguishes the gold prospector at his moment of mortal peril - unlike Buster, the would-be bank robber or the "girl that got rattled" - was (the same as the wagon-train leader who almost got killed in his stand against the Indians) he, the prospector was paying very, very close attention (and suffered what he had to suffer- playing dead) when death approached. All the others, whether out of hubris, youthful inattention, or fear were not thinking/showing awareness of the situation.
Also, the prospector's would-be killer also thought he had won when he shot the prospector and hadn't made sure of his kill... this is a film about distraction (which is a very odd and wonderful theme you've hit upon).
ps: Also note how the Wagon Train Master in his battle with the Indians almost died when he thought he had survived - but what saved him was the excessive enthusiasm of his assailant/the brave who wanted a scalp and who forgot himself - and his enemy - when trying to retrieve it.
Wow. Great video man. I watched this movie when it first came out and had no idea lol I knew something was off but didn’t give to much attention to it
To note about the gold miner:
The old man lives for the same reason he survives, with a little bit of luck, a lot of hard work, and bit of smarts.
He got lucky finding the valley, used his smarts to pin point the gold, and a lot of hard work to get it.
He got lucky that the young man was a sloppy shooter (Scrugg's words), he outsmarted the man by playing dead, and then had a hell of little fight to actually kill him.
For the young man:
He mirrors the other characters that actually did die, doomed by the fate of the cards when he chose to try to kill the old man (that was his gamble but he couldn't see the cards the old man was carrying), because he did not have the mentality to subdue the old man. It is also stated in the other videos of L&F that the young man is the antithesis to the old man in the same way as the Bank Robber is the gold digger's antithesis.
For the Bank Robber and the Old Man:
It seemed to me that in both scenes they encountered strife and grief by the pursuit of riches. The old man had a hard life digging up the gold, fighting the younger man, and then taking it off to who knows where. And the Bank Robber for his attempted robbery. However, both encounter what they desired for a peaceful life had they had it in them to be peaceful. For the old man it was the peace of the valley that he disturbed. For the Bank Robber it was the young woman at the end. We can see that both characters acknowledged their appreciation for the quality in themselves that they desire at some level to be at peace with those two, the young woman and the serene valley.
As acknowledge my own part in the last scene of the movie with death, I say that for me the theme is struggling with the fear of death by which we play an unknown hand to either live peacefully as we may and not bother with understanding the order of the universe or struggle against that order to gain as much as possible before being taken unawares anyways.
Bruno Delbonnel, the cinematographer of this movie, said that this final chapter contains references to all of the previous ones. That's where you should start your analysis.
I may be late to the party but I highly recommend Raising Arizona for your next video. If not, perhaps the video after that. I'll get you started with one of my favorite Cohen Brothers lines: "Edwina's insides were a rocky place where my seed could find no purchase".
So much to break down in such little time, I definitely got my eyes opened to even more layers of depth than I originally thought. Edit: On that happy note XD
Absolutley loved this video
Thanks a lot, this was wonderful :)
Wow, brilliant! ❤
Great analysis
I loved this one. Could easily be done on stage.
It really doesn't matter which one you tell next! you just need to tell them all, I'm sure I'm speaking for everybody when I say I just can't wait until you complete them!
Thanks! This next one has been slow going, but I’m on it!
@@LanguageFilm really glad to hear this. It's such a fantastic movie!
- Traper is just to proud to acknowledge he closed his eyes!
Notable: Rene shares the name with philosopher Rene Descartes who famously posited that "certainty relies on the judgment of the individual."
Thank you for your analysis. It's by far my favorite scene. I gonna watch the movie again. 😅😅
The main thing I took away from Buster's story is that no matter how good you think you are, and even actually are, that every day some new kid might come along who doesn't have your reputation, but has just a good or even better skills/talent and the advantage of youth on his side.
Perfect explanation
At the end I noticed they didn’t make it up the stairway to heaven they looked to stay on the lower level of the INN which means they weren’t accepted into heaven. The only one who made the journey was Mr.thorpe the body bag
Another small detail, on the doors of the hotel, the left one has a cherub and the right one has the head of a goat
Very well done.
The greatest modern western?
“Reapers.” “The harvesters of souls.”
The personification of death
Cohen brothers rock man. Fargo is something else. Even the TV series is awesome.
16:36 The 2 doors, one is an angel, and the other is a goats head. This has to represent heaven and hell.
Thanks for this series. These movies always seemed to clever for me. Like, I looked for connective themes but never found them. I was also always lousy at HS Literiture class.
thirty seconds in.... lol i had not the slightest idea!😂 I did not catch that at all while watching. Maybe I wasn’t paying attention maybe I am just dense and slow on the uptake. hahaha but of course the Coen bros did that. But of course! I think also maybe I thought about the film and interpreted the film in a super literal, historical way, thinking of it as historical fiction but also as plausible types of events that could have really happened, which I especially thought that about the wagon train one.
At 16:37, you can see the decoration of the doors, representing heaven and hell. Nice little detail.
The left reaper is the devil the right reaper is an angel. The lighting changes when they start to put together that they’re dead but still cant comprehend it. The devil stares into their eyes while saying he “likes to stare into their eyes when they pass and watch them try to make sense of it all” they take the body off the top of the carriage and say they want to put it in the right reapers room, thats why they go upstairs to the light. I think the 3 on the carriage are either in purgatory or awaiting hell.
The lady urges the trapper to enter the hotel before her. This could be a metaphor for how the rich and advantaged have urged the poor into death before themselves in many ways throughout history. The gambler, who the lady admonishes for his hedonism seems to have the most trouble in literally crossing the threshold.
I like your take. I saw the three as the lady who has no understanding she is dead, the Trapper as having a vague since of the idea he might be dead, and the Frenchman who is accepting that he is dead by the way he watches the carriage leave and proceeds to give a tap on his hat before entering much in the same way the Gold digger waves good bye to the valley.
I do agree with your statement though and see no reason that those ideas can't also exist in the characters.
I think I figured out who Mr. Thorpe is.
From two different clues at first it seems as if it would be Buster Scruggs: they talk about Mr Thorpe being a wanted man, as Buster was, and Buster's name on his wanted poster in the beginning is "the misanthrope" which sounds very similar to Mr. Thorpe.
The only problems with that theory is that the frenchman in this seems to be the same frenchman sitting at the card table in the Surly Joe scene, meaning this had to take place long after Buster's death, as he is much older here. Also, Buster already has a name and it wasn't Mr. Thorpe, he was already shown as going up to heaven, and he didn't seem to encounter Thigpen (Thigpen said he told Thorpe the Midnight Caller story).
Now we have one character whose death would take place years after Buster's to fit in with the frenchman card player timeline, doesn't have a name otherwise, and at the end of the first story the book says his story is different than Buster's but also very similar: that would be The Kid, who looked up to Buster and who also could have earned the misanthrope/Mr. Thorpe nickname living his "very similar" existence. At the end he is also taken up the stairs to heaven, same as Buster (I guess they were both seen as a product of their time and environment and not judged too harshly for cheerfully killing so many people).
Edit: Also, the kid sings the lyric "when they wrap my body in the bindling sheet" in his song
Those aren't bad suggestions. By "the Kid" do you mean the man in black who meets Buster and then kills him?
In any regard the name Thorpe is much more loaded than you've imagined. Look for a Jorge Luis Borges short story called "Shakespeare's Memory." In there is a character named Daniel Thorpe. "Thorpe" is roughly synonymous with a hamlet, or village in older middle english and norse antecedents (so I'm given to understand). So, for Borges, 'Daniel Thorpe' would be akin to 'Hamlet the Dane,' in the way that authors disguise their intentions through veiled reference. (And as we shall see, Ethan has done in the writing of this story.)
The mysterious publisher of Shakespeare's Sonnets is noted cryptically on the cover page as "T.T." which is attributed to one Thomas Thorpe. This is the origin of the reference using Thorpe as a synechdoche for Shakespeare, used by Borges and by Ethan. But as you may already be aware, the authorship of Shakespeare is much speculated upon, and on the subject of who and how many individuals are to credit for those great works very little is certain, particularly in conventional wisdom, which insists on a fairy tale fable of the personality of the Bard. Fair enough to say that the name Mr. Thorpe is clearly a reference to the body of "Shakespeare," whose spirit belongs to all of us. And of course that body is to be found "atop a stage." If you review the dialog with this in mind, it will make perfect sense. "As much as anybody's..." "As much as anybody's."
But he's not the only literary reference... Of all the places to be buried, the deceased body of the tormented visionary genius of Philip K. Dick lies beside that of his infant twin sister in... drum roll please... Fort Morgan, Colorado. On at least one level, then, there is a commentary here about our transition not just from life to death, but our collective vast cultural transit between the consciousness of the last 400 years playing out the Renaissance/Enlightenment experiment, so to speak, perhaps best described and defined in Hamlet's monologues, and the surreal new science-fiction reality which contains no privacy, no clear cause/effect pushing historical progress along, replete with dystopian destabilization, and a distinctly different idea about identity and self, so presciently described, we might say, by the Bard's successor, P.K.D. The baton has been passed; have you noticed? "Oh how I love to see the look in their eyes as they negotiate the passage and try to make sense of it..."
The through-line of the whole anthology of these Buster Scruggs westerns is the theme of Water/Currency, beginning with Buster's first song. In this context, the final chapter is about the currency of the spirit as it is understood as a social construction in the cosmology of different ages. We are very clearly living through an interregnum between ages, and that is one layer of what the Mortal Remains is made to reflect upon.
Extra Credit: You may also discover veiled critique/insult leveled upon Prof. Robert Sapolsky and the empty reductions of much celebrated Neuro-Science, in general, which smugly fails to recognize the limitations of its own discipline and thereby ignorantly over-extends its claim to deny the soul and spirit, which it is ill equipped to assess. The criticism is symbolically implied and revealed in the space between the Frenchman's discussion of "knowing a man entire" at the moment of play in a hand of cards during a game he played with one 'Chapolsky,' and the visual likeness of the Trapper who wears the same signature beard as that of the Stanford Professor/Priest who we must assume is the target of the refrain, "the Tedious Man." Joel and Ethan are totally taking a piss out of self-important experts who claim to wrap up human nature in a neat bow.
Sapolsky, notoriously, denies the existence of Free Will, which any artist like the Coens recognizes as an absurdity on its face, a politically expedient swindle, at best, as reputable as any Dr. Betchumen selling "human betterment." The Trapper's reduction of "just one kind of human, people are like Ferrets (or maybe Beavers,)" is equally as unsophisticated and tedious as anything the mechanistic, single-minded brain 'trapper' of Palo Alto may assert about human nature. These animal figures, however, delightfully hearken back to the water/currency theme, insofar as Ferrets consume vast amounts of water compared to other mammals of their size, Beavers build damns to control the flow of water, and what's best in the analogy is that a group of Ferrets is called a Business! (Dealing in currencies.) So yes, "only one kind of person - people are like ferrets." They all do business of one sort or another, and others try to stop, control, and regulate them, like beavers do a stream's flow.
Or like Sapolsky and the central bankers whom he and his ilk of pop scientist priests carry water for, well rewarded with status and position as intellectual gate-keepers. They could just as well have been insulting Yuval Harari, another tedious man who lulls people into a death-sleep, to believe they have no free will, and will soon be rendered useless in the economies fashioned by titans of business and banking. The Frenchman addresses the Trapper directly when he says "right up to the moment of that bet... I CANNOT know you." This is a direct attack.
The Coens' are reminding Sapolsky about the time-bound nature of decision-making, the elusive enigma of fate inherent to the unfolding of time, and the futility of efforts to master the minds of others, as is all the fashion today by Tech and Finance cohorts who attempt to conquer all of humanity and engineer us into a vast exo-conscious hive that does its bidding, or to obsolete us with more predictable, obedient machines. What I'm describing of Sapolsky's philosophy and its endpoint is exactly the context and subject of Philip K. Dick's futuristic visions.
Thigpen even reiterates the critique: "How would I know? I'm only watching." ...Reminding the narrow minded technocrats, scientists, and engineers of the world that they are mere voyeurs, perverting human nature, and so, so wholly unfit to judge people, what can the charming reaper do but give a dismissive, twinkle-eyed grin in reply to the preposterous question asking him to anticipate the minds of other people.
Check out the Borges story; it's great.