Burn After Reading
Focus Features | Release Date: September 12, 2008
6.7
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 452 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
285
Mixed:
100
Negative:
67
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
6
JoshuablabbermouthAug 27, 2008
I don't know? It just didn't feel right for me. It's a wild, fun, and entertaining movie. But it needs to find the proper tone because half of the time it was too loose and awkward. It's also very weird of a movie. I don't know? It just didn't feel right for me. It's a wild, fun, and entertaining movie. But it needs to find the proper tone because half of the time it was too loose and awkward. It's also very weird of a movie. It's very realistic, but it just didn't come to me. Sorry Coen brothers. But I denounce this movie to only be okay.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ERG1008Aug 24, 2010
Man loses job at the CIA, writes memoirs, wife is having an affair then wants a divorce, couple of dimwits find the memoirs on a disc, try to sell it to the Russians as Top Secret intelligence.
Coen brothers do farce. Cast are fine & thereMan loses job at the CIA, writes memoirs, wife is having an affair then wants a divorce, couple of dimwits find the memoirs on a disc, try to sell it to the Russians as Top Secret intelligence.
Coen brothers do farce. Cast are fine & there are some clever bits in it but took a while to get going.
Ending does seem a bit rushed too.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
D-SliceDec 26, 2010
I enjoyed Burn After Reading for it's unconventional plot and hilarious performance from Brad Pitt. So many stupid people played by a cast of awesomeness. But this movie was missing quite a few things. It didn't really have a great impact andI enjoyed Burn After Reading for it's unconventional plot and hilarious performance from Brad Pitt. So many stupid people played by a cast of awesomeness. But this movie was missing quite a few things. It didn't really have a great impact and I think I know why. The Coens found great success with their Best Picture winner No Country For Old Men and tried to re-create that success, and who wouldn't? They created some form of success, but this movie fell short of being memorable. The performances of the stupid people in Washington felt a bit overplayed at times and some of the jokes we admit are funny, but not very. Still, Pitt's acting shines in this one, so I'll say that this movie is okay in my book.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
FilmQueenNov 28, 2015
I can't say this film is not funny, it has some quite entertaining parts. It's not a bad film at all, but it's kind of messy, the plot just jumps from one character to another and nothing gets resolved. Plus a lot of characters are extremelyI can't say this film is not funny, it has some quite entertaining parts. It's not a bad film at all, but it's kind of messy, the plot just jumps from one character to another and nothing gets resolved. Plus a lot of characters are extremely stupid, annoyingly so. The part that John Malkovich played is an exception, his character is kind of a jerk, but the only person with a brain. Brad Pitt's character is extremely idiotic, but he is also an exception, because Pitt managed to make him hilarious.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
StewartQ.Sep 12, 2008
It's okay to admit that the Coen Brothers missed the mark on this one. Really, no need to pretend that the ending was not a baffling disappointment with more loose ends than a grass skirt. Sure, Brad Pitt was mildly funny but the film It's okay to admit that the Coen Brothers missed the mark on this one. Really, no need to pretend that the ending was not a baffling disappointment with more loose ends than a grass skirt. Sure, Brad Pitt was mildly funny but the film is full of gratuitous suspense and self absorbed intricacies that ultimately lead nowhere. Whether it is intended as a black comedy, a satirical farce or an espionage goof, it is a hollow effort all around. ;-)… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JenniferG.Sep 15, 2008
I'm not sure that I understand the raves about this movie...I do agree that it has you laughing one minute and gasping the next, but only in revulsion or confusion. There are certainly moments that are very funny and there is some great I'm not sure that I understand the raves about this movie...I do agree that it has you laughing one minute and gasping the next, but only in revulsion or confusion. There are certainly moments that are very funny and there is some great satire re: government "intelligence." However the overall experience is disjointed and too realistic to be a true farce, yet too unrealistic to be a cutting satire. It seems that everyone making it had fun, but when we left the theater most of what I overheard was wondering why we hadn't had nearly as much fun watching it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DaveJ.Sep 15, 2008
Entertaining, but definitely the weakest Coen brothers movie I've seen. Almost feels like a stop-gap production, or at least I hope it is.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DaveW.Sep 18, 2008
It has some funny moments and some violent ones. I like both of the above but they didn't work well in this case. The characters were so stupid you just didn't care.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
avatar16Feb 7, 2012
Il était presque difficile de croire que les frères Coen nous livre une comédie après le sublime No Country For Old Men. Encore plus étonnant, que ce nouveau film n'ait pas leIl était presque difficile de croire que les frères Coen nous livre une comédie après le sublime No Country For Old Men. Encore plus étonnant, que ce nouveau film n'ait pas le caractère mordant propre aux réalisateurs. Enfin, si... si l'on décortique à fond cette comédie. Mais il faut bien l'avouer : ce qui ne sont pas habitués à ce genre d'univers ne peuvent pas entièrement accrocher à ce genre d'humour, prenant l'ensemble pour un simple film quelque peu monotone. Mais il faut bien reconnaître que la plupart des quiproquos se montrent jouissifs et que les comédiens se laissent aller (Brad Pitt, exceptionnel!). Bref, une sympathique farce noir qui manque tout de même de mordant.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
shamusolarrySep 7, 2011
This is the epitome of mediocre movies. After watching it I seriously could not decide if I liked it or not. The acting is great. It has some funny moments. There are some small twists that I seriously did not see coming. But the story isThis is the epitome of mediocre movies. After watching it I seriously could not decide if I liked it or not. The acting is great. It has some funny moments. There are some small twists that I seriously did not see coming. But the story is lackluster, as are most of the characters. While the plot is resolved at the end, you're kind of left feeling like the entire movie was a waste of time.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
TyranianOct 2, 2019
One of my least favourite Coen brothers, has some clever moments and writing but is full of unlikeable characters.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
MovieMasterEddyApr 3, 2016
Coens Ask the C.I.A. for a License to Laugh.

Heart isn’t usually part of the discussion when we talk about movies, partly, I imagine, because it sounds too corny. And fuzzy. After all, what does it mean to say this or that director or filmCoens Ask the C.I.A. for a License to Laugh.

Heart isn’t usually part of the discussion when we talk about movies, partly, I imagine, because it sounds too corny. And fuzzy. After all, what does it mean to say this or that director or film shows a lot of heart or too little? I ask only because “Burn After Reading,” the clubby, predictably self-amused comedy from Joel and Ethan Coen, has a tricky plot, visual style, er, to burn, but so little heart as to warrant a Jarvik 8.

Not that you probably won’t choke up a couple of ho-ho’s in between a few hee-hee’s whenever Big Daddy Brad Pitt, as a nitwit gym rat with a Pepe Le Pew two-tone hair-stack, twitches across the screen or the camera nuzzles one of the other goofy gargoyles so beloved by the Coens. Mr. Pitt’s Chad is the overripe second banana to Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand, Joel Coen’s wife), who has some vague job at the gym where the two sort of work. Chad’s a buffoon (the hard body as soft brain), and Mr. Pitt has been charged with delivering a caricature rather than a character, but because the actor loves playing sidemen and conveys such natural, irrepressible (irresistible) sweetness, he’s also one of the film’s saving graces.

It could use a few more. Like most of the Coens’ comedies, “Burn After Reading” is something of a shaggy sendup of an established genre and conventions, in this case the espionage flick. The film opens and closes with a Google Maps view of the Earth that has already become a cinematic cliché, a godly perspective that rapidly narrows in on the headquarters for the Central Intelligence Agency in Langley, Va. There, an analyst named Osborne Cox (John Malkovich) soon receives a demotion for boozing, the first knot in an increasingly and intentionally tangled thicket of contrivances and coincidences mostly involving three favorite American (and Hollywood) preoccupations: money, sex and self.

With its complexly interwoven stories, political backdrop and the central presence of a bearded George Clooney, the film comes across a bit like “Syriana for Dummies,” though given the original this seems somewhat redundant. Here Mr. Clooney, recycling the tic-y head bobs and weaves from his “ER” days, plays Harry Pfarrer, a federal marshal who is two-timing his wife, Sandy (Elizabeth Marvel), with Osborne’s scarier better half, Katie (Tilda Swinton). A serial adulterer who totes his own wedge-shaped bolster to his assignations, Harry hooks up with Linda through the Internet, an improbability only slightly less preposterous than the computer disk of C.I.A. secrets that ends up floating around Linda and Chad’s gym and leading them in a world of trouble. As Donald H. Rumsfeld once said, “Stuff happens.”

Professional wisenheimers, the Coens like squeezing laughs out of potentially hazardous material, whether they’re dumping a paraplegic out of a wheelchair for a chuckle, as they do in their finest film, “The Big Lebowski” (a comedy about the drama of friendship), or violently disposing of bit players, as they do in their most recent , “No Country for Old Men” (a drama about the comedy of death). They have a gift for the absurd and a penchant for cruelty, tendencies that, without the tempering quality of a recognizably human presence — Jeff Bridges’s glorious performance in “Lebowski,” Ms. McDormand’s emotionally nuanced one in “Fargo” — can make the Coens come across as insufferably superior and bullying. Comedy needs fools with funny faces, but comedy without gentleness is often just sadism.

It isn’t that sadism can’t be a laugh riot; it’s just a question of modulation, of balancing the loud yuks and cruel jabs with some delicate feeling, mixing a real face in with the cartoons. Though “Burn After Reading” isn’t as uniformly flat as “The Hudsucker Proxy” (the Coens’ leaden bid for Preston Sturges’s dizziness), there’s a crushing sameness to the characters and their predicaments. With the exceptions of the hard-working supporting cast — notably J. K. Simmons as a C.I.A. bigwig and the equally reliable and welcome Richard Jenkins as a lovelorn gym manager — the characters have been conceived as variations on self-deluded boobishness. Some (like Katie) appear sharper than others, others dumber (Linda), but they’re all punch lines in an overly extended joke.

The Coens in turn have made their careers with impeccable technique and an exaggerated visual style — they sure love their low-angle shots and traveling cameras — but it’s a wonder they keep making films about a subject for which they often evince so little regard, namely other people.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
MichaelS.Sep 15, 2008
This was a horrible mess of a movie that strained too hard to pull out any sort of comedy. Extremely dry and simplistic humor dots the film as if the actors were forced to try and make it funny. The only moments that even cracked a laugh in This was a horrible mess of a movie that strained too hard to pull out any sort of comedy. Extremely dry and simplistic humor dots the film as if the actors were forced to try and make it funny. The only moments that even cracked a laugh in the whole movie theater were perhaps the least clever, calling a man a, "Jew", a Hispanic worker repeating what he's saying, and two government officials trying to figure out whats going on, mark all three funny moments in the film. As well, the first quarter of the movie before the, "Burn After Reading" file is discovered is absolutely unneeded, it slowly, almost to the point of nauseatingly fleshes out the main characters, so much that I think I've seen soap operas wrap up character history faster. The entire movie was a failure at an attempt to entertain, but spot on when it comes to portraying how stupid the characters were, the last three minutes of the show are all you truly need to watch, as this movie is quite the head-snapper, as in I'm trying not to pass out from the sheer stupidity this film made me endure.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MarkB.Oct 16, 2008
Comparing and contrasting the careers of the last two Lifetime Achievement--er, Best Director Oscar winners: Martin Scorsese's lifetime output represents the work of someone who has seen a lot of movies and lived a lot of life. The Coen Comparing and contrasting the careers of the last two Lifetime Achievement--er, Best Director Oscar winners: Martin Scorsese's lifetime output represents the work of someone who has seen a lot of movies and lived a lot of life. The Coen Brothers' lifetime output represents that of someone who has seen a lot of movies. Oh, don't get me wrong--their studiously composed clones-with-attitude of yesteryear's finest ,such as the unjustly underrated retro-noir The Man Who Wasn't There, can certainly yield many of their own rewards (and it should be no surprise whatsoever that the biggest laughs in their remake of The Ladykillers were lifted directly from the 1955 Alec Guinness original), but too much of their recent work--No Country For Old Men being an atypical blip on the radar, and therefore predictably the big winner of the Academy Award jackpot--emerges as heartless, soulless, and, especially given how often the word "quirky" is applied to these guys, oddly mechanical. Earlier comedies such as Raising Arizona and Fargo partially countermanded this with such a palpable underlying core of sweetness, especially in thdeir depictions of the central characters' marriages, that any fleeting suspicion that Joel and Ethan were treating their principals with the slightest whiff of condescension could be easily and happily dismissed. Not so with their espionage farce Burn After Reading, a farce as irriatingly tangled as a store selling Christmas tree lights in the aftermath of a firebombing and as distastefully acrid as a carton of milk left sitting on the radiator since Saddam shuffled off this mortal coil. If I wanted to watch one-joke comedies about nothing more than how selfish and stupid people are (with no compensating or justifying point of view as can at least be found in Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove or Altman's The Player), I'd sit at home with reruns of Married...With Children and America's Funniest Home Videos; at least those offerings wouldn't profoundly depress me with all-dressed-up-and-nowhere-to-go comic turns by a very lively Brad Pitt, John Malkovich, J.K. Simmons and Mrs. Coen herself. The rubber-faced Frances McDormand, whose brilliant but compassionate cop Marge Gunderson from Fargo will live past all vocal comparisons to a certain notorious political figure to remain one of ther most endearing movie characters in history, is especially poorly used as a moronic and (deservedly) unlucky-in-love health club employee. Admittedly, the fact that the Coens assembled such an elaborate , seemingly unending (though it's only slightly over 90 minutes) paean to utter obtuseness (with the one somewhat likable and reasonably intelligent character meeting a gory, disgusting fate) IS superficially impressive in the way that someone constructing a model of the Sistine Chapel entirely out of cheese might be, but in both instances the novelty wears off VERY quickly and the results turn putrid even more rapidly. Or, as Juno's dad asks at picture's end, what have we learned? Not a damned thing. Oh, brother, you said it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JohnHJan 1, 2009
Starts off ok but just gets stupid. I can't recommend this one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
KathyS.Dec 30, 2008
Ho hum. The best part was seeing Brad Pitt smacked in the face.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
LarryK.Sep 13, 2008
Ah, yes. Yet again the trailers lure the flies to the spider's web. The stellar cast who nailed their roles could not make up for spotty entertaining dialogue and minimal laugh-out-loud scenes. It was boring and quite forgettable for Ah, yes. Yet again the trailers lure the flies to the spider's web. The stellar cast who nailed their roles could not make up for spotty entertaining dialogue and minimal laugh-out-loud scenes. It was boring and quite forgettable for the most part. Brad Pitt was the highlight of the film. His portrayal of a gym rat was hilariously entertaining. His exit came too soon in my opinion. I'll remember "Fargo" and "No Country for Old Men." This film I've already forgotten.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JohnsSep 15, 2008
Really average movie. Laughed once. The cast was just not funny. Gave NCFOM a 10, hope brothers do better next time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
MariosK.Sep 16, 2008
This was a farce of everything which wasn't that interesting. the first part of the movie was bland and dry. the first bit of humor was when Brad pitt had his first lines (He was the only reason i gave this score a 4 instead of a 2). This was a farce of everything which wasn't that interesting. the first part of the movie was bland and dry. the first bit of humor was when Brad pitt had his first lines (He was the only reason i gave this score a 4 instead of a 2). the story was very random. I expected more from a CLooney /Pitt movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
CDSep 21, 2008
Not the best film of all time for sure...there was a lot of unnecessary drama crap and cold war puns that just flat out failed. Most of the film felt like boring office work, some of the film felt like those akward silences that you hate, Not the best film of all time for sure...there was a lot of unnecessary drama crap and cold war puns that just flat out failed. Most of the film felt like boring office work, some of the film felt like those akward silences that you hate, and the small rest of it was funny. The only parts of this film that worked was Brad Pitt and Clooney. Everything else sucked.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
WalterE.Sep 11, 2008
Burns After Peeing
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DougD.Sep 13, 2008
it did not live up to the ad. don't want to ruin anything but after someone dies it just gets sad. After the turning point in the movie it is not really comical anymore
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ClaytonH.Sep 23, 2008
This was too long in setting the stage and ultimately not satisfying in the conclusion.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
TinaRJan 12, 2009
With such a great cast, I thought this movie couldn't be bad, but BOY IT WAS BAD. I can only give it a 4 because Brad Pitt did a very good job and it was the only good thing about this movie. Despite that, It was very boring.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
AnnG.Mar 12, 2009
'Some great actors in a less than great movie. Brad Pitt was the most amusing and I am not a Pitt fan. I wish there were better scripts for such talented actors.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
EricC.Dec 28, 2008
Normally I'm a big defender of the Coen brother's black comedies, but this time... I don't know. Maybe the formula has grown old. How many times can you watch a bunch of wacky characters destroy each other through desperation Normally I'm a big defender of the Coen brother's black comedies, but this time... I don't know. Maybe the formula has grown old. How many times can you watch a bunch of wacky characters destroy each other through desperation and coincidence? They've made this movie before, and so have multiple others. The actors dedicate little to the movie. Only Brad Pitt seems to put in effort, but he's only resurrecting previous characters. I wasn't bored while watching, but was disheartened by cheap jokes and cheap thrills. The Coen brothers reached greatness last year, now they sit lazily in meniocrity. It just isn't very good at all.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
sammydeedgeMar 18, 2012
Frances McDormand and George Clooney lead this somewhat confusing and at times startlingly violent film about what happens when two people that put money (or possible larger breasts) over their safety. When two gym workers find a CDFrances McDormand and George Clooney lead this somewhat confusing and at times startlingly violent film about what happens when two people that put money (or possible larger breasts) over their safety. When two gym workers find a CD containing sensitive CIA information, they embark on a dangerous quest to receive their reward for being 'good samaritans'. Despite the label comedy, it is not a terribly funny movie, as the jokes are few and far between. It isn't worth the hype, however, if you like crime drama kinda stuff, you should at least try it.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
ExKingJul 28, 2013
you know how when a normal movie ends and you're like "ok, that was ok" while nodding your head.
and when a great movie ends you're like HOLY waw, that was fantastic
but when burn after reading ends, i'm like "WHAT, THAT'S IT 1:35 MINUTES,you know how when a normal movie ends and you're like "ok, that was ok" while nodding your head.
and when a great movie ends you're like HOLY waw, that was fantastic
but when burn after reading ends, i'm like "WHAT, THAT'S IT 1:35 MINUTES, did i download the full movie or something went wrong?"
so yeah 1 hour 35 minutes are too short to figure out these 5 characters, and yeah the performances were great,
but one does not simply enjoy an unfinished movie with terrible ending.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
amheretojudgeJun 15, 2018
disappointing after experiencing..

Burn After Reading It is a misguided feature whose actual concrete material is piled upon it's subtle tone that asks viewers to work for it and read between the line and if thought twice about it, thedisappointing after experiencing..

Burn After Reading

It is a misguided feature whose actual concrete material is piled upon it's subtle tone that asks viewers to work for it and read between the line and if thought twice about it, the extracted material narrows down to a moot point. The script is dull and annoying, as one can clearly see the writers sweat behind the camera to break a smile on the viewer's face, and fail miserably in the end. The artsy factor is here is taken for granted and relies completely upon the viewers to be star struck and appreciate to whatever is offered. The Coen Brothers; the writer-director, clearly fails to implement their vision on screen and seems unstable where each individual thread of the plot track is a textbook formula of cinema. Despite of having such a powerful cast like George Clooney, Frances McDormand, Brad Pitt, John Malkovich, Tilda Swinton, Richard Jenkins and J.K. Simmons, their barely lies a performance that demands attention or even convince for a second look. It is short on technical aspects like sound department, art design and editing. Burn After Reading is more like disappointing after experiencing for the most of the part in here is either a failed attempt to create a humorous skit with a multi-billionaire cast or just hoax.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
BM.Oct 5, 2008
Horrible waste of money. was mildly amusing at best. story could've been made into something neat but instead was a wash of nothing. You know those types of movies that just don't have any meaning or resolution. Boring, pointless Horrible waste of money. was mildly amusing at best. story could've been made into something neat but instead was a wash of nothing. You know those types of movies that just don't have any meaning or resolution. Boring, pointless waste of time and money. Do not see this movie.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful
3
LucaS.Sep 24, 2008
One of the most boring and useless film in this 2008. Stay away from it. it's a waste of money,time and patience.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
CraigR.Mar 2, 2009
Truly dismal. A fim about nothing. It's like they got 3/4 of the way through and gave up any hopes of a story.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
KimAJan 22, 2009
This movie was a big disappointment. If it had not been for Brad Pitt the movie would have been a total bomb. He was the only funny part of the movie. Figured from the previews and the cast it would be great, but no. A real disappointment!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
kendraSJan 27, 2009
At the end it left me puzzled...what just happened?
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
LuisVDec 28, 2008
Some how directors believe that if they do some good movie what follows will also be good just like that, this movie seams to be the case.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
JA.Sep 16, 2008
Don't waste your money. This was a disappointment, and the only reason it got such great reviews was because of the hype and directors. I didn't go in with high expectations, which is a good thing because even those weren't met.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
JonathanCSep 21, 2008
I gave this movie a mark for every scene that made me laugh. One for the two scenes of the director of the CIA's bewilderment at the events of the film, and one more for Brad Pitt's attempt at trying to out-spy John Malkovitch. I gave this movie a mark for every scene that made me laugh. One for the two scenes of the director of the CIA's bewilderment at the events of the film, and one more for Brad Pitt's attempt at trying to out-spy John Malkovitch. This movie is billed as a comedy. It fails simply because the audience hardly ever laughed. It doesn't even qualify as a black comedy, simply because it's not black enough. There may very well be big messages in here, but they are not well expressed. If there is a message, it is purely expository, something like "Middle-aged America is in a crisis, where the only meanings to be found are shallow, all relationships are broken and nobody knows what is going on." But there is no analysis of this idea, or any attempt at a meaningful solution. So as a drama, there is nothing here; there is no lesson to be learned. This movie is not funny, and it is not particularly dramatic. Regardless of what you're looking for, you should probably see something else.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
HannahR.Sep 28, 2008
Cohen Brothers should change their names to InCOHEreNt Brothers: 1.Unnecessarily foul languaged: I give credit for humor for its content, not relying on foul language. Abuse of swear is cheap. 2.The plot was so incoherent being under
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
CamilleJan 1, 2009
I was surprised this movie got all the attention and praise that it did. For a movie advertised as a dark and sophisticated comedy, it failed to deliver. The pointless, meandering plot did nothing to hold it together and I think I laughed I was surprised this movie got all the attention and praise that it did. For a movie advertised as a dark and sophisticated comedy, it failed to deliver. The pointless, meandering plot did nothing to hold it together and I think I laughed once during the entire film. I can see where they were *trying* to go with it, but all in all it was poorly executed, and when the movie was over, I was annoyed and disappointed. I was told it was 'funnier' the second time watching it, but I can't think of any reason why I would sit through it again.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MarvinS.Nov 11, 2008
I love Coen Brothers movies. This one is a dud. I did not care about the characters nor could I invest in the plot. Weird people acting stupid and killing each other is not comedy, dark or otherwise. Very, very disappointed.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
StevePSep 13, 2008
Waste of time. Made no sense. Couldn't wait for it to end.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
DrewP.Sep 21, 2008
Ummm I'm still trying to get my money back for this movie. What the hell is the point its nonsense.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
GendolynH.Nov 29, 2008
The film had a few laughs but it was flat overall. I was really amazed this came from the Coen brothers, whose work I generally like quite a lot, but this was way below their standards of excellence like Fargo.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
FilipeNetoAug 24, 2018
This movie seems to make fun of the secret world of spies, their agencies and secrets. The entire film revolves around an American spy who, after being removed from office, decides to write a memoir. But the CD-ROM where he put its sketchThis movie seems to make fun of the secret world of spies, their agencies and secrets. The entire film revolves around an American spy who, after being removed from office, decides to write a memoir. But the CD-ROM where he put its sketch went to the hands of a gym employee who, with the help of an idiot coworker, tries to blackmail him. Then, the movie goes on to create a huge confusion about something so minor that, in the end, even the CIA are amazed at the situation.

The biggest problem I've felt here is the fact that the film handles everything very lightly, as if none of it were really important. That fits the movie, but it creates a huge barrier between the audience and the film, as if we were watching a movie that doesn't want to catch our attention. This gets even worse if we consider that no character is capable of reaching the public. There are only people, much like any human being we meet outside but we do not have the interest to know, and for whom we do not look more than once. The result is to become invariably boring, sometimes very difficult to keep up with. In the end, except for the action scenes, we don't care about the movie anymore.

The best of this film are the performances of the main actors, usually very good but unable to truly shine in a film that did not allow that (they are good actors but they don't perform miracles). Clooney was very good, Pitt was convincing in the idiot character they gave him, Frances McDormand was pleasantly futile (something that her character demanded) and John Malkovich was OK, in a character without major difficulties but Which also never allowed him to have much space to show talent.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
BrockJ.Oct 18, 2008
A few funny moments intertwined with a lot of cheaters. Brad Pitt was fantastic, but unfortunately the same cannot be said about this plot.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
LinL.Jan 4, 2009
Despite the fantastic cast, this was extraordinarily boring and bereft of laughs. I kept waiting for it to get funny, clever, entertaining . . . never happened.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
WhitfordSt.H.Dec 27, 2008
This is one of the lowlights in the Coen canon; not funny (and desperately trying to be), not suspensful in any measure and laborious to endure. A waste of a first class cast and an uncharacteristic misfire in every respect.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
CraigS.Oct 19, 2008
Its a horrible feeling to be embarrassed for your heroes, but after watching this absolute mess, it looks like 'No Country For Old Men' was just a fluke show of their old form in the career nose-dive of the Coen brothers, one good Its a horrible feeling to be embarrassed for your heroes, but after watching this absolute mess, it looks like 'No Country For Old Men' was just a fluke show of their old form in the career nose-dive of the Coen brothers, one good film out of their last four is not a good sign. They really need to dump Clooney as soon as possible and get some of the old crowd (Steve Buscemi, John Turturro, John Goodman..) back before mainstream Hollywood strips all that was special from their films permanently. Credit to John Malkovich though for putting in the effort and making the best of a bad situation..… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
BernieB.Sep 14, 2008
A big disappointment. Save your money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
CarlosR.Sep 21, 2008
This movie combines a pathetic excuse for a storyline with terrible characters. With the exception of Pitt and Malkovich, everyone seems out of place and awkward, as does the movie as a whole. The film just spills on to the screen, leaving This movie combines a pathetic excuse for a storyline with terrible characters. With the exception of Pitt and Malkovich, everyone seems out of place and awkward, as does the movie as a whole. The film just spills on to the screen, leaving the audience with little time to appreciate the moments worth watching. As much as I appreciate cerebral conversation, a movie this stupid need to be given a good review just because it requires tons of psychoanalysis.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
TonyB.Jan 27, 2009
The Coen brothers, far too overrated for far too long, hit rock bottom with this tripe. The only positive component here is a fine performance by Brad Pitt. George Clooney is a bore, John Malkovich is playing vintage John Malkovich, and The Coen brothers, far too overrated for far too long, hit rock bottom with this tripe. The only positive component here is a fine performance by Brad Pitt. George Clooney is a bore, John Malkovich is playing vintage John Malkovich, and Frances McDormand and Tilda Swinton have seen better days.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
ArtG.Aug 18, 2009
If you saw the trailer and thought it looked like a really funny movie like I did be warned it's not. Disturbing is the kindest way to discribe it. In the future if its by the Coens I ain't goin'.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
CecilBJul 12, 2021
"Charade" was good, this movie was not. Cast members are not enough to carry hackneyed writing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
DanielaN.Dec 30, 2008
A few funny lines, other than that, thoughtless, pointless, the violence was senseless, the amount of cursing made it seem like the writers were in 7th grade and had just discovered the words shit and fuck. After seeing this, I spent about A few funny lines, other than that, thoughtless, pointless, the violence was senseless, the amount of cursing made it seem like the writers were in 7th grade and had just discovered the words shit and fuck. After seeing this, I spent about 40 minutes talking about how bad it was. I felt robbed of my time, and cheated. It was simply AWFUL.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
StephanieE.Oct 3, 2008
This movie was absolutely a waste of $16. The only parts of the movie that moved that audience at all were Brad Pitt's idiotic humor and when he was shot in the face. The character Linda was a joke. Not to mention Clooney fit the role This movie was absolutely a waste of $16. The only parts of the movie that moved that audience at all were Brad Pitt's idiotic humor and when he was shot in the face. The character Linda was a joke. Not to mention Clooney fit the role of a psycho but that's about it. Don't even get me started on the ending. They briefly explain to you who got shot and who died while stumbling over words. I'm sorry but I highly doubt a person in such a position (the character who fired Malcovich) would studder while speaking to his superior. This movie was absolutely horrible and I'm pissed that I wasted my money.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
AlexODec 21, 2008
This Movie was god awful. The BIG Liebowski was the Cohen brothers last good movie. I will never pay to watch another of their films. The Characters were cartoon parodies of humanity. The level of stupidity and ignorance was astounding and This Movie was god awful. The BIG Liebowski was the Cohen brothers last good movie. I will never pay to watch another of their films. The Characters were cartoon parodies of humanity. The level of stupidity and ignorance was astounding and the point of this film, why it exists at all remains a mystery. After watching this movie I felt empty and terrible. Evil Ugly stupid film.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RobertL.Sep 28, 2008
Burn After Reading should have had all the copies of the film Burned Before Showing. Aside from one funny line in the film - it was one of the worst movies we have ever seen!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
NicholasC.Feb 27, 2009
The biggest load of rubbish I've seen in years. It may have elicited a vague empathetic twitch at the corner of my mouth occasionally, but I think the weather forecast would have been more humorous by a country mile!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
MaccaNotDisclosedDec 23, 2008
Complete trash. I can't believe the good rating this has. The characters were stupid and unconvincing and the script was just utterly weird, and left you feeling out of place and disappointed at the end of it. Ten minutes into the film Complete trash. I can't believe the good rating this has. The characters were stupid and unconvincing and the script was just utterly weird, and left you feeling out of place and disappointed at the end of it. Ten minutes into the film you realised how bad it was, and it maintained that throughout the film. The worst of the Coen brothers' films.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
MichaelKisielewskiDec 27, 2008
What really bothered me here is Malkovich's character and the inane and contuous barking at the screen. While I could have been all for a loopy comedy in the vein of "The Big Lebowski," this fell so short of the potential that wasWhat really bothered me here is Malkovich's character and the inane and contuous barking at the screen. While I could have been all for a loopy comedy in the vein of "The Big Lebowski," this fell so short of the potential that was there. Brad Pitt was the sole savior of this film that should have been funnier with the dynamite comdeic cast that they had here. I have come to realize that I am not a Coen Brother's fan, and that is okay. I will love Lebowski for every "Dude"ist moment, and pack my bags and choose an Aronowski film every time.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MikeHAug 29, 2009
people giving "burn after reading" any score above zero are reading too much into the movie. you could give them a blank piece of paper and it would keep them entertained for hours, as they would find some 'hidden meaning' within people giving "burn after reading" any score above zero are reading too much into the movie. you could give them a blank piece of paper and it would keep them entertained for hours, as they would find some 'hidden meaning' within it. they probably saw movie critics' ratings for "no country for old men" and thought that by giving a high rating to the coen brothers' next nonsensical movie they would appear 'smart' in movie critics' eyes. i watched this entire movie, constantly expecting something interesting to happen. it didn't. dreadful!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AnonymousMCNov 10, 2008
This script should've been burnt after reading. I've never been this close to leaving the cinemas. I didn't hear one good word about it from other people who were watching the movie. During the break I couldn't help butThis script should've been burnt after reading. I've never been this close to leaving the cinemas. I didn't hear one good word about it from other people who were watching the movie. During the break I couldn't help but speaking out loud what kind of $#!% I thought it was, and I didn't get else but confirmation from other people. I came here to expect that others somewhat shared the same opinion and I'm very surprised that it's currently rated at 6.3 / 6.5. I guess I'm more of an all rounder when it comes to watching movies. I think this movie only appeals to a specific group (hence the great differences in user ratings). I didn't see the trailer before I watched the movie, but upon watching it now I would think its a fair movie. I think the trailer is pretty misleading. Better wait for 007. Even if you have to wait 2 weeks before you can make a reservation.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
BrandonS.Sep 15, 2008
No Country made me want to kill the Coen brothers. Burn After Reading makes me want to kill them, revive them, and kill them again. I'm done with these idiots.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JohnO.Oct 4, 2008
Do you have a rating lower than 0 - if not I'll be generous and give it a well deserved 0 . I loved the Robert L. comment - all copies of the film should have been burned before showing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MirandaS.Oct 4, 2008
I have never before in my life walked out of a movie in a movie theater. But I lasted about 1 hour before I had to leave the theater before shooting myself. I feel that the Cohn Brothers owe me my money back!!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
LaurenE.Sep 12, 2008
Stupid movie, about stupid people.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
DoomedtoFailSep 15, 2008
This has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. Hollywood's version of entertainment has left me in the past and the whole movie tries to sell on star power. But it is garbage. Brad Pitt plays a moron & George This has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen in my life. Hollywood's version of entertainment has left me in the past and the whole movie tries to sell on star power. But it is garbage. Brad Pitt plays a moron & George Clooney plays a "player" extreme (what he thinks he is). The movie has ZERO likable characters and nothing positive to offer. If this is the future of entertainment - we are in serious trouble!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
RexC.Jan 24, 2009
I guess I'm not sophisticated enough to get or laugh with it. I can't imagine a worse movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
jaquemiorfAug 29, 2009
The funniest thing about this is the idiots who think THEY'RE the smart ones cos they understand a movie that doesn't make sense. "o look, there's a bird over there. I'll pretend it's a purple elephant and laugh at The funniest thing about this is the idiots who think THEY'RE the smart ones cos they understand a movie that doesn't make sense. "o look, there's a bird over there. I'll pretend it's a purple elephant and laugh at other people and call them stupid when they say it's a bird". john E is a d*ckhead.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SoumenS.Oct 11, 2008
On the level of Jeepers Creepers and Wicker Man. Don't even see this one for free. If the Coens Brothers come up with another original idea, I won't be seeing it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JeromeHDec 22, 2008
Terribly odd movie, characters are even stranger than life. Loosely connected story line that failed to hold my interest.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SammyQ.Sep 18, 2008
This is a movie just to go see because of Pitt and Clooney are in. The comedy of the year is Tropic Thunder. Burn after reading is just a waste of money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
ALFSep 25, 2011
A film that is proof positive that if film critics like it, it has to be bad. This film goes back to the time when US comedy did not travel. Actually from brain to mouth is usually to far for most alleged comedy. Frances McDormand greatA film that is proof positive that if film critics like it, it has to be bad. This film goes back to the time when US comedy did not travel. Actually from brain to mouth is usually to far for most alleged comedy. Frances McDormand great actress but in this I could have quite cheerfully beaten her to death as I found her incredibly irritating all the way through. Brad Pitt. Terrible. As to George Clooney. This actor has only made two decent films that I can recall, The Peacemaker and One Fine Day. He was so so in Three Kings, appalling in the dismal US version of Solaris and this was not much better. If you want to see a good spy spoof then watch the infinitely better "Red" with Bruce Willis. This film should be renamed Burn Before Viewing. But as I said it should be thanked for proving how abysmal the film critics are. To those that liked it, I presume they were doing another sale at Lobotomies 'R us!… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
next
Page:
More From This Movie

63 Critic Reviews

6.7 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL