The Big Lebowski begins with a case of mistaken identity which escalates when Jeffrey Lebowski-alias The Dude-attempts to seek recompense for the despoliation of his ratty-ass little rug, and then finds himself entangled in a kidnapping caper as a bagman-a situation that goes from bad to worse due to the interference of his hapless bowling partners.
In this film the Coen brothers have taken on the preoccupations of Raymond Chandler, but have given them a postmodern spin, while at the same time leaving Philip Marlowe's ethos intact as The Dude wanders through the fractured world of nineties L.A. trying to do the right thing. Like the award winning Fargo, The Big Lebowski is suffused with a droll humor and a verbal felicity that is as delightful as it is startling.
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, known together professionally as the Coen brothers, are four-time Academy Award winning American filmmakers. For more than twenty years, the pair have written and directed numerous successful films, ranging from screwball comedies (O Brother, Where Art Thou?, Raising Arizona, The Hudsucker Proxy) to film noir (Miller's Crossing, Blood Simple, The Man Who Wasn't There, No Country for Old Men), to movies where genres blur together (Fargo, The Big Lebowski, and Barton Fink). The brothers write, direct and produce their films jointly, although until recently Joel received sole credit for directing and Ethan for producing. They often alternate top billing for their screenplays while sharing film credits for editor under the alias Roderick Jaynes. They are known in the film business as "the two-headed director", as they share such a similar vision of what their films are to be that actors say that they can approach either brother with a question and get the same answer.
I expect the book contents are majority dialogues, but then there are some descriptions to substitute the movie visualization. I found the descriptions are plain and flat. The book lacks the movie visualizations or showing the acts of the actors/actresses.
I found a scene toward the end of the book contains additional dialogues that I don't remember exist in the movie (at least for the movie version that I watched).
In summary, this book is for movie's fan. If you haven't watched the movie, I recommend to watch the movie first.
Any actors worth their weight (in ability) should salivate over a Joel Coen script. The writing almost always comes first, and the dialogue is almost always outstanding.
TBL has some of the most re-quoted lines in modern film history. Just check out IMDB and Facebook to determine the extent of its continued enjoyment, some 15 years since its creation. (How many films of a similar ilk remain as beloved that many years after their release?) Writing is important!
This screenplay reads very well, and the dialogue is so insightful, that the the characterisations are easy to imagine. If you haven't seen the film, read the screenplay first, and see how close your imagination of the characterisations come to the actual characters in the film.
It's a laugh out loud screenplay, folks, and is worthy of your time, study, and analysis.
(The film is outstanding, and contains some visual humour that, of course, comes down to direction and acting to be successfully brought to life. Such scenes cannot be transposed from page to mind, without the screen.)
One of the most helpful scripts I read when I was first making my attempts to be a screenwriter in my teens. Its so close to the film that you can see how important dialog is But how it's not something to be afraid of if the dialog is stylized, it can still have a realism to it.
To my great surprise, this stupendous comedy has not been included by The New York Times on its list of Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made. But it is popular with the public:
Jeffrey Leon Bridges has what I think could be the best role of his career- as much as I know it and compared with other endeavors. I much prefer The Dude to Bad Blake or the old cowboy in True Grit.
Bad Blake has won Jeff Bridges an Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role, but The Dude is more appealing. In fact he could be a role model.
Of course, only if many or most of his shortcomings would be eliminated and we could only have a serene personage to look up to. For The Dude is the epitome of peacefulness, an easy going, relaxed attitude, a detachment that comes close to levitation.
- I am not talking the Dalai Lama here - And this makes for a more complex, interesting and complicated character
Because the hero is not all that accomplished. He does float around on a cloud of bonhomie and good will, but he is also careless and rather ignorant.
The pleasure of seeing a man that appears to be happy, jolly and amused most of the time is not complete. If not an alcoholic or drug addicted, he still acts like he is high or just decoupled from the real world and incapable of understanding much.
The gentle protest that he makes when thugs invade his house is enviable in that he does not lose his calm. But otherwise, the dude did not strike me as particularly brave, intrepid or really concentrated on the issue.
- Still, he is a cool guy… - In a sense, he could be the definition of Cool - Or stoicism
The latter philosophy of life is rather in opposition with The Dude, who comes across as the symbol of another current of thought
- Hedonism
The Dude could be the poster image of enjoying life to the maximum, in the here and now, without much care for tomorrow. And the features that he may share with the stoics refer to a certain satisfaction with what he has, that was preached by the ascetic philosophers:
- Seneca, Marcus Aurelius and…The Dude? - Not really, no!
But until his rug is peed on, the cool hero aka The Big Lebowski had no trouble in his life, except perhaps when he lost a bowling game against the team of… Jesus, Jesus Quintana as played marvelously by John Turturo. For on top of the famous, genius team of writers and directors of the Coen Brothers, this superb comedy benefits from a magnificent cast;
- John Gooodman, Julianne Moore, Steve Buscemi, the late and regretted sensational Philip Seymour Hoffman, in addition to the aforementioned Bridges and Turturo
I would venture to say that the plot is not that relevant and maybe serves as a good excuse for a festival of comedy and exemplary acting. There is a case of mistaken identity, then a kidnapping or maybe a set up in the vein of the one in Fargo- another chef d’oeuvre from the same writers and directors and Steve Buscemi- and a few conflicts.
But this is 95% comedy if you ask me, even if on the IMDB site it is listed under comedy and crime…
It was a good script. I used it to study the film a few days ago and while I hate this movie, it's one of the best written scripts I've read so far.
And by the by, I don't hate the film because of the quality. It's actually brilliant in terms of execution. No, what I hate is the message. This film is (like many Coen Brothers' pictures) a critique.
The main writer of this is Joel Coen, a graduate of Princeton University with a degree in Philosophy. He doesn't write pretentiously, and he isn't trying to show off, either. The filmmaking and the dialogue is clear and unadorned with the language of an Ivy League graduate. Some writers love to brag and reveal a literary sensibility.
No, Coen focuses on the story. And this story is a blend of Hawks's "The Big Sleep" and Altman's "The Long Good-Bye," and observations on 1990's America and the failure of 1960's radical liberalism. The Dude was a hippie, a true believer... by the time of our story he's just a middle-aged white guy with a weird taste for White Russian and shorts. He's unemployed, he's okay with it, and he's making no effort to find a job. He's trying to stay connected to those roots, but what good are they in the age of nihilism and abstract art? Again, it's subtle. There is no speech that declares its politics because it's obvious in the characters and the story. He's a slacker who's given up on changing the world. He just wants to play bowling, man.
When thugs urinate on his carpet in retaliation of an affair another Lebowski has, he calls on THE Big Lebowski to cover the costs of the carpet. He's told no, so the Other Lebowski takes it upon himself to "borrow" a carpet. I confess I found that to be a funny bit. For whatever reason to be explained later, he's hired to find THE Lebowski.
Over all, an interesting film. It's longevity speaks to the power of this script and to two of the greatest filmmakers of the late 20th early 21st centuries.
Great script. Go see it or read the words. Y'all be glad you did.
I recently encountered a brilliant fan theory online about The Big Lebowski. To wit: Donnie isn't real. He exists only in Walter’s imagination.
Notice almost all Donnie’s interactions are with Walter alone. Yes, the Dude does acknowledge Donnie, once or twice, cursorily. To keep the peace, the Dude humors Walter's delusion.
There was a real "Theodore Donald Kerabatsos" but he's long deceased. He died, like so many young men of his generation, before his time, face down in the muck of Vietnam. Or perhaps he expired in Walter's arms while waiting the medics. Either way, Donnie is a memory--or more specifically, a PTS-induced hallucination.
Think about it. Why does the Dude’s bowling team have three members while Jesus’s has only two? Answer: It doesn’t. Because Donnie’s not really there.
The Stranger knows about Donnie, of course. After all, he's sad to see him go. But the Stranger seems to be a supernatural entity, privy to all the shit.
The only thing that doesn’t quite ring true about the theory is the vehemence of the Dude’s reaction to Walter’s oafishness during the funeral scene. And I guess the undertaker from the prior scene would have to have been in on the game, which might be a stretch. Other than that, however, I think it’s an uncannily plausible interpretation.
I’d like to see a new version of Lebowski in which Donnie is digitally erased. Walter’s habit of heaping scathing abuse against someone no-one else can see would underscore the terrifying insanity that leads him to draw a pistol over an argument in a bowling alley, roll out of a moving vehicle with an automatic weapon, assault a paraplegic, and rip off a nihilist’s ear with his teeth.
I fleshed out some of the details of the theory here, but I can't take credit for it. I have it from Jeff Bridges himself, who mentioned it during a round table discussion with John Goodman and Steve Buscemi. You can probably still find it on Youtube.
Worth reading for some of the stage directions ("The Dude, also holding a large plastic cup of Bud, wears some of its foam on his mustache") and for some dialogue that slightly differs from the finished film (the film's iconic "I'll be there, Man" is rendered here "Sure, Marty, I'll be there"). I just wish that the original script's page numbers were left intact. As someone who cut his teeth on Save the Cat, I want to know what page the catalyst happens on, what page the break into two takes place, where the midpoint is, and so on. It looks to me as if the shooting scripts put out by Newmarket Press are much better in this regard. Also their introductions are better, more inspiring and instructive for aspiring screenwriters, and who else reads screenplays?
I saw this movie about ten years ago and read the screenplay (in the Faber and Faber edition which coincided with the movie’s release in 1998) a couple of days ago. I would say the screenplay conveys the action pretty well, and some of the lines hit a little harder because the reader can laugh out loud without missing anything. Not that it conveys the pizazz of the movie. The screenplay, is, of course, written in service of the movie. The book is accompanied by stills; not many, but not too few. These are strategically placed, helping the reader to picture the movie. Three pages of comedic prefatory remarks appear at the start of the book. These are written for the book by one or both Coen brothers.
I don't usually read film scripts, I don't really see the point. I made an exception for The Big Lebowski though as I think it is an incredible, word perfect, piece of writing. Having seen the film well over a hundred times I pretty much know the script so thought it would be interesting to read the original and compare. It seems pretty word for word and conjured the scenes nicely in my mind as I read. As I had understood the film followed the script almost down to the letter. The script runs smoothly with little in the way of scene setting. The introduction to the book was disappointing and a little lost on me, I thought it deserved more.
Not sure how to rate this tbh but it's the script for one of my favorite movies ever so I thoroughly enjoyed it. I'm assuming this was the final draft of the script as it's pretty much the same as the movie from what I could recall, a few lines were a bit different though. For example in the script the Dude says Jackie Treehorn "treats women like objects" whereas in the movie he says he "treats objects like women" which is a funnier line imo. Overall this is great and was the first film script I've read and I want to read more.
Really an interesting read, if one's into the bones and mechanics of movie production. Real making the sausage vibes here. Although don't read it unless you plan to watch the movie before,after or in-tandem. There are some changes here, from scene openers to dialogue. All in all a bit more fun for those REALLY invested.
The script here reads almost 100% as to what ended up in the movie. Fun to read as there were a few lines I did not understand in the film that now are clear when I can read them. Brilliantly funny. Hats iff to Rodger Dekins as DP and of course the serlt production crew! Great job all around.
What can I say about this screenplay except that it is the one script I could read and movie I could watch OVER and OVER and OVER again and still laugh my head off.
Skimming this again for the sake of the screenwriting class I'm about to take. Read it along with the movie, and that's a great exercise if you enjoy movies or plan on writing a screenplay.