---
title: "Burn After Reading"
year: 2008
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/burn-after-reading"
fi1m_id: "burn-after-reading"
imdb_id: "tt0887883"
tmdb_id: 4944
wikidata_id: "Q381731"
fi1m_score: 72
critics_score: 63
critics_reviews: 22
published: "2026-10-01T20:13:10.908857+00:00"
updated: "2026-10-01T20:13:11.728796+00:00"
region: "ES"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Burn After Reading (2008)

Directed by Ethan Coen, Joel Coen · 1h 36m · ICAA 12 · Comedy, Drama

## Identity

Burn After Reading

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/burn-after-reading
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** burn-after-reading
- **IMDb ID:** tt0887883
- **TMDB ID:** 4944
- **Wikidata ID:** Q381731
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0887883/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/4944, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q381731

**Fi1m score: 72** · Critics 63 from 22 reviews

*In a sentence:* Several stupid people chase a disc of nothing while Carter Burwell scores it like the end of the world

> The Coens follow their bleakest film with their silliest: a Washington farce in which a disc of personal finances is mistaken for a state secret and ruins everyone who touches it. It is fast, mean and often funny, and it does not like a single person in it.

## Synopsis

Washington, DC, the present day. Osborne Cox (John Malkovich), a CIA analyst, is moved off the Balkans desk and quits in a rage, announcing he will write his memoirs. His wife Katie (Tilda Swinton), a paediatrician, wants a divorce and quietly copies his financial records onto a disc. The disc ends up on the floor of Hardbodies, a gym where Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand) is trying to pay for four cosmetic procedures her insurance will not cover and Chad Feldheimer (Brad Pitt) is a trainer who has seen too many thrillers. Chad decides the disc is secret intelligence and that Cox should pay to get it back. Meanwhile Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney), a Treasury marshal who is sleeping with Katie, keeps meeting women online. One of them is Linda. The gym manager, Ted (Richard Jenkins), watches all this and says nothing.

## Review

Joel and Ethan Coen have made a comedy about intelligence in a city with none. Osborne Cox (John Malkovich) loses his post at the CIA, quits in a rage and sits down to dictate his memoirs. His wife Katie (Tilda Swinton) is already planning to leave him and copies his bank records onto a disc. The disc gets lost, a gym trainer Chad Feldheimer (Brad Pitt) finds it, and *Burn After Reading* follows from Chad’s conviction that he is holding something the government would kill for. It is frequently funny and it thinks every person in it is a fool. That is the joke and, by the end, the limit.

Pitt is the reason to see it. He plays Chad with a bleached quiff, an earpiece he never takes out and the open-mouthed confidence of a man who has been told he is a people person. His phone call to Cox, in which he tries to sound like a blackmailer and ends up sounding like a customer service agent, had us laughing, and the laugh came from how badly Chad wanted to be good at this. Frances McDormand’s Linda is the sadder half of the pair. She wants a new body because she has decided it is the only thing between her and a decent man, and McDormand plays the want straight, so that the scene where the insurance company says no is painful before it is amusing.

Malkovich swears as if he has been waiting twenty years for permission. His Cox is a man in a bow tie who believes he is the last serious person in Washington, and Malkovich gives him enough wounded dignity that the insults land on something. Swinton’s Katie is a paediatrician who tells crying children to stop it, and does the same to everyone else. Richard Jenkins, as the gym manager Ted, is in love with Linda and is the only character who behaves well; the film shows him no kindness for it.

The craft plays it straight. Emmanuel Lubezki opens from a satellite’s view of the earth and drops down onto the CIA’s headquarters, then lights the rest of Washington in the flat daylight of a federal brochure. Carter Burwell writes drums and low brass for a woman trying to afford a tummy tuck, so that every drive across town sounds like a coup. Jess Gonchor gives Cox a wood-panelled Georgetown house full of books nobody reads and Hardbodies an orange-and-blue brightness that makes everyone in it look ill. Mary Zophres dresses Chad in gym clothes a size too tight and Cox as if he had got dressed in 1962 and seen no reason to stop.

The Coens cut it themselves and cut it hard. The plot is coincidence piled on coincidence and moves fast enough that you have no time to object. Where it slows, it is around Clooney. Harry Pfarrer is a twitchy, sex-obsessed marshal who jogs the same block and checks the floors for the agency he is sure is watching him, and Clooney commits, but it is one note held for 96 minutes and the note tires. The scenes where a CIA officer (David Rasche) reports the mess to his superior (J.K. Simmons) are among the funniest in the film, and also where the Coens tell us that none of this means anything. It is a good joke. It also lets the film off having to mean anything.

Most critics liked it; a few found it cold and pointless, and we see why, because we felt it too. In the last twenty minutes we were still laughing and noticed that the people we were laughing at had been built to lose, with nobody to make the loss cost something. *Fargo* had Marge Gunderson. [*The Big Lebowski*](https://film.one/film/the-big-lebowski) had a Dude you could warm to. This has nobody, by design, and a design can be a fault as well as a choice.

See it for Pitt, for Malkovich’s language, for Burwell’s drums and for the pleasure of watching expensive actors play idiots with care. It carries a 15 and most of that is Malkovich’s vocabulary. Do not expect to like anyone, and do not expect the film to mind.

*Fi1m score 72, published 1 October 2026.*

## What the critics say

Most critics come away amused, if not quite satisfied. The praise clusters on the cast: Brad Pitt’s clueless gym employee and John Malkovich’s irascible Osborne Cox are singled out again and again, with Frances McDormand’s comic turn and George Clooney not far behind. Several reviews admire the precision with which the farce escalates into violence, and a few find the bleakness oddly cathartic, a portrait of paranoia and grasping foolishness with a political sting.

The spread is wide. The middle of the pack calls it slight, second-shelf Coens, with a loose plot, no strong protagonist and characters who are difficult to love. The dissenters go much further: The Guardian finds it a strained, chaotic failure, The New Yorker thinks the misanthropy freezes the comedy, and Paste complains that the actors play quirks rather than people. Even the harshest reviews, though, stop to admire Malkovich or Pitt.

## Straight answers

**Is Burn After Reading worth watching?**

*Burn After Reading* is worth watching for anyone who enjoys a fast, mean farce and does not need to like a single person in it, and we scored it 72. Brad Pitt's gym trainer and John Malkovich's swearing analyst are the reasons to see it. Expect to laugh and to feel a little cold about it afterwards.

**How long is Burn After Reading, and what is it rated?**

*Burn After Reading* runs 1h 36m and is rated 12 by the ICAA in Spain. It is a comedy and drama film.

**Where can I watch Burn After Reading in Spain?**

*Burn After Reading* is available to rent from Amazon Prime Video and Apple TV from €2.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.

**How violent or frightening is Burn After Reading, and is it suitable for children?**

*Burn After Reading* carries a 15 certificate in the UK, and most of that is Malkovich's vocabulary rather than anything frightening. It is a comedy of adultery, blackmail and foul language, not a thriller, so there is little to alarm the squeamish. It is not for children, and younger teenagers will find the swearing is most of the point.

**How does Burn After Reading compare to In the Loop?**

*Burn After Reading* is the sillier and colder of the two, and [*In the Loop*](https://film.one/film/in-the-loop) is the angrier and the funnier. The Coens' film treats its Washington idiots as fools built to lose; Iannucci's treats his Westminster and Washington idiots as people whose wounded pride could start a war. Choose *In the Loop* for the swearing and the point, *Burn After Reading* for Pitt and Malkovich.

**What should I watch after Burn After Reading?**

After *Burn After Reading*, try [*In the Loop*](https://film.one/film/in-the-loop) (2009, Fi1m 86): Westminster and Washington idiots start a war; the swearing is even better. Then [*A Fish Called Wanda*](https://film.one/film/a-fish-called-wanda) (1988, Fi1m 83): A heist farce in which everyone double-crosses everyone and nobody is bright; and [*Dr. Strangelove*](https://film.one/film/dr-strangelove-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-bomb) (1964, Fi1m 93): The original comedy about serious men in rooms who should not be trusted.

### Reviews we read (22)

- **Little White Lies**, Kevin Maher (5/4/5): Maher finds the film funny, cruel and faintly depressing, praising its thrillingly barmy ensemble farce. He singles out the characters’ desperate emptiness and the precision with which the plot spirals into grisly violence. [Read](https://lwlies.com/reviews/burn-after-reading)
- **Radio Times**, Stella Papamichael (4/5): The critic praises the Coens’ skill at blending sophistication with silliness. John Malkovich’s over-the-top performance is singled out for praise. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-0nt9r0/burn-after-reading/)
- **Time Out**, David Jenkins (4/5): The review gives the film four out of five stars. The visible text calls it another Coen brothers concoction, but the article body is unavailable, so no specific praise or complaint can be identified. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/burn-after-reading-1)
- **The AV Club**, Keith Phipps (B): Phipps finds the film funny but a second-shelf Coen comedy, with its loose plot and lack of a strong protagonist holding it back. He praises the cast’s broadly comic performances, which are almost uniformly funny. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/burn-after-reading-1798204850)
- **Empire**, Ian Nathan (75/100, inferred): Nathan finds the film initially abrasive but ultimately rewarding, with its offbeat wit lingering after viewing. He particularly praises the precision of its escalating farce and the performances, especially Brad Pitt and George Clooney. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/burn-reading-review/)
- **Los Angeles Times**, Carina Chocano (75/100, inferred): Chocano finds the bleak farce bitterly cathartic. She praises its mordant portrayal of paranoia and the grasping, murderous foolishness of its characters. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-oct-09-et-carina9-story.html)
- **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (3/4): Ebert found the film amusing but less satisfying than the Coen brothers’ strongest work. He singled out its comedy of ineptitude, while finding its characters’ foolishness less compelling as the joke continued. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/burn-after-reading-2008)
- **Evening Standard**, The Standard (70/100, inferred): The critic finds the comedy entertaining, though slight and without much to ponder. The performances and broad character drawing are singled out as its strengths. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/brothers-at-play-in-burn-after-reading-7438819.html)
- **The Hollywood Reporter**, Kirk Honeycutt (70/100, inferred): The critic finds the Coens’ spy-thriller send-up goofy and delightfully lunatic, though its anti-thriller rhythms may take time to settle into. He praises the cast’s comic riffs on their screen personas, especially Brad Pitt’s performance as a clueless gym employee. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/burn-reading-review-movie-2008-126159/)
- **Screen Daily**, Lee Marshall (64/100, inferred): The page identifies this as a review, but the text is behind a registration wall. The critic’s verdict and specific praise or complaint are not visible. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/burn-after-reading/4040429.article)
- **The New York Times** (64/100, inferred): The blocked page does not reveal the critic’s verdict. It provides no verifiable praise or complaint about the film. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/arts/29iht-fmreview29.1.15706969.html)
- **Slant Magazine**, Bill Weber (2.5/4): Weber finds the film a tonally uneven but ambitious farce, with an undertow of sadness that gives its state-of-the-union punchline weight. He singles out Malkovich’s astonished reaction to the blackmailer as especially funny. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/burn-after-reading/)
- **Total Film**, Sam Ashurst (3/5): Ashurst finds the film an entertaining but slight Coen brothers comedy, short of the siblings’ best work. He praises Brad Pitt’s comic performance and the film’s nimble plotting, while faulting its anonymous visuals and characters who are difficult to love. [Read](https://www.gamesradar.com/burn-after-reading-review/)
- **The New Yorker**, David Denby (25/100, inferred): Denby finds the film bleak and unfunny, with its misanthropy ultimately freezing the comedy. He praises John Malkovich’s finely calibrated performance as the irascible Osborne Cox. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/09/15/storm-warnings-david-denby)
- **Variety**, Todd McCarthy (20/100, inferred): McCarthy finds the comedy overplayed and fundamentally silly, with the film ultimately a failure. He singles out Brad Pitt’s performance as unexpectedly endearing, alongside the Coens’ visual sense. [Read](https://variety.com/2008/film/awards/burn-after-reading-3-1200507465/)
- **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (10/100, inferred): Bradshaw finds the film a strained, chaotic failure and a major letdown after the Coens’ previous success. He singles out John Malkovich as the strongest contributor, praising the seriousness and emotional force of his performance. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/oct/17/burn-after-reading)
- **Den of Geek**, Ron Hogan (4/5): Hogan calls it a wickedly funny, brisk return to form, though it falls short of The Big Lebowski and its plot can feel aimless. He especially praises Brad Pitt’s goofy performance and the film’s sharp editing. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/burn-after-reading-review-2/)
- **The Playlist** (80/100, inferred): The headline signals a positive review, describing the film as delightful. It singles out the foolish characters as the source of its appeal. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/league-of-morons-rule-delightful-burn-20080905/)
- **Collider**, Steven Weintraub (B): The review finds the film smart and sharply acted, though its technical elements feel deflated. It praises the sharp screenplay and performances, especially Frances McDormand’s comic turn. [Read](https://collider.com/burn-after-reading-movie-review/)
- **Eye for Film**, Anton Bitel (75/100, inferred): The critic finds the Coens’ dark comedy highly effective, even as its familiar chaos carries a political edge. He praises the filmmakers’ unmatched knack for comic crime-gone-wrong stories and highlights the characters’ blinkered idiocy as a troubling reflection of their world. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/burn-after-reading-film-review-by-anton-bitel)
- **Digital Spy**, Stella Papamichael (72/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a memorable, finely crafted black comedy, though at times its plot is too nutty and reliant on coincidence. Pitt’s phone call to Cox is singled out as one of the film’s most memorable scenes. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a131948/burn-after-reading/)
- **Paste**, Robert Davis (15/100, inferred): Davis judges the film a pointless, disappointing misfire whose promised comic payoff never arrives. He complains that the actors play quirks rather than characters, despite their energetic performances. [Read](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/joel-and-ethan-coen/burn-after-reading)

## Details

- **Director:** Ethan Coen, Joel Coen
- **Director:** Ethan Coen, Joel Coen
- **Writer:** Joel Coen, Ethan Coen
- **Cinematography:** Emmanuel Lubezki
- **Editor:** Ethan Coen, Joel Coen
- **Music:** Carter Burwell
- **Production design:** Jess Gonchor
- **Costume design:** Mary Zophres
- **Producer:** Joel Coen, Ethan Coen
- **Cast:** George Clooney as Harry Pfarrer; Frances McDormand as Linda Litzke; Brad Pitt as Chad Feldheimer; John Malkovich as Osborne Cox; Tilda Swinton as Katie Cox; Richard Jenkins as Ted; Elizabeth Marvel as Sandy Pfarrer; David Rasche as CIA Officer
- **Runtime:** 1h 36m
- **Certificate (ICAA):** 12
- **Release (Spain):** 10 October 2008
- **Genres:** Comedy, Drama
- **Also in:** [Golden Globe Best Musical or Comedy winners](https://film.one/collections/golden-globe-comedy.md) (Nominee, 2008)
- **Budget:** $37 million
- **Box office:** $164 million
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jksnxStXol0

## Where to watch in Spain

- Amazon Prime Video: rent €2.99, uhd
- Apple TV: rent €3.99, hd
- Amazon Prime Video: buy €7.99, uhd
- Apple TV: buy €9.99, hd

*Checked 2026-10-01.*

Also available in: AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, ES, FR, GB, GR, HR, IE, IN, IT, JP, LT, MX, NL, NO, NZ, PL, PT, RO, SE, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## If you liked this

- *In the Loop* (2009), Fi1m 86: Westminster and Washington idiots start a war; the swearing is even better — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/in-the-loop.md)
- *A Fish Called Wanda* (1988), Fi1m 83: A heist farce in which everyone double-crosses everyone and nobody is bright — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/a-fish-called-wanda.md)
- *Dr. Strangelove* (1964), Fi1m 93: The original comedy about serious men in rooms who should not be trusted — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/dr-strangelove-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-bomb.md)
- *Wild Tales* (2014), Fi1m 83: Six Argentinian stories of ordinary people escalating past the point of return — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/wild-tales.md)
- *Fargo* (1996), Fi1m 91: The Coens’ earlier crime-gone-wrong, with one decent woman at the centre of it — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/fargo.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/burn-after-reading