If Fargo can be said to be about anything, it is subversion. Specifically, the subversion of conventional audience expectations from a movie. As a testament to this assertion, consider the fact that Fargo was nominated for Best Picture by Golden Globes in the category of Best Comedy or Musical. (Note of shocking interest: it lost to Evita!) While it is true that Fargo contains more than a few moments of outright hilarity along with consistently humorous dialogue, it is worth remembering that body count in this “comedy” includes on state trooper, three people who mere happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, a father and his daughter and, most notably, a guy who buys the farm inside a wood chipper after spending the last third of the movie drenched in blood.
Comedy is not pretty, apparently. Still, the mere fact that Fargo is very often categorized as a comedy—not just by the Hollywood Foreign Press—only serve to underline that this entire film is about subverting what Hollywood has conditioned audiences to expect.
“THIS IS A TRUE STORY. The events depicted in this film took place in Minnesota in 1987. At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed. Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred.”
Most people upon reading an information title at the beginning of a movie informing it is based on a true story do not then expect to watch a completely authentic and accurate recreation of that story. Audiences have never been conditioned to expect that, but they do expect that if a movie claims to be based on a true story, there must be some connection to reality. In fact, despite efforts to uncover potential true life crime cases that adhere “close enough” to the narrative to substantiate a certain level of authenticity, no crime which took place in, near or anywhere far away from Minnesota has ever been uncovered to suggest that the audience should be this is a true story. After changing their stories on the subject several times, director Joel Cohen finally admitted that the whole thing was made up and that it is a true story on in the sense that it is true it is a story.
Fargo.
A movie titled Fargo is expected to take place in Fargo. Failing that, then Fargo should at least be some sort of metaphorical location loaded with meaning such a Chinatown in the film bearing that name. In reality, there is very little Fargo in Fargo. None of the film was actually shot there, almost none of the movie actually takes place there (and that which does consists almost completely of interiors which could be anywhere) and, for that matter, most of the film isn’t even set in North Dakota, but neighboring Minnesota. And as for Fargo being a metaphor for anything…forget it, Jake, it’s no Chinatown.
Pregnancy
First the facts: actress Frances McDormand was not pregnant during filming so that is not why Marge Gunderson happens to be pregnant. She happens to be pregnant because that “condition” allows the film to subvert one of the most conditioned responses in the history of Hollywood narrative. If a major character in a movie is pregnant the first time she appears, the smart money is always---always—on the bet that she is either going to deliver the baby (probably at a crucial and inconvenient moment) or she is somehow going to lose the baby. The one outcome that happens so infrequently they can probably be counted on one hand is that the pregnancy has no impact on the plot and the baby remains safely inside and undelivered throughout the film. Fargo simply has a cop that’s pregnant; it is in no way about a cop that is pregnant.
Marge and Mike
Marge Gunderson takes the time while on her official police business visit to the Twin Cities to interview Jerry to have dinner with an old high school friend who clearly has always been carrying a torch for her. Normally, such an interruption in the investigative narrative like this would produce some sort of emotional or marital complication that affects the investigation. But Marge is happily married and and Mike promptly disappears from the storyline. A lot of people refer to this scene as awkward and out of place and seeming to exist only for the purpose of giving a little background shading to Marge’s character. And thus it succeeds on subverting expectations twice. First, Mike does not figure at all later, so that expectation that he might is completely thwarted. But the explanation for why the scene exists at all is also subverted because, in fact, it actually does serve a quite valid and useful purpose. The key to why this seemingly purposeless digression from the storyline to introduce and then quickly dismiss a character that seems like he is going to be important later on is the way he totally convinces Marge that his wife has died. It is Mike’s lie that leads directly to Marge considering that Jerry was lying in her initial interview.
The Money
Fargo is hardly the first movie in which a load of money goes unclaimed by the end. Psycho is probably the most famous. What is different here is the level of brutality, violence, pain and physical struggle that goes into the hiding of the filthy lucre. Marian Crane merely took an envelope full of cash on a long drive and hid it inside the folds of a newspaper. By contrast, Carl Showalter gets shot in the face, murders two men, practically bleed to death, crawls through the snow and digs into ice to hide money that nobody involved in this enterprise will ever located. (The money will eventually be located purely by accident. This discovery is revealed as a key plot point in the first season of the Fargo TV series airing on FX.)
Fargo is a film that consistently subverts the expectations of its audience, but not in a way that seems artificial or that even draws attention to the subversion. It simply tells a story that just so happens not to align with the conventions of Hollywood narrative. Perhaps, there is some Fargo in Fargo, after all. Maybe Fargo is where Hollywood filmmakers go to break the rules.
