We have that well of tradition to draw on, to help us understand. When we're puzzled we have all the stories that have been handed down from people who had the same problems. In the whole movie he doesn't do anything. Not much of anything, anyway. He just wants to understand what is happening to him. It's a reference to another man, Sy Ableman Fred Melamedwho is passive-aggressively taking over Larry's wife life. To add insult to injury, it seems to be a fait accompli -- just came at Larry out of the blue. And Larry, remember, hasn't done anything. It is a flat world without curbs, without fences, without boundaries.
Can you repeat that? if the pillars of your assurance, the ones that have stood designed for more than two millennia, are built upon a foundation of sand? Larry acts in a correct and accurate manner. He supports his family, believes in God, sends his son en route for Hebrew school, is on the cusp of making tenure, and goes en route for the doctor regularly. He even lets his good-for-nothing brother stay in his house until he can find a place of his own. He does things the right way; or by least, he does not do things the wrong way. He is before he has tried to be a serious man.
Larry Gopnik : It's a long account. Sy Ableman : Do you alcoholic drink wine? Because this is an absurd bottle. This is not Mogen David. This is a - heh heh - a wine, Larry.
A Serious Man isn't a movie en route for be solved. It's a film so as to revels in its paradoxes because those paradoxes illustrate what it means en route for be Jewish right from the aperture parable about the dybbuk. Arguably Joel and Ethan Coen's most oblique film since Barton Fink, A Serious Be in charge of is also the brothers' most basic examination of their Jewish upbringing after that how it crashes up against their American roots. To be Jewish is itself a paradox—an outsider always active among other communities waiting for the inevitable next exodus, an exodus that's also key to your identity. En route for understand A Serious Man, or by least to embrace its paradoxes, we must first look to its aperture scenes, which force us into a paradox within a paradox. The film's epigraph quotes the Rashi, a medieval French rabbi who wrote extensively arrange the Talmud books of Jewish act and the Tanakh the canonical album of Hebrew scriptures including the TorahReceive with simplicity everything that happens en route for you, and then we get the parable of the dybbuk, a tone-setting prologue that refuses to be arrive with simplicity. Velvel tells Dora so as to Traitle Groshkover Fyvush Finkel just helped him with his broken cart arrange the way home and he's invited Groshkover over for soup to pay back his kindness. Dora tells Velvel so as to Groshkover died three years ago, after that that Velvel was interacting with a dybbuk, an evil spirit. Velvel thinks his wife is being silly, although when Groshkover comes over, she stabs the man she believes to a dybbuk.