Did you like the film? If you did, does it really encapsulate what a "best picture" is. Me, I thought it was okay, more like retread of "fargo", especially how a heist gets worse and worse and innocent people are shot as a result of it. It may be an exploration of evil, of age and all of that but I felt shortchanged. The argument that "it was supposed to feel that way". I don't know, yet that's why I want you opinions. TLJ was good, but it felt as if he was in a different movie.
I really liked the film and how the Tommy Lee Jones and Javier Bardem storylines played off and complimented each other. However, I did feel shortchanged at the end -- I didn't get a resolution. They way the presented the two storylines I was expecting Jones' sheriff to somehow make a payoff to help catch Bardem at the end. Instead, Bardem walked off and Jones retired and felt ansy. The emotional underpinning of the scenes didn't resonate with me and I felt misled. The rest of the picture was good, I just felt underwhelmed. I got a better emotional resolution from "There Will Be Blood" and "Juno". -nobody
It was the best picture I saw last year, and I saw all the best picture Oscar-nomiated movies except Atonement. I am a fan of the Coen bros. directing style, and I read the book after I saw the movie and thought they did an absolutely first-rate adaptation. I have talked about the theme of the movie and why it worked for me in earlier threads, so I won't go on about it again. --Justin
I saw Atonement; and to my mind it's not to the calibre of either No Country for Old Men or There Will Be Blood. Course, my favourite American mainstream release was none of these but rather the blood splatter musical Sweeney Todd; so you can take that as you will. Actually, I'd like to see more There Will Be Blood threads; this is the third or so No Country thread in a while. Yes. Very much so. That's an interesting question. Do you mean the kind of film that wins Oscars, or the kind that should? Either way, I think No Country for Old Men explemifies both kind of picture. It's the kind of quintessentially American yet prestige laden film that can pick up the prize (The Godfather being another such example); and it's also one of those damn fine cinematic experiences of the kind you want to win. I felt it resembled Fargo more than any other previous Coen Brothers film; but not in a negative sense. Like Fargo, it's one of their strongest pictures. But, again, I love The Hudsucker Proxy; so you can take that as you will. Odd, as it was really his movie. The film is about him and the title is what he comes to realise. I thought it was interesting he got a nomination for In the Valley of Elah rather than this picture; while Elah is far more dependent on his performance to carry the picture, he's also very good here.
I liked No Country for Old Men. Anton Chigurh is the best movie villain I have seen in a long time. This may sound strange, but I was kind of reminded of Terminator when I watched this movie because of how relentless and seemingly unstoppable Chigurh was. There is even a scene where Chigurh "repairs himself" in a hotel room.
I liked No Country for Old Men. I had no problems with the way the movie ended, I would have been disappointed with a "Hollywood ending".
They didn't need a "Hollywood ending" what they needed was an ending. There was no emotional resolution to the story. It didn't have to be a physical confrontation between Jones and Bardem, but a simple coda where they exchange words, a glance, they dance, something more to acknowledge that there is "no country for old men." Other than a cryptic dream being deciphered at breakfast. -nobody
No Country for Old Men was one of the biggest pieces of crap I've ever seen. It doesn't even have an ending. It just stops. To attribute any idea that this movie has an ending is erroneous. It doesn't even have a bad ending, that would require it to have an ending in the first place. In addition to having no ending, No Country also has no story and no point. A complete waste of 2 hours. One of the most undeserving and over-rated movies ever made.
The ending (which is absolutely faithful to the book, btw, as is nearly the entire movie--probably the most faithful adaptation I've ever seen) can be criticized, but trying to say the movie had no story and no point seems pretty absurd to me. Especially since the point is partially encapsulated by the title. But I'm sure Kegek will be here to get my back, shortly.
The story was about Ed Tom Bell's inability to cope with the changing nature of the world around him. Once, as a younger man, he had been in his element but now, as an old man, there was no place for him any more. That is why he had to retire. He knew there was no place for him up against the men like Chigurh. The ending captured that perfectly.
Present. Miss Chicken pretty accurately summarised it, though. The film is about Tommy Lee Jones' character realising his own obsolence in a world where killers like Anton Chigurh roam. It's not the most conventional of endings; I was certainly surprised by it; but I think it really works. The title is ultimately a reference to a poem by W.B. Yeats (Sailing to Byzantium; where in context it's more a regret that he is past the age of lust); but as far as the ending goes T.S. Eliot applies: 'Not a bang but a whimper.' Problem is, everyone - including myself - was expecting a bang; a show-down between Bell and Chigurh. But I think the whimper works very well.
It could've been a better whimper. The conversation with his uncle would've worked better than the breakfast table ending. There didn't have to be a "bang" but a scene where Bell and Chigurh had some of exchange leading Bell to retire would've worked. A simple botched effort at going after the man, or a telephone conversation. There were already two other "endings" that fit with the futility of humans fighting and existing in a world with such senseless violence. The scene were Chigurh kills the bounty hunter and when Moss is killed. They had more of an impact -- not because they were violent, but because there was more of an emotional undercurrent to those scenes. You could still have Bell whimper out, but do it in a way that provided the same emotional ending that the other scenes had. -nobody
thanks to some posts I'm starting to understand the ending. im not saying it was a really shit movie but a best picture movie often succeeds in at one point or another channeling every emotion.. even ones that are mostly sad have funny scenes etc. This movie was efficiently made but not really special and not rewatchable
me and my buddy watched i am legend the same night and he said that should have won. of course all here would say the ending sucked. i thought it was good. its almost like there is a stigma against saying NCFOM wasn't good, but i got more emotional when will smith was talking about "the greatest album ever made" than at any point in the 2 hours of NCFOM and maybe the point was that TLJ was retiring, he was not up to dealing with this kind of case. but somehow i feel cheated. although its a different character I'm still thinking how disappointing..this was the guy that in another series relentlessly tracked down two fugitives
Well, while I'm sure that probably meant more to Marley enthusiasts than myself; I only thought that was a fairly good dramatic beat that underlined the themes of the picture. I liked I Am Legend's ending; but truthfully I liked No Country for Old Men's better. And while there are science fiction films I feel had best picture potential (the one in your avatar wasn't even nominated, you know), I do not feel that was the case in I Am Legend. I do understand what you mean by a stigma in disliking No Country for Old Men. It was critically raved about, it took home four Oscars - including Best Picture. Disliking it is doubtless a lonely affair. I've been there - with the ouevre of Joss Whedon, whose work I've never particularly liked. When it comes down to it, it's all entertainment, regardless of whether or not it's art. And thus it's a matter of personal taste.
Thanks Kegek. i want you to know that I'm not a Marley fan, but the scene i think was really powerful and well played by Smith who is a very talented actor. I often find great performances inside "popular' movies.. more there than performances locked into what are called "great films". Sometimes popular films have to have better performances to sell the absurd word that is created in the course of the movie. I'm with you on joss. he tries too hard to be hip, or witty. And i feel the same about Kevin smith, I'd feel he'd be ebtter if he had restraint. you don't need to make every scene crammed with as much witty dialog as the scene before it. that's why Liman's Swingers was in some ways better than the majority of his films.. similar humor, but played out better over the course of the film.
It was okay. I liked Zodiac better and it wasn't even nominated. When I see There Will Be Blood, I won't be surprised if that one turns out to have deserved the Oscar more. Here's a theory: the phone call Tommy Lee Jones got at the end of the movie was Chigurh, telling him he was going to kill him next. Jones' non-reaction other than to ask his wife to go on a horse ride (for her own safety) was the resolution - he'd decided not to fight.
I wrote in my blog that No Country For Old Men was about three veteran warriors in combat with each other. Yet, each of them was so good at their respective crafts that there was no way to predict who would remain standing at the end, that the only difference was pure luck. Sheriff Ed Tom Bell didn't surrender because he was afraid of men like Chigurgh. He easily figured out that Chigurgh's weapon was a pneumatically driven, cow killing steel bolt. He knew the FBI was baffled and going around in circles over this case. He knew Moss is skilled enough to survive Chigurgh's attention. He knew the only person Moss would listen to is his wife and concentrated his efforts there. All these are not acts of surrendering. What shocked the Sheriff was that despite the collected skills of all three men dancing the warrior's dance, Moss was killed by a lucky shot from a bunch of weak mexican drug dealers who had to escape without the money in a 4 vs 1 shootout against Moss. Bell felt powerless that despite his best effort and skills, lady luck still controlled the roll of the dice and he had no weapons, no skills to fight against that. This movie requires a lot of reading between the lines (or frames) to figure out what's happening. I wrote my blog about a month before the Oscar nominations were announced and back then, I anticipated that No Country would be nominated for Best Supporting Actor (Javier Bardem), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Directors and Best Picture, but that it would win Best Supporting Actor, Best Adapted Screenplay and had a 50% chance for Best Director. I thought Best Picture was going to be a long shot because it lacked the epic movie quality that the academy favors.