Cool News
Capone and MiraJeff fingercuff NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN!!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
Hey everyone. Capone in Chicago here.
I knew this one would be different, special even. There's something to like in every Coen Brothers movie. Put two rabid fans together in the same room, and they will fight to the death over what film is the Coens' finest work. A lot of people choose FARGO or MILLER'S CROSSING or O BROTHER WHERE ART THOU?, but I will never forget that feeling of discovery and blood lust I acquired watching Blood Simple for the first time (and every time since). But from the first time I laid eyes on the trailer for NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (based on the novel by Cormac McCarthy), I knew this one would be different. I'm not sure if it was the towering figure of Javier Bardem in his Dutch boy haircut, or Josh Brolin covered in dust and carrying a bag of money, or Tommy Lee Jones being Tommy Lee Jones, but I got a vibe that the ferocity of this film would penetrate my soul. In so many ways, I wasn't quite prepared for what I got.
This is a film in which the hero (for lack of a better word) Brolin and the villain Bardem are two sides of the same sharp sword. The only thing that separates them is their need to kill, not their ability. Brolin's career-defining performance (in a year when Brolin's work in such films as AMERICAN GANGSTER, IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH and the GRINDHOUSE offering PLANET TERROR has been spectacular) as Llewelyn Moss is also changed by the presence of a good woman, as is often the case. Kelly Macdonald plays Carla Jean, a simple woman who knows a little bit more about what her husband is capable of than she ever lets on. When we first meet Llewelyn, he's hunting and stumbles upon the aftermath of a massacre that appears to be a drug deal gone horribly wrong. The Coens relish in doing this to us a couple times in NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN; they drop us in to a blood-soaked scenario after the blood has mostly dried and the bugs and heat have turned the crime scene into an even uglier landscape. When Llewelyn finds a man still alive at the site, we discover just how cold-hearted this man can be. The sequence sets the tone for many to follow; it is essentially dialog free as he finds a substantial sum of cash next to the body of a dead man under a tree.
Jones's Sheriff Bell is more of an outside observer and pursuer. At various times, he's not even sure who he's after. Sometimes he's chasing Llewelyn, and other times he's after a stone-cold killer named Anton Chigurh (Bardem), who is hired to find the missing money and drugs. Jones and his co-star Garret Dillahunt ("Deadwood"; THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES) provide the film with rare moments of humor (and dialog) as they deduce the limited clues left behind by both Moss and Chigurh. We've seen Jones play a man chasing another man before; he won an Oscar for playing such a man, as a matter of fact. What's fascinating about his character and the film in general is that the three leads don't really share any screen time together, despite the fact the one is chasing the other, who is chasing the other. Yet none of the drama is undercut. There are even shoot outs between characters, but you can never see more than one at a time; it makes the suspense unbearable.
But years from now, the character people will talk about is Chigurh, who might be one of the most cold-hearted, evil men ever to occupy the screen. He makes a coin toss terrifying, even when the person calling heads or tails has no idea what the stakes are. His weapon of choice makes air an instrument of death. Top that! He pursues Llewelyn like a famished wolf, and when the two men get near each other, all hell breaks loose. The first time we see him kill somebody (he chokes a cop with his handcuffs), the Coens don't focus on the officer's last moments. Instead, the camera zooms in from above on Chigurh's face as the blood from the dying man's throat widens beneath them. The look on his face is ecstatic and horrific at the same time.
The Coens have chosen to make a film that has a cold heart. Good feelings don't have a place in this work or in most of these characters. As if to prove that point, when Chigurh realizes he probably won't ever catch Llewelyn, he forces Llewelyn's hand by threatening the man's wife, one of the few warm people in this movie. When Woody Harrelson shows up late in the film as another assassin, his character has almost too much personality and charm to exist in this universe. As a result, his fate seems almost certain.
Many audiences are going to squawk loud about a sudden time shift toward the end of the film. Remember what I said earlier about certain acts of violence not shown on the screen? There's an instance of this near the end of the film that many will find unforgivable, and if you do, you're missing the point of the story entirely. We don't need to see this particular moment to understand its impact on the bigger picture. More importantly, what does your call for showing this bloodletting say about you? The Coens throw the moment back in your face, and say, Why do you need to see this? The handling of this material (from what I understand, the book handles it exactly the same way) might be the single bravest sequence I've seen in a movie all year, and it may divide reactions to this film for a long time to come.
I saw NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN about three weeks ago, and it haunts me as often as it has forced me to rethink (although never change) my feelings and reactions to it. I only have about a month to go before I can start putting together my list of my favorite films of the year, and I fully expect this one up near the top. This is a troubling and astonishing work that almost requires that you view it repeatedly. I know I plan to, if only to watch Bardem's presence on screen cast a dark and fearful cloud over an audience.
Capone
capone@aintitcoolmail.com
Greetings AICN, MiraJeff here with a look at the Coen brothers’ latest cinematic endeavor, No Country for Old Men. There’s been a lot of ink spilled on this film. It arrives in twenty-something theaters this weekend riding a tidal wave of hype. Most of it is extremely deserved, but cries of ‘masterpiece’ or ‘best-ever Coen brothers film’ only do the film a disservice. Because the last ten minutes of the film will give even the most tolerant viewers reservations. But we’ll get to that in a bit.
Set in 1980, No Country for Old Men stars Josh Brolin as Llewelyn Moss. We don’t know much about him other than he’s got a lovely wife ( the fantastic, Oscar nom-worthy Kelly Macdonald) he shares a modest home with. One day, as fate would have it, Llewelyn stumbles upon the aftermath of a botched drug deal while out shooting deer. Bodies are strewn about the desert sand, there’s a truck with a bed full of drugs, and not far away lies a suitcase full of money and a dead man nearby. This is the golden opportunity Llewelyn has waited for fate to bestow on him. So he does what anybody left alone in the middle of nowhere with a ton of money would do; He takes it. This proves to be an ill-fated decision.
You see, the money (and the drugs) belong to someone, and that someone employs Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem). Chigurh is a coin-flipping, cold-blooded killer with a very dry, sardonic sense of humor, though there’s nothing funny about his existence. Chigurh has principles that transcend money or drugs. He’s been hired to do a job and it’s business, not personal, even though that’s what he seems to make it. Now the following sentence is not hyperbole whatsoever. With Chigurh, Bardem has created an instant icon of evil. Chigurh is one of the baddest men to haunt the history of cinema, and Bardem’s creepy, magnetic performance recalls the masterwork of Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs. Bardem’s work here really is that incredible. Chigurh is on a mission of death, and Bardem’s epic depiction of this unstoppable bogeyman is never anything less than riveting. His eyes are like two vacant black holes in the middle of his ridiculously pasty face, like a ghost seeing through a pair of UFO’s. Honestly, he made me afraid to look away, as if he’d put that cattle gun to my head if I dared to look away. If it sounds like Llewelyn’s odds of survival are insurmountable, that’s because they are. But that doesn’t mean the fight is one-sided.
As played by Brolin, Llewelyn Moss is a feisty but overmatched underdog. There’s a lot of fight left in this dog though, and the strength of his performance creates a satisfying balance of good and evil, without which the film wouldn’t be nearly as successful. Brolin makes us root for Llewelyn. We want to see him get away and live happily ever after with his wife. Our attachment to Llewelyn is a testament to the strength of Brolin’s performance here. Brolin is an actor who has spent the better part of his career working under the radar, but after his solid supporting work in Grindhouse, In the Valley of Elah and American Gangster, it’s clear he is enjoying a career renaissance of sorts. He’s having a breakout year and Llewelyn provides him the role of a lifetime. Thankfully, Brolin steps up to the plate and gives his finest performance. He’s so good in the lead that I’m willing to bet that even the Coen brothers were surprised and impressed by his performance. Expect to see a lot more of him as soon as this unfortunate writer’s strike ends.
So with Bardem and Brolin turning in career-best performances, what’s the problem? Enter the third piece of the puzzle, Tommy Lee Jones’ Sheriff Bell, who many view as the film’s protagonist. Sheriff Bell comes from a long line of lawmen. He became Sheriff at the age of 25 and can’t help but compared himself to the old timers who came before him. He’s teamed with a smart but goofy deputy played by Garrett Dillahunt, and together they stay hot on Chigurh’s trail as he hunts down Llewelyn. Sheriff Bell is the beating heart at the center of the film. His contemplative voiceover takes us into the story, same as it takes us out.
The film is thisclose to perfect, but it overreaches in its philosophical final reel, when the Coen brothers choose to remain too faithful to Cormac McCarthy’s source material and impart some metaphoric words of wisdom that don’t necessarily make for a satisfying conclusion. The problem is the deliberate structure of the film, and how it spends its running time building to a climactic confrontation that we’re never given. A character that we spend nearly 2 hours pulling for is killed off-screen, by fringe characters that we’re basically given the impression are irrelevant to the rest of the story. It makes for an incredibly frustrating cinematic experience, waiting for something that never comes. I’ve read a few reviews that compare the abrupt ending to the end of The Sopranos, only in that case, David Chase’s decision to cut to black was brilliant, whereas here, the anticlimax feels a bit like a cheat. And perhaps that’s where the brilliance of No Country for Old Men lies, in how it toys with the conventions of the genre and plays off its audience’s expectations, but personally, I thought the end fell a little flat and squandered the good will built up by the preceding two hours. I was expecting an epic confrontation of good and evil, but sadly, fate intervenes before we the Coens can get around to it. They make some very deliberate choices and I can’t say I agree with all of them but I admire them for having the sheer balls to attempt them.
You have to give the Coens credit for never ceding to the formula of the genre. They’re always pushing the boundaries of storytelling, and while I found Fargo and Blood Simple to be superior films, there’s no question that No Country for Old Men marks a significant return to form for the Coens, and stands as a major accomplishment for them as filmmakers. Their collaboration with cinematographer Roger Deakins is nothing short of majestic, and even more so than Brolin’s streak, it truly blows my mind that Deakins is behind this, In the Valley of Elah and the film he most deserves to be recognized for, The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford. The sweeping vistas he captures here are simply gorgeous. Another important contribution, or rather lack thereof, is Carter Burwell’s score. His name is listed in the production notes but I swear I can’t remember a single note of music. It was one of the first things that came to mind when the lights came up and I loved that creative choice. It’s also worth noting, since I missed the chance to review it last week, that Burwell’s score in Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead is his finest work since Fargo. I really hope he gets a nomination for his work in Lumet’s film.
What else did I love about the film? How about the scuff marks left on the floor by a cop who thrashes around violently as he’s being strangled by Chigurh. Or the thrilling dog chase that marks the second time in a week Brolin has appeared onscreen shooting a dog. And Bardem’s individual scenes with Woody Harrelson, Kelly Macdonald, and a superb scene between Chigurh and an elderly shopkeeper that is underlined by an atmosphere of intense dread, though the shopkeeper winds up being one of the few people who are allowed to keep their lives after crossing Chigurh’s path. I loved the incredible shootout at the hotel, and the overwhelming suspense when the desk clerk fails to answer the phone. And it physically pained me to watch Chigurh tend to a particularly nasty wound that’s so jaw-dropping it silences a mariachi band. It was also a delight watching Brolin and Harrelson’s back and forth in the hospital. I appreciated how the Coens got all the details right, like the squirt bottles of maple syrup in the restaurant scenes between Jones and Macdonald, who’s Scottish accent pokes through at times, though for the most part she’s successfully manipulates her voice into a convincing Texas twang. She also looks just like Kate Winslet might if she were from the Southwest.
In the end, No Country for Old Men is a sublime if disjointed meditation on fate. It’s about how you can’t stop what’s coming. Time moves on. People and their dreams die. The end finds a newly-retired Sheriff Bell contemplating a dream of his now that he has time to indulge and explore his subconscious. He’s outlived his father by 20 years but even in his dreams, he sees himself as a young man. The dream speaks his sense of purpose, and how that vain sense of purpose drives us all, and once it’s lost, it can never be found. It’s an interesting way to close the film but it feels forced and out of place with the rest of the film. Whose story are the Coens most concerned with telling? Which character do they feel the strongest allegiance to? Who are they trying to do justice by? Again, I don’t need movies to give me all the answers in a nice, neat package, but the end of No Country for Old Men leaves us with only more questions, and while it provides for a fascinating post-screening discussion with whoever you see the film with, it’s likely to leave a bad taste in your mouth. You have to chew on it and you can’t spit it right back out if you don’t like the taste at first. You have to savor it and let yourself digest it. But I’ve given this one more than enough time to marinate in my mind and there’s something about the end that just rubs me the wrong way. No Country for Old Men remains one of the year’s best films, but I predict it will also be the film to create the most heated debate. Its themes are universal (good, evil, fear of getting old and purposeless) but it’s certainly not for everyone. That said, it’s an absolute must-see. And while I see Bardem as a lock in the Supporting Actor category and the Coens as probable nominees for either writer or directing or perhaps both, I still don’t see this one as the Best Picture contender that most critics have it pegged as.
Real quick… I meant to review Lions for Lambs today but I have been swamped at the day job with Oscar season revving up. The long and short of it is that it’s a good movie and a bold first release for the new-and-improved United Artists, and while it featured solid performances from just about everyone and I could easily relate to Andrew Garfield’s apathetic college student, I still found the film’s message a little preachy. It’s not a particularly entertaining film, and it doesn’t say anything especially original, but it does engage its audience and I was surprised by how invested I became in its characters. I also think it has one of the best last-lines of the year, so keep your ears out for that.
That’ll do it for me, folks. I’ll be back next week with a very special, one-on-one exclusive interview with Southland Tales writer/director Richard Kelly, as well as the most epic review of that film that you’re likely to read on the Internet. ‘Til next time, this is MiraJeff signing off…
-
+ Expand All
-
spoiler alert.
-
can't wait for the movie. sounds like the coen's pulled no punches.
-
Nov 09, 2007 5:08:07 PM CST
"the most epic review of that film that you’re likely to read"
by iammrmonkey!
Okay, you've got my interest MiraJeff. Can't wait to see it!
-
want to see this movie.
-
The gong's too good for MiraWhiff. Bring out the giant gorilla arm.
-
You're also the guy who claimed that George Clooney is gay.
-
I can't remember a single note of film music I've heard this year, and I'm still trying to work out why some critics think this is a good thing. The most popular films of the last 20 years -- STAR WARS, TITANIC, LOTR -- all had sweeping symphonic scores. The best films of all time -- CITIZEN KANE, THE GODFATHER, CHINATOWN, etc. -- all have distinctive and prominent music scores. So I say: bring back big, unabashed music scores -- PLEASE.
-
Hey pal, a little spoiler warning might be nice... "A character that we spend nearly 2 hours pulling for is killed off-screen" ... c'mon man! Just because we might feel that is the direction the movie is going doesn't mean we KNOW it. The suspence is gone. Mira, do me a favor and read my talkback name!
-
Granted there's no point getting some mediocrity thrashing the hell out of an orchestra, but there are some good composers left: Thomas Newman, Alexandre Desplat, James Newton Howard and Old Man Williams, etc. But more to the point Carter Burwell is capable of a good score. So is anyone going to say that NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN wouldn't be even better with a distinctive, memorable score (doesn't need to be symphonic)?
-
Great great great great movie. One of best Coen Bros. films, and that's saying something.
Bonus!! Kelly MacDonald from Trainspotting as a completely convincing Texas girl. How'd that happen?? -
test
-
This movie is designed, like the book, for one reason - TO PISS OFF THE AUDIENCE! Don't tell me a story and skip the end of the major character. WHO DOES THAT - NOBODY, and that's why it's supposed to be cool! SUCKERS! Don't make excuses for it like, "You don't need to see it". It's not cool because nobody has done it before. there are reasons nobody has done it before - IT'S STUPID STORYTELLING! The emperors have no clothes - dorks!
-
I will pay money to see this! What better compliment can their be?
-
Normally I find your "reviews" to be little more than base synopses with a quick glimmer of opinion thrown in, so I don't read most of them anymore. It's OK - from what I understand, you see more movies than anyone on the planet. But this was a GREAT review.
Looking forward to seeing it this weekend, though I'm worried I'm going to agree with MiraJeff (in another good review) about the ending more than I do with Capone. Just a hunch. Thusly I've been disappointed in the Fall Movies I've Been Most Excited For (WE OWN THE NIGHT and, to a much lesser degree, AMERICAN GANGSTER, which was very good but didn't quite have the "UMPH" I was hoping for) and I'm praying this and THERE WILL BE BLOOD end that streak.
On a side note, this must be, like, the year of the Downer Epic, huh? -
Lots of quiet, I hope. Erie? Or 'Lebowski'?
-
Brody on the sinking boat as shark approaches - cut to Hooper and Brody swimming to land talking about how cool it was to blow up the shark with an oxygen tank. Don't show the audience the climax of the story - GREAT IDEA! Just because you have an original idea doesn't mean it's a good idea. Mirajeff and Capone follow the crummy idea like stupid sheep.
-
...thanks for the spoilers, you fucking moron. Retroactive props to Boll.
-
"One of best Coen Bros. films, and that's saying something."
I totally agree. It is ONE of their best. But it's not THE best. And that's the stance I'm taking. I feel like most critics who've written raves about this one are completely overlooking Fargo, the Coen brothers one true masterpiece, and Blood Simple, which is the obvious precursor to this film. Yes, I know the film is based on a novel, but I feel like No Country couldn't exist, at least not in its current form, without Blood Simple, which is an underrated entry in the Coens ouevre. -
Dude, chillax. I don't put the spoiler warning boxes around the article on the home page. If you're reading this site, you read at your own risk. I'm sorry if I blew it for you. It's hard to discuss my problem with the film without making mention of that scene, and I feel like most reviews I've read have been leaving it up to the reader to fill in the contextual blank, which is fairly obvious.
-
I'm not reading any of this till I see the movie, and I'm not sure I'll be able to see the movie in theaters. A pleasant evening to all of you.
-
It was great. I liked the ending, even though it was a little abrupt. I can see how they could have gone a different way with the ending, and made a different movie, but they made a specific choice. Someone near me uttered, "If I had known it was going to end just there...I would have listened to what he was saying" Hah, I kinda agreed with that dude. I was listening, but still it was like...wait, what?..and I had to replay it in my head.
-
is dating Martin Scorsese. Their sextape is online now!
-
But it's only because my psycho of an ex liked it so much. I wonder what she's doing now? Hmmmmm. She was great in bed.What are we talking about here again?
-
Great acting by both. Fantastic movie, until the last ten minutes. I thought the ending was a cop out.
-
he is correct in some of the anachronisms - i noticed them too. ATMs, some weird posters that were very current in design and font usage (OK i'm a production designer, i notice these things) and a few other things that i just can't believe were sloppy - these are the coens, with deakins shooting, so if they fucked up, they really fucked up there. but he is INCORRECT that kate winslet looks like a dude. i love kelly mac d too, but i dare you to kick kate outta bed for eating crackers.
-
or else i'd've done one post...but i think the 'cop out ending' was a definitive choice. yeah, it was a gyp, it was all literary-style and shit, but you know...you want a tidy ending, go see just about any other movie in the theatre. we ALWAYS get tidy endings. i don't mind something else to wrap my head around, plus tommy lee did a beautiful, low-key job with it.
-
WHAT??????
-
just coz it's a comedy doesn't mean it can't be a masterpiece!
-
****POSSIBLE SPOILER BELOW***
I'm not talking about the missing "payoff" at the end of the movie, I can understand how a *real* review can't skip that.
I'm talking about the death of a major protagonist then mentioning Tommie Lee Jones lives. Well, that narrows it down to...Josh Brolin?
THAT could have been avoided. I guess it could also be the wife. Probably both, from the tone of your review.
And shove your "read this site at your own risk" line straight up your ass, other reviewers have the courtesy to put spoiler alerts in their reviews or they just fucking know better. Though I've learned my lesson, I'll just skip your reviews from now on. -
Their movies are just so compulsively watchable, with a high level of excellence on all fronts - lyrical scripwriting, inspired directing, and always, ALWAYS top-notch performances. Their weaker films are still better than most filmmakers' strong ones.
-
Nov 09, 2007 10:15:38 PM CST
Mirajeff: it's Brolin's wound that silences the Mariachi band
by executor
It always troubles me when a reviewer completely mis-remembers parts of a movie. It puts everything else he says in question.
-
Nov 09, 2007 10:20:41 PM CST
Plus, the "ill-fated decision" is NOT him taking the money...
by executor
...it's Brolin's going back to bring the Mexican water. If he never went back, no one ever would have known who took the money. It's not greed that's Moss's undoing, it's compassion (which Chigurh has none of).
-
In that order. Can't wait to see this new one, though it's too bad the ending has been pretty much given away (not just here, by the way). And happy to hear Garret Dillahunt, who played TWO loathsome characters in Deadwood, is in this too!
-
Put that second, right after Miller's Crossing and before Raising Arizona! Heresy! Sorry bout that.
-
How nice. I shall disrupt it...NOW!
Socialism Socialism Socialism!
Abortions for all! -
Gooooooo Eagles!
-
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU FUCK A STRANGER IN THE ASS!
-
WTF is that movie even ABOUT?
-
Agree with Capone on this one. (My review is here: http://www.ghostinthemachine.net/005039.html) Also, Mirajeff, the mariachi band are silenced by BROLIN'S wounds, and I'm 99.44% sure [SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER] that the major off-screen death is perpetrated by Chigurh, not the Mexicans. They're just collateral damage...that's why the lock is missing in the hotel room when TLJ revisits that evening.
-
Barton Fink is about writer's block. In fact, the Coens' wrote it when they were stuck at a particularly thorny part of Miller's Crossing (also why Tom Reagan's building in Crossing is the Barton Arms.)
-
guess what? you're a moron. "wtf is that movie even about?" haha, it's about WRITING. and it's only top 3 best Coen bros movies.
-
Spoiled for me too. I don't have a problem with you talking about the freakin scene, but this site has spoiler boxes, therefore when I don't see one I have every reason to expect no freakin spoilers. Just saying you don't put them up is not actually an excuse you know, you're just being lazy. Are you saying that people who don't like spoilers should never read stuff with your name on it? If so let us know, happy to oblige here.
-
...but try to defend that BIZARRE final 15 minutes of the film. Fink walks into the painting on the wall? Goodman is the devil saying "Heil Hitler"? Christ, what a weird movie. The funniest thing to come out of the movie was the punchline it inspired on The Simpsons. I still like the film for it's first two thirds, but it's the only Coen movie that, for me, doesn't improve with multiple viewings. Adaptation is a MUCH better movie about writer's block, and it makes SENSE.
-
NCFOM is a damned masterpiece and one of the greatest thrillers of all time. It will rank as on of the Coens' best. But Bardem's performance is awe-inspiring. Much like Cuaron's Children of Men turned him from a great director to an important director, Bardem's performance in this will turn him from a great actor to an important actor. I'm talking greatest actor of his generation type work here. Sean Penn and Benicio get blown out of the water by this. He's that damn good in this.
-
"dude, chillax." asshole spoiler.
-
I agree with Capone that the death was handled in the right way, but for different reasons. When it happened, I had a reaction that was likely similar to MiraJeff's and Massa's reactions. I was stone-cold PISSED that a character in whom I'd invested so much could go out like that, so peripherally. I realized shortly afterward that this was the surefire way to achieve the most powerful emotional reaction possible in the viewer (and for McCarthy, the reader) at Moss's demise. It is SUPPOSED to make us uncomfortable, confused, and powerless because that's how it feels when someone you care about goes and you're not there to stop it or even see it. The powerlessness I felt was doubly effective because it emphasized the futility of Moss's getting mixed up in this, and, ultimately how his misguided compassion (with the water and for his wife) had no place in this fucked-up mess. Truly no country for old men. Then, as the next minutes unfolded and it became clearer that Chigurh was the one actually responsible for Moss's death, I saw even more certainly why it was necessary for the viewer not to be there when it happened. Our confusion when we see the Mexicans leaving the hotel gives way to an awesomely cold semi-confrontation between Chigurh and the sheriff. TLJ's internal conflict when he sees that he was *this* close to both catching his man and joining his father and all of the past sheriffs in the afterlife is one of the most note-perfect sequences I've seen all year. And, that we find out after the fact that Chigurh made off with the money (emphasized in the kicker by his bribe to the kids) made it all the more fucked up that he STILL hunted down Kelly MacDonald at the end. And the reason we don't see her, or Moss for that matter, get it drives home the unimportance of everyone in Chigurh's twisted path. Man, I was pulverized by this film. The more I think about it, the more intense it is. All that and a dog chase? Who could ask for more?
-
Slow down. Let me see the damn thing first.
-
I've probably seen 50+ screenings so far this awards season, and this is easily in my top 3 -- it is a phenomenal achievement. I'm so glad they've gone back to this genre -- I'm not a big fan of their Hudsucker-type stuff.
-
Hey Capone
I’m glad you understand the story so thoroughly that you are willing to say if someone is disappointed at the end it’s because they're "missing the point of the story entirely”. Well, congratulations on being so uber-smart to get it when other people didn’t. Assuming that you are not uber-smart and your comment is mere opinion stated as fact, I would say that seeing the certain unnamable scene ends a journey in which we are emotionally invested. The entire movie is so violent that your thoughts on what the Coen brother’s are trying to say by not showing the scene seem nonsensical. Why would they show any scenes of incredibly graphic violence then? Seeing the scene is certainly not a call for bloodletting, it’s a call for understanding and closure. While I still liked most of the movie, I do find the choices near the end to be unfortunate. It’s not a matter of missing the point it’s simply a disagreement with the statement.
-
you're absolutely right... i went back to my notes and it didn't mention the character's name, only 'wound silences mariachi band' and while i realize there were a lot of nasty wounds in this movie, i only remembered bardem's, but you're right, it was brolin's... sorry bro, it was 6am and i'm a bad proofreader, what can i say?
and soylent, dude, not every one of their films is a masterpiece... as you can read in my jesse james review, i think people have started throwing that word around a little too easily... the Coens are great and all, but they're definitely not infallible. And in case you were wondering Herc, Raising Arizona was my 3rd favorite Coens film before No Country, which snatched the bronze away. I'm a big fan of Raising Arizona but it's a little too all over the place in my opinion to be considered a masterpiece, but such is the Coens' brand of wackiness. Lebowski is 4, followed by Miller's Crossing and Barton Fink, etc.
as for you sevadro, yes, i am predicting Javier Bardem will win Best Supporting Actor this year. I think his only real competition is actually Casey Affleck in Jesse James, but I cede that Hoffman is widely rumored to be among the top contenders in that category for Charlie Wilson's War, which I haven't seen yet and don't expect to be very good, but I think Hoffman's phenomenal turn in Before the Devil Knows You're Dead is worthy of a Best Actor nod. -
***SPOILERS*** I generally don't like it when movies play bullshit tricks with your head. I can appreciate the 'good guy' not winning in the end but to not see him go down swinging is a complete fucking copout. What is the point, then? We are supposed to root for the assassin? Yayyyy, crazy Mexican dude kills the wife needlessly! Yayyy. Fuck that. I'll keep my money on this one.
-
Sounds to me like it is "Don't be nice to people or you'll get fucked in the end." NOT the message we need.
-
You won't be disappointed.
-
Haven't seen the movie, but I've read the book, and as bleak and fucked up as it is, the "moral" of the story (although I hesitate to call it that) is that the increased presence of just flat out evil in the world (as represented by Chigurh) that can only really be stopped a bit at a time, here and there (if at all - which is why Chigurh ISN'T stopped) is making the world into a place that "Old Men" like Ed Tom can't figure out any more. The book's most important character (I won't say protagonist, because I think Ed Tom, Llewelyn, and Chigurh are all protagonists) is Ed Tom; it's overall a tale of how this fucked up set of events has made him feel like a man out of time, unable to measure up to the "old timers" like his father and grandfather. He tries his best, but dad and granddad didn't have the wholly irrational force of nature that is Chigurh to deal with, and he feels defeated by it. The end-story deaths take place without being narrated (or shown, in the movie) to emphasize just how meaningless and pointless we all are in the face of - for lack of a better term - true evil. Kind of a downer, but then this is Cormac McCarthy.
-
I hope this one works as I love Cormac McCarthy's books. Best film of the year so far is 3:10 To Yuma, IMO. I hope this is up there with that!
-
Dude. I had to finally register after reading your review. I don't think I have to tell you what a tool you are for completely ruining this film.
What I do need to say is that if you can't "express" you feelings about a movie's ending without giving it away, then you should not be reviewing films. It's completely ametuer. Capone managed to invoke his feeling without telling us EXACTLY what happened. From now on if I see your name attached to anything, I'm skipping it regarless if it's marked by a spoiler tag, because I'll already know that you probably blew the movie in one sentence. You should consider another line of work. -
Not the whole movie, not by a long shot. But what is wrong with the film isn't really the ending, or the way it ends, or the way something isn't shown, etc...its their inexperience in adapting a book to film. The whole story works great in print but on film, we get ACTION, DEATH, ACTION, ACTION, SUSPENCE, DEATH, ACTION, SUSPENCE, DEATH, DEATH, DEATH....and then two monolouges. Now Barry Corbin and Tommy Lee Jones are wonderful actors. But these long ass monologues after what came before...I just started to zone out...I know there was importance in what they were saying, the themes of the movies were embodied in the words. But I found I was in whiplash mode. I had to go home and grab the book and re-read those soliloquies again (the movie adheres very closely to the novel, which is cool, except, as I said, the shift in tone at the end worked literarily, but not film-wise). But for thier first time in adapting printed source material, they did a really fine job for most of it.
-
Why isn't K-Mac getting mad props for her performance? She only essayed a perfect trailer trash accent when she's got a Scottish brogue as thick as my cock. Plus, she adds a poignant gravitas to what's arguably the best scene in the movie. Kelly MacDonald, word!
-
Nov 10, 2007 11:37:18 AM CST
I hate that "you just don't get it because you're dumb!"..
by osmosis jones
...argument. I "get" and somewhat enjoy Barton Fink...for about it's first two thirds. Then, it just becomes tiresomely inscrutable and pretentious, disappearing up it's own "We're making Art!" ass. I've watched it about four times, too, so it's not like I haven't tried my best to enjoy it. There's symbolism, and then there's "let's throw a bunch of weird stuff up there for no reason" self-indulgence. Hey, I'd still give Fink a B- grade just for it's lofty intentions, but I just don't enjoy it as much as the Coens' other films (yes, even their "sell-out" efforts like Intolerable Cruelty and The Ladykillers). I'm a smart guy. I fucking HATED Transformers and Pirates III. But that doesn't mean I "have" to like Fink otherwise I'm a drooling moron who watched American Idol.
-
*SPOILER I GUESS* the actual good guy isn't brolin's character, it's tommy lee's. brolin's moss has a lot of shades of grey; damn he did a good job! anyhow, if you accept that it's not going to play out in an accepted fashion, you might enjoy it...
-
don't worry guy, we all love the big mac here!
-
...can you feel the hate?
-
It's more fatalist than that. Please, try to invest some blind faith in this. It's worth it.
-
Seriously. I don't want to be a pretentious fuck, but everything has a reason. Are you telling me that you equally don't like "Brazil" because of the off-the-fucking-wall last 25 minutes?
-
Yeah, some stuff gets spoiled, but at least to me it's pretty obvious what's going to happen. The interest is in HOW it's going to happen. Are you bothered that Miller gave away the ending of "Death of a Salesman" through the title, or any of the opening monologues of Shakespeare's tragedies?
True, MiraJeff is not Miller or Shakespeare, but there's a sense of inevitability in the book and the movie of NCFOM that spells it out pretty early on. -
...and it was fantastic. Capone is totally on point but I can understand how some may find the last 10 minutes frustrating. The tension and dread (which is sort of boiling over throughout the film) just suddenly dissipates...much like the story's characters. It's not a conventional way of ending a tale but it's something McCarthy has managed to turn into a trademark that always contains more layers than it appears. The Coen Brothers did well by it.The meaning of TLJ's dream will be what folks ponder afterwards. While the ending scene is rather abrupt, I think it will make people want to listen again to what was said and how it relates to the rest of the film. This movie definitely had people talking afterwards and I was glad to hear that it was mainly about the overall meaning as well as that of the protagonists.Great stuff.
-
Quote: "I was expecting an epic confrontation of good and evil, but sadly, fate intervenes..."Yeah, well welcome to the ungregarious and merciless world of Cormac McCarthy.
-
...I like the ending even more, and I think it reinforces how this movie will stand the test of time to become a classic. The abruptness of the ending is deliberately jarring, somewhat, and drives home the meaning of the title.
-
I understand what you're saying, but not everyone read the book. Saying that protaginist is killed offscreen is unnesscessary. He could have said something like... "The film's ending was abrupt, or anti-climatic." He didn't have to say WHAT happened. If it's established in the beginning of the film, I want the Coen's to tell me that.. while I'm watching it.. not because someone was at a loss for words in a review. There are some films that have their spoilers built in.. Death of a Salesman, Titanic, In Cold Blood.. etc.. This film doesn't qualify. I will still see it of course. Just a little less excited for it.
-
I almost fell off my chair when I read that. Thanks, TB.
-
After lurking/reading this site for a few years now, I was compelled to register for talkbacks today simply to voice my agreement with you. MiraJeff was extremely irresponsible in his review. There aren't that many rules a film reviewer is called to adhere to, with the exception of a little common sense and respect for those who actually take the art of cinema seriously. "Not really a spoiler" my ass.
-
tom, the minor-jeff thing is really catching on, keep it up...
and hard 8, dude, i understand what you're saying and i apologize, but it's not my fault that whoever posted this review forgot to put a spoiler tag around it, i don't have editorial access to the site, plus i tried to dance around the spoiler but your spidey sense filled in the blanks,,, either way, i don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to... hehehe (what movie?) -
and clearly, i'm not a very good dancer, forgive me
-
Most of his reviews are shit, people call it, and he pathetically tries to defend himself. Get rid of him.
-
Quit making excuses for it. Don't blame the person who posted your "review."
-
Don't take my comments to heart. I'm just some opinionated jackass on a forum...
If I had seen the movie, Iwould have loved the review, so it's not all bad. -
What a surprise.
-
What a concept!
-
I should apologize for the curtness of my first post, I was probably a little harsh. The frustration of reading the spoiler was fresh in my noodle! I enjoy your writing style itself MiraJeff, for what it's worth.
-
Looking For Mr. Goodbar. Tom Berenger chopping up Diane Keaton slasher movie style, that creepy strobe pan out of diane's cold dead face. Fucked me up good man.
-
...NCFOM does have built-in spoilers, at least if you've ever seen a thriller in your life. But I respect your response, and thank you for phrasing it in a way not-so-assholey. (AICN TBers, take note.)
-
No violent ending. Just a still shot of our "heroes" running to their slaughter, sad music and the sound of hundred of rifles.
-
apologies
-
That fuckin train came outta nowhere!!
-
L Moss would waste Anton in a ridiculous slow-mo shoot-out, split the cash with Tommy Lee, and open a hair salon named after his ole' lady.
-
After said ridiculous slo-mo shoot out, a dying L Moss begs Tommy Lee to get the cash to his Ole'lady, which Tommy Lee does, and then she opens a hair salon name after her Ole' man. which is kinda cool as Lewellen (sp) is a pansy sounding name in the first place.
-
End of discussion. Every other movie they've made pales in comparison.
The trust is spoken. -
heh heh
-
This ending has nothing in common at all with the Sopranos ending, besides it's abruptness. When the screen went black to end the film I almost jumped out of my seat and shouted "What the fuck?!". But I caught myself, and just sat in my seat, and it all started to come to me. Started to see what it was that just hit me. I'm not saying i've figured out if this is a masterpiece or not, I'm not sure if it's even better than good. But Sopranosesque it is not. The reaction in the room where I saw Sopranos was just dumbfounded anger immediately filling the room. People walking out of No Country were just zapped, and in a good way.
-
...Man, did y'all miss the point.IMMENSE SPOILERSIMMENSE SPOILERS As I left the theater, I overheard some guy griping about how Tommy Lee Jones' character had "no point." He liked the movie up until the end, and then it completely lost him. Why didn't Tommy Lee Jones do anything? Were viewers like this guy paying any attention to the dialogue or the overarching themes? This film is about the harsh and inescapable realities of life, particularly the idea that time catches up to every single one of us eventually. Even if Josh Brolin's Moss were to escape with the money, there's no escaping his ultimate fate. It's not just a case of needing to think of Tommy Lee Jones' sheriff as a "Greek chorus," although I do think that is useful. What I thought was most valuaable for appreciating this film is to see it as a sort of modern SEVENTH SEAL. Yes, Javier's killer is subject to the laws of the physical world, but has there ever been any character more Grim Reaper-like without carrying a scythe? He treats whether people live or die like fate with his coin, he tells us exactly how the tale will end before it does, and he is virtually indestructible (witness the tease of the car accident that made me fear for a moment that there might be a major misstep of accidental justice). This is such an excellent film that is so thematically rich, and the idea that we needed to see some shootout at the end (when we were already given one of the most brilliant gunfights I've ever seen on film) is ludicrous. You do realize that by not showing the gunfight the death is presented as established fact, right? To see Brolin's character gunned down in an active struggle in which it seems he has a chance to prevail would be to claim that we exert some sort of control over fate, which runs contrary to every thematic fiber of this film.The fact that Javier's Reaper shows up at the end to collect the sweet, innocent wife and that honorable men like Jones' sheriff try their best but ultimately futilely rail against the universe are all that we need to know. END SPOILERS END SPOILERS
-
that the ending in the book as well as the movie is meant to provoke thought regarding the nature of choice and consequence, especially if that choice is made without the full consideration of overarching consequences for not only one self, but those around us. It's easier to be fed an acceptable answer than to figure out, and be responsible for, our own choice. Being angry or put off by the ending is a normal response to the frustrating reality that there are no neat and tidy answers to these questions in real life, and so we have been conditioned to expect these answers for our seven bucks and two or so hours of our time. I would imagine the same response in a church if the orator/preacher/pastor were to tell the congregation. "you will all die, and there is no way of knowing what to expect until you get there, Bless you all suckers."
-
1. The Coens adaptation was extremely faithful which leads me to believe that they share Cormac McCarthy's worldview at least regarding matters of moral choice.
2. McCarthy is not one to shy away from depictions of violence. -
I could be totally off base with this opinion, but MY point to MIRAJEFF and others who share his opinion regarding the ending is this: Don't wast time being frustrated with the ending, dig a little deeper and ask why the artists chose to end the movie/book this way. What does it mean to the overall message of the story.
-
Minor sticking point for me. Harrelson mentions an ATM, and I thought ATM's didn't emerged until the late 80s.
-
...we don't owe them a thing. Can't wait to see this movie as, despite the contentious final reel, i'm pretty sure it will be great. I hope they're still at it in twenty years.
-
Amazing film - especially the kid with the hula hoop in the street, brings me to tears of laughter every time. My Coen top 3 are: Fargo, Hudsucker Proxy, Raising Arizona. Looking forward to catching No Country, nice to hear the guys are back on form.
-
I thought the same thing. I remember them being around in the 80s, but certainly didn't even start calling them ATMs until sometime in the early 90s. I think ATMs are originally from Texas, but I have serious doubts about there being ATMs in Eagle Pass (which is a straight-up BFE border town where ATMs are probably STILL hard to find) that were also called that in 1980. Took me out of the movie for a second too.
Historically, though, yeah. ATMs were in existence. Whatever. -
is how tommy lee lets mccarthy's words roll. i've been thinking about it for 2 days. there are some actors born to say dialogue written by certain writers and jones was made to do mccarthy. not only the last scene but the opening monologue, which is exquisite; just listen to how he makes the words echo the landscape.
-
The first ATM I used was in Pittsburgh where I was a freshman in college. It was 1978.
-
First one in 1967, in the town that I live in, from the bank that I use.
-
Nov 11, 2007 1:39:18 PM CST
"...but try to defend that BIZARRE final 15 minutes of the film.
by homerofthesea
Barton Fink is the story of a man, Barton Fink, who claims to want nothing but to depict the stuggles of the common man. But in fact, he has no interest in the common man, or any man, but himself. He spends the entire movie oblivious to the obvious fact that the man across the hall (or in the next room) is a serial killer. (So why are we subjected to those confounding last fifteen minutes? Because "You don't listen!!!") As for the beach scene, maybe it's supposed to mean that instead of isolating himself up in his room, Barton is finally going out into the world he wants to write about. Or, in the alternative, it could just be artsy horseshit. Or maybe none of it makes sense.
-
Excellent point about TLJ's delivery of the dialog. It may come as no surprise that TLJ was allegedly in possession of the rights to BLOOD MERIDIAN (which is supposedly being made by Sir Ridley Scott and William Monahan). I've got a feeling ol' Tommy Lee is a big fan of McCarthy.
-
i'd forgotten about the whole 'blood meridian' thing. i hope ridley doesn't spaz out over it. i do enjoy him but he often, well, spazzes out. there's some line that the sheriff delivers like 3/4 of the way through the film - it's something throwaway - where i was like 'where is my rewind button i want to hear that again and again and again' - because it was just so fucking perfectly done. and garret dillahunt was spot-on as well, he has the rhythms beautifully, just as beautifully as he did on 'deadwood'.
-
I just saw this today and I was blown away! As far as the ending goes I had no problems with it. This is one of the best things the Coen's have done in years.
-
I just saw this today and I was blown away! As far as the ending goes I had no problem with it. This is one of the best things the Coen's have done in years.
-
I TOTALLY agree with you - I had much the same feeling listening to the opening narration. It felt like McCarthy's words were lifted right off the page and delivered with PERFECT tone.Garrett Dillahunt was a pleasant surprise. I forgot that he had a role and I was glad to see him doing even more great work. (His really shined in his 2 roles on DEADWOOD.)Another great addition was Barry Corbin (aka Maurice J. Minnifield!). I thought he had the same feel and tone as TLJ.I know what you mean about Ridley Scott's possible handling of BLOOD MERIDIAN. I'm actually nervous about it. I think it has the potential to be one of the most dark and thematically disturbing films ever made. (The Judge should make Anton Chigurh look like a choir boy.) Here's hoping he gets it right.
-
Good film, far from great. But don't worry, you will still be considered smart if you didn't love this film.
-
Nov 12, 2007 12:01:55 AM CST
You people who use words incorrectly in efforts to appear intell
by wyld stallyns rules
-
Person who enjoys filmmakers' movies = "apologist."
Arguably unsuccessful film = director automatically qualifies as "talentless hack."
Spider-man 3 = "OMGzorz111worst movie EVAR."
Remake of any random bad kid show = "raped my childhood."
-
=== SPOILERS FOLLOW ===
Disagreeing with Mostholy and others: There are some pretty clear clues that Chigurh did not kill Moss. TLJones only noticed the missing lock while revisiting the room, and AC was inside, recovering the money. The Mexicans found Moss first and took care of him but couldn't find the cash. If AC had done the deed, TLJ would have noticed the missing lock when he was there earlier. Also, if AC did Moss, why wouldn't he have taken the cash then? We were given no clues that AC did it, but plenty that it was the Mexicans, who found out the hotel address from Moss's mother in law.
Also, for Executor: The bad decision was indeed going back with the water, but it's not true that Moss would necessarily have gotten away with the cash because of the transponder. it didn't have a large range but you never know. -
btw, Executor -- if you hate movie reviewers who get details wrong, you should read Mick LaSalle's review of "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" in the SF Chronicle. He got the chronology of the movie completely backwards and spoiled the plot. He writes that Jim Carrey plays a guy who starts dating a woman and then gets a package in the mail letting him know that the two of them were once lovers but that they'd had their memories of each other erased. Mick Lasalle is an ass.
-
posts something (I would call it a review, but it is actually worse than a Post) And no, MJ, you're not a good dancer- it's almost as bad as your boxing (puddle of puke, ring any bells?)
-
was The Blair Witch Project- when some idiot woman on Scottish TV actually described the final shot frame by frame.
-
Speaking of apologists, I think you should apologize for that useless post.
-
let's make out.
-
Ha! Sure. You're a hot babe though, right? :^)
-
yes, i am one of like 3 bitches on this site. a grasping, devious minority. ;)
-
AC did take the cash: it is hammered home when he bribes the kid at the end with a 100 dollar bill. His presence also accounts for the dead Mexicans at the hotel. If Moss was indeed at the pool drinking beer (as his final resting place indicates), it is highly doubtful he went on a killing rampage all the way up to the room.
-
...of "Eternal Sunshine." I'd hardly call that a spoiler. We are meant to believe that is their first time dating, and as a former member of the press (who did the junket for this specific film at the time) that was pretty much the given synopsis of the film. Now, if LaSalle had *SPOILER, I guess* given away the fact that they had ALREADY met and that the OPENING took place after the events of the flim, that'd be different.
Either way, LaSalle is a great writer whose just happens to have a taste in movies I consider very wrong-headed. But goddamn is he funny. -
I disagree that theme suddenly shows up at the end. Once Anton makes his first appearance, there is not a single moment in the film that did not leave me anticipating his reaper-like presence. Additionally, I would not describe the sheriff's part as "extraneous comic relief" at all. His monologue that opens the film and sets the tone is hardly comedy and certainly qualifies as cynical if not fatalistic. Yes, he certainly does bring levity to the proceedings, but it is often a levity that has a morbid and world-weary tone to it. For example - I forget the exact line - he quips to the deputy that if the initial bloodbath isn't trouble than trouble is coming. As for being neurotically and unnecessarily dreary - what can I say? I'm a neurotically and unnecessarily dreary guy, and I appreciate that this film does not pull any punches tonally in that respect.
-
Well, it's good to have you and the other two (?) here. In all your grasping deviousness.
-
Stare at a blank wall. Stare deeper. No: Deeper... See if you can find the message buried underneath, the meaning of man, and of our existence. It's there, just keep staring...
-
It shows a lowest-common-denominator bullying if you try to convince others that your opinion on what others find meaning in is the be-all-and-end-all. True, some of the "meaning" people could possibly be doing the same to you, but to win a figurative fight, just rise above.
-
...and saw Fa Fa Fooey's face.So, I punched a hole in it.
-
...Best Picture regardless of how overrated it is.
-
...I'm just giving you a hard time. It's too early to tell but I'd actually be surprised if this won Best Picture. But to each his own.Node32774 - that line by Barry Corbin did get a huge laugh.
-
that's exactly what LaSalle did -- expose that they'd already met. In his own words (http://tinyurl.com/2zf499): "No sooner have they made their first halting steps toward romance when packages arrive at their respective addresses. They're from a scientific institute and contain a tape of each talking to a doctor about their relationship. Apparently, they were once lovers, but they had such a difficult, unhappy time that they each had the memory of the other permanently erased."
This is wrong all around. The tapes actually arrived at the *end* of the film (when kirsten dunst mails them out); it's the envelopes to carrey's friends that arrive in the beginning (bearing news that she'd had his memory erased.)
Mick may be funny at press junkets, but when told that a review of his is totally wrong (in a nice way of course) he's pretty pig-headed. -
Oh, balls. The guy with the air hammer is just such a force of nature that no matter what Brolin does he is going to die. Excuse me? Another fucking copout. EVERY bad guy in the movies is portrayed as an ultimate badass...that's why they are the bad guy! Are you people telling me that the faggoty-hairdo killer is actually supernatural? "No matter what he does Brolin is fated to fail." Why? Have you never seen a movie where people rip off criminals and get away with it? Is this some new AICN movie rule? If Brolin had killed the dying drug guy, swiped the money, put it in a duffel bag and then grabbed his wife and split...then bingo, he's golden. I hate when characters do stupid things (Giving the guy water. Hello, if you are ballsy enough to hork the money you wouldn't be so nice as to go give the asshole some water). It all just sounds stupid to me and I don't really want to go watch a movie telling me that the world sucks. No shit. I want to go to the movies to ESCAPE from the daily occurence of assholes winning and nice guys finishing last. But that's just me.
-
From your first message, I had kind of assumed that you were up in arms about LaSalle saying this was their first meeting, on the train. This is what happens when I do drunken talkback--I miss a few things. Yes, he was an ass, because we as critics and entertainment journalists were asked to basically just say that they met (on the train) and next thing we know they're broken up and Carrey receives the letter about Clementine, resulting in his memory-erase trip to the clinic. Nothing more. No embargo or anything. Just a kind request from our friends at Focus.
-
Nov 13, 2007 11:47:09 AM CST
Wow, Binky, you just took cinema down a couple notches. SPOILER
by lenny nero
If you haven't even seen the movie, try not to come bitching to us about escapism and other such things. The way the movie (and book) is goddamned written and structured, we find out pretty early on that Chigurh is in fact virtually indestructible, despite having gone against many a foe (and encountering many a wound). It's not a "newe AICN movie rule." That's how the specific movie is. You know what they say about assuming things. This is not a regular movie. It's (as I've mentioned before) a story about fatalism, how we're all destined for our own things no matter what we do to try to avoid it. Chigurh is an honest-to-God Grim Reaper on Earth.
The water thing isn't as bad as you think it is, because Chigurh has other ways of tracking the fucker than just sight. But you don't want to hear about that. You just want to "ESCAPE from the daily occurence [sp] of assholes winning and nice guys finishing last." Why even bother watching good movies at all? There's a pretty big list of films with downer themes we'd all recommend in order to enjoy film at its finest, but according to your need to escape/ignore what somebody has to say about the world, good or bad, it would fall upon deaf ears. -
Somebody needs a lesson in subjectivity.
-
to me it was more than just breaking an agreement with the studio; Mick got some pretty major plot points out of order. You might have missed his review of "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid": "...Newman and Redford play a pair of bandits who start a gang and whose courage is then tested by an ill-fated sprint through a hail of Bolivian Army gunfire."
(oh I meant to add: -== SPOILER!!! ==-)
-
The first 3/4 of the film is brilliant; the climax and the last 1/4 are utter shit. I don't need everything force fed to me, but I do like having SOME sort of plot resolution at the end of a film. Llewelyn's death is offscreen and totally anti-climactic; it was a huge jerk-off with no ejaculation. (or "happy ending".) I wasn't even sure that it was his body we were looking at in the hotel. (I was expecting a shot of the body at the morgue would confirm or deny that, but we don't even get that!) Honestly, I'm not even 100% sure that Kelly McDonald was even killed at the end. I assume she was, but who knows? Maybe Chigurh spared her 'cause she refused to call the coin? And what the fuck was Maurice from "Northern Exposure" doing in the film? And why did he have such a long speech that went nowhere? Did Chigurh get the money? I assume that he did, 'cause the vent in the hotel room that Moss was in was opened and he paid that kid at the end $100 for his shirt, but really, who knows? (And I guess the money's the Maguffin and ultimately irrelevant, but come on, throw us a bone!) So, the first 3/4 of the film was a brilliant, funny, and suspenseful crime thriller. The last 1/4 was a confusing, philosophical mess. If you have to go see it, go with extremely lowered expectations...
(oh, and my favorite Cohen Bros. films are: All of them. Except this one: No country for bad movies!)
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts