Even if it does go shit 2/3rds in it's still the event I've waited 1/2 my life four (ever since I first saw Bloodsimple as a kid) because although i love me some Coens in all their comedy quirkiness, recently they have sucked pretty bad for the Coens and nothing they ever did after BloodSimple hit me 1/2 as hard as that motherfucker did! I got addicted to that like yung-uns are addicted to textmassaging or Myspacing or crack! although Fargo was almost there it just wasn't 1/2 as dark as BLoodSimple.

Are you sure you're not thinking of BLOOD MERIDIAN there?

It might be that he read the book and was just pissed off with the way the Coens adapted it.

I don't get that impression, though. Without giving anything away, suffice to say that a key character in the book is dealt with in a way that challenges traditional narrative expectations. It certainly took me by surprise when I read the book, but it's also clear that it was meant to. It's part of the way the story is told and, in my view at least, completely of a piece with the themes of the book.

I'm inclined to think that Massawyrm is shooting at the wrong target here. He may have a legitimate beef with Cormac McCarthy but it sounds as though the Coens only sin here is fidelity to the book.

If the movie doesn't make sense on its own then I'm not wasting my time on it.

You "read the book" types are elitist sh8heads.

And Harry calling Massa retarded is hypocrisy. It appears to me that Harry has the mentality of a twelve-year old.

"the film is about how the evils of this world are over-whelming." oooooooh!!! I'll bet you write "life sucks" on your Trapper Keeper.

But I read it again about 6 months ago, and the thriller stuff still worked great (why the fuck didn't he blast Chigger when he had him?) but I also really liked the Sherriff chapters and the ending felt just fine.

I'll be calling in sick the day this fucker opens.

More than the skip in time, it's really gonna bother my wife that

Spoiler

Moss's wife dies thinking he cheated on her with the little hussy. Gaurantee that'll bug her more than skipping ahead and Moss being dead.

In my view, it's one of McCarthy's finest, possibly even his finest. And it sounds like the Coens have nailed the adaptation.

But if you want to talk McCarthy misfires, read The Road. Since making Oprah's list it's probably one of his best known, and in my view the weakest. I'm as big a fan of dystopian SF as the next AICN talkbacker but The Road was implausibly, hyperbolically bleak, even for McCarthy. Also, there are only so many synonyms for 'grey' and 'ash'.

And I don't know if NCFOM is a "misfire" - it's great for a while but certainly loses steam. Even when it's great, though, it's "small" great. One of his minor works, as the Jeff Daniels character in the Squid and the Whale would say.

I know beginning writing classes tell you not to speak in the first person, but that's because those classes are CRITICAL writing classes (i.e. you actually critique something using facts and logic, character or plot as your reasoning behind your critique.) Here, all we get is kneejerk emotionalism in reviews substituting for film criticism.

Not that I'm commenting on whether your review was spot on or not (and I've enjoyed your opinions in the past) but you've been doing this long enough that you really need to move past the amateur hour of taking YOUR opinions and trying to make it seem like the world is in sync with you because you use the second person.

well, you didn't actually say it, but it's a fucking spoiler, isn't it?

the fact that this review does not have a spoiler box around it is much more retarded than Massawyrm could ever be. come on, Harry. name calling is fun, but if you like this movie, don't you want to preserve, in the spirit it was intended, a huge artistic ending like this seems to be?

SPOILER BOX!!!!

but isn't complaining about that a bit like saying that the astronauts surviving in Apollo 13 is a Hollywood ending? if the Coens (or the "Coen's", as Massa seems to call them repeatedly) had taken this novel with an ambiguous and ambitious ending, and turned it into a normal Hollywood shoot-up ending, they might have got Massa's vote, but certainly their fans who appreciate them pushing the envelope, to say nothing of the fans of the source material, would have been disappointed. which do you think is more important to them, in terms of reching their own artistic goals? why would you ever expect them to take the easy, traditional road? at least do a LITTLE research on th source material before writing such a scathing review.

I don't always agree with Massa, but I always tried to respect him. but this petulant, poorly researched, and ultimately misguided review has really dropped him down a notch, in my opinion.

not that Massa will care what I think, but you know, just saying. I'll take the Coen brothers, with their eschewing of the norm, and their sense of adventure and obligation to cinema as an art form. you can have Transformers...

or is it "Transformer's"?

Reminds me of Glengarry:

"I find out whose fuckin' cousin you are..."

Oh, and neither Massa nor MiraJeff can write worth a damn, so if you really think so little of their work, why do you allow them to stink the place up?

Read this and see how it reads..."It becomes a film that depresses you. Then it makes you angry. Not because the material moves you – " Don't try to tell me how it impacts me when you don't know me; that's what you're doing, even if you don't realize it.

And while you have a right to approach a review from any angle you wish--free country and all that--to write a review of a film with no mention made of the fact it comes from a book is lazy and misleading. It's not fair to criticize filmmakers for sticking close to the source material (when that's what they have obviously done here) unless you are willing to take your complaint to the source. I can't think of a more important quality for a reviewer to have than fairness. Honesty and integrity are the hallmarks of a good critic. Ignorance and weakness are the hallmarks of a bad one.

Kinda like 'gay' which used to mean happy, then homosexual and now it means bad AND homosexual as two separate connotations.

If you are in the confrontational mood, perhaps call out Harry for essentially stating that Massa and Mira's opinions are incorrect as a matter of fact. That is the kind of shit that folk get banned for round these parts.

Funnily enough some of my best friends are differently-abled and loved the stuffing out of NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN's ending! So there, Harry. ... Actually, I'm just kidding. I wouldn't be friends with tards!

And calling things "gay" to mean "bad" is just as ignorant.

Harry's welcome to his opinions, as are Massa and MiraJeff. And so am I. And I think people who use "retarded" as an insult are ignorant.

As for the differently-abled biz, sorry, but if I have a handicap, then that means I am handicapped. Just like everyone else in the world.

The book is fantastic and the film is fantastic. I saw it at Cannes, and the audience had the exact opposite reaction Massa described in his review. Different continent, though.

The novel provokes a lot of passionate reactions, too. Some people cannot stand the way McCarthy punctuates his dialogue, and what some feel is his hurried pace through descriptions, as though he was only interested in writing speach. He's a minimalist, you take it or leave it, and that's what's great about the film version: it was made by people with their own distinctive style, which also provokes passionate reactions. I don't know if it's a perfect film, but it is a perfect adaptation, that's for sure.

As for the Oscar talk, who gives a fuck? They gave one to that fat chick from dreamgirls, and they named crash best movie of the year that saw Munich, A History of Violence, and Doom. Just kidding with that last one, there. Keep 'ya on your toes. Damn Oscars are nothing but a prom night popularity contest among people who are so thin-skinned, that hearing someone called a "retard" is reason enough to call Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

But you know what they say about the prom queen; she's nothing special at all, unless you're fucking her.

I was lucky enough to have the kind of parents that'd drive 100 miles to see a no name flick their kid read about in Fangoria of all places. We made a trip to the city to see Blood Simple when I was about 13 or 14 and I fucking loved it. It'll take quite a few more Intolerable Crueltys and Lady Killers before I give up on them. Unfortunately, if history holds, we'll probably get plenty more.

Grow a thicker skin THIS IS TAAAAALKBAAACK the home of personal abuse, unsustainable opinions, and petty on-line fueds. Oh, and movies get mentioned occasionally.

How've you been- still grinding that Bay axe? Still a dick?

Pete Best is a better drummer than Ringo. Mind you, almost anyone is a better drummer than Ringo.

But Ringo is still cool. Unlike McCartney- who is a po-faced cunt.

Massawyrm and MiraJeff complain about an adaptation of a book they haven't read and you bring up Bakshi and Jackson to DEFEND them?

Wow, friendly fire much?

The essential complaint here is that the Coens adaptation of No Country for Old Men left out what would in conventional terms be regarded as a key piece of the narrative. Except that that is exactly how the book deals with it. It would be like adapting Macbeth and showing Lady Macbeth's death scene, whereas the fact that her death offstage is a critical part of the story.

Ultimately, you guys can moan all you want. The fact that you're moaning about the ending doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that it's ignorant fucking moaning.

if it's bad in the book, but the adaptation is good, then you can praise the adaptation.

but if it's good in McCarthy's book, and the Coen bros adaptation of the book is dead-on, then you can't criticise the adaptation can you now?

clearly you haven't read the book either, dude. more fucking ignorance.

It wasn't a pun- it was a straight up insult. You clearly are still a dick.

Those of you who think Massa wasn't happy with the ending because it wasn't an explosion are simply mischaracterizing his point of view to make your point of view seem so much smarter.

If the books ending was so satisfying for everyone, then there may possibly be a cinematic equivalent that could be true to the nature of the book and yet be satisfying.

The fact that many of you equate not liking the ending with desiring a Big Happy Ending leads me to believe the great lot of you were educated in Public Schools and have very remote critical thinking skills left in your mushy skulls.

People here are pissed at Massa because he didn't know the book ended the same way.

My point is that if the Coens had produced a movie that justified missing the climax with the same effectiveness as the book then Massa would have enjoyed the complete film with the same amount of hyperbole.

I believe you were looking for "all who watch".

I have no idea what that means. At a guess, I think you mean that I cannot insult you any more than I insult myself. Seeing as I don't make a habit of insulting myself, I can now prove you wrong.

You fucking disgrace to the species.