No Country for Old Men

MattinSTL said:
Considering TWBB's ending receiving praise on this forum, I'm surprised that there's any dissension from the same people. I see both movies as having a similar ending...
Click to expand...

The difference is that No Country is a genre film, a thriller, and with genre films there are certain expectations the audience wants met. One of them being a clear resolution (preferably with evil being defeated). In a sprawling character based epic like There Will Be Blood, there is no central plot device (people chasing a money bag), so no expectation of how the story will resolve itself.
 
Batutta, I was thinking of the Coens making some pretty bad movies lately. The Ladykillers, Intolerable Cruelty (was that theirs?), The Man Who Wasn't There - I even thought O Brother kinda sucked. I think they just didn't know that they had another Fargo on their hands so they tried to be too experimental.

These guys are amazing filmmakers. They just seem to have a quirkiness to their taste that never quite feels right unless they do one of these simple "someone has money and someone else wants it" films. I still think that their short in Paris Je'Taime was the best *directed* piece in the film (not the best overall though).

I agree with you on your assessment of the ending. Although I'd say it was both a matter of how AND when.
 
Mattin, yes, there seems to be this craze of anti-climactic endings in "serious" films these days that is very miscalculated. Actually, this movie reminded me a lot of another film that I liked until the end - American Gangster. You had these two guys who were gearing up for a major showdown and then at the end you get them high-fiving each other and asking if they want more sugar in their coffee (although that was a true story - still, take some creative liberties -- it's a film).

What's wrong with a serious movie actually following through on two hours of set-up? Are they afraid they'll be accused of selling out? They attempted to please the audience through the first 95% of the movie. Why not try to please them for the final 5%?
 
c.g._eads said:
Batutta, I was thinking of the Coens making some pretty bad movies lately. The Ladykillers, Intolerable Cruelty (was that theirs?), The Man Who Wasn't There - I even thought O Brother kinda sucked. I think they just didn't know that they had another Fargo on their hands so they tried to be too experimental.

These guys are amazing filmmakers. They just seem to have a quirkiness to their taste that never quite feels right unless they do one of these simple "someone has money and someone else wants it" films. I still think that their short in Paris Je'Taime was the best *directed* piece in the film (not the best overall though).

I agree with you on your assessment of the ending. Although I'd say it was both a matter of how AND when.
Click to expand...

I just don't think they approach their films with that much self consciousness to think "this could be another Fargo". They just make their films and let the chips fall where they may...I can agree that killing one of the primary characters off screen was a bad move. I don't have a problem with him dying, but they should've at least showed it. In Psycho, Janet Leigh gets killed halfway through the movie in one of the greatest death scenes ever shot.
 
Variety says that the No Country for Old Men team of Joel and Ethan Coen and producer Scott Rudin will transfer another Pulitzer Prize-winning author's work into a film.

Columbia Pictures has acquired screen rights to the best-selling Michael Chabon novel "The Yiddish Policemen's Union," with the Coens writing, directing and producing with Rudin.

Chabon sets up a contemporary scenario where Jewish settlers are about to be displaced by U.S. government's plans to turn the frozen locale of Sitka, Alaska, over to Alaskan natives. Against this backdrop is a noir-style murder mystery in which a rogue cop investigates the killing of a heroin-addicted chess prodigy who might be the messiah.

The Coens will turn their attention to the book after they shoot A Serious Man for Working Title and Focus.
Click to expand...

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=41859

Anyone read the novel?
 
c.g._eads said:
Okay, just caught this movie. SPOILERS...

I rarely stray from the idea that everybody has their own opinions and therefore everybody is "right". But if you thought they couldn't have made a better ending to this film, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. You're dead wrong. People will talk about the "brave" choice and the unique approach to filming a climax that occurred in this film (by not showing it?????) but The Coens really screwed up here. They had the opportunity to make a classic. Instead they made an almost-classic. I honestly believe it's because they didn't know how good of a movie they had. They didn't know how great the characters were that they created.

These characters... were awesome. Everybody talks about Anton and how great he was. But I liked Josh Brolin just as much. I've never wanted a person to escape more than I wanted him to escape. I don't know where Josh Brolin has been hiding, but man was he great in this movie. I cared so much for his character. And every tip, every scene, every sequence, every conversation, led to these two guys having a showdown. And that's what you wanted. That's what you wanted to see (if you weren't warned about the movie's ending ahead of time - do not try and tell me that you didn't want to see this showdown). But because The Coens made 20 movies and they wanted to be unconventional, they screw it up by not showing that showdown. It was really disheartening. I feel bad for these guys for how badly they misjudged this. I almost think... and I know this is terrible to say... but I almost think the Coens were f*&king with us. That they were saying, "you think you're going to get a great ending don't you? Well, hahaahhahahah, psyche!" They even went so far as to, 5 screen minutes before the "showdown", have an awesome challenge set by the main character. That was one of the greatest movie lines ever! "I've decided to make you a special project of mine." [hangup] FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THE FREAKING SHOWDOWN! And then you don't even show it?????? So disappointing. So sad. You screwed it up guys. You screwed it up bigtime.

For those that will try to say, "It was a better choice than having some cliche showdown that we've seen a thousand times before." Uhhh, no. That's just the thing. This isn't Brett Ratner directing the final showdown. It's the Coen brothers! So any showdown between these two characters would've been entirely unique and exciting.

And I don't care if it's the same ending as the book. Unless the book was 100 pages long, they changed a whole bunch of other things. So why not change the ending to show these two great characters square off?? Man did I want to see that happen. And I know that, even if you refuse to admit it on this board, that you did too. Do not tell me that if you would've seen these two face each other, even if it was an average face-off, that you would've thought, "Man, I wish they would've skipped that altogether and just showed the aftermath of it." If you do, you're lying.

Well, too bad, Coens. You almost made one of the greatest movies ever.
Click to expand...

Can't agree any more than I do with this take.

And well put:

This wasn't some POPCORN showdown coming, this was the Cohens. They really created a killer film, unreal performances. The whole package was there.

They screwed up. :violin:

Ahhh well.
 
Thanks Hudson. It's good to see you're still alive.

You know, it crossed my mind that this may have all been calculated. I mean, I guess we're all talking about that ending. I heard enough about it so that I was curious to see it. To be honest, I probably would have waited for video otherwise. Maybe the Coens do win....

No, a classic movie trumps every gimmick. Never mind.
 
I actually liked the ending and I'm not lying (though I see your point).

I mean, of course I wanted to see some classic show-down and experience the tradition climax-resolution while I was watching.

Then the screen went black.

This caused me to completely reevaluate everything I had just witnessed, and I don't think I would have done that otherwise. It went from a movie about a story to a movie about themes and ideas. I liked it.

But yes, part of me wants to see a show-down.
 
This is a totally serious question, did anyone actually think Moss stood a chance against Anton in a showdown? I know I didn't and that is why I didn't mind the Coens skipping over it once I started thinking about the movie. But of course like everybody else, I was expecting one to happen.
 
I totally thought he had a chance. He injured him in that night time street fight. That's what you wanted to see. If the underdog could win.

Oh, and when Anton saw Woody at the bottom of the stairs, why didn't Woody just run? He would've had a better chance running then he would in a room alone with Anton. And even though Anton was a lot of things, he definitely wasn't fast. He could've found cover at the Cheers bar. Sam would've helped him out.
 
Drew Ott said:
I actually liked the ending and I'm not lying (though I see your point).
Click to expand...
Same here.

I understand what you guys are saying but I LOVED the ending.
When the screen went black.... the first words out of my mouth were... "COOL!"

I am so glad that this movie isn't like every other movie. Time for a change....
Cinema was getting far too predictable for me.
 
jpeck said:
This is a totally serious question, did anyone actually think Moss stood a chance against Anton in a showdown? I know I didn't and that is why I didn't mind the Coens skipping over it once I started thinking about the movie. But of course like everybody else, I was expecting one to happen.
Click to expand...

He seeemed to fair well during the gunfight in the street in shooting him in the leg. And he did stay one step ahead of him.

:thumbsup: :D :smile:
 
J.R. Hudson said:
He seeemed to fair well during the gunfight in the street in shooting him in the leg. And he did stay one step ahead of him.

:thumbsup: :D :smile:
Click to expand...
The only reason why he kept one step ahead of him was because he knew he was coming... Beep.. beep... beep... beepbeepbeepbeeeeep.....

Once he destroyed the device... he wouldn't hear him coming next time.
:thumbsup:

And I'm willing to bet Chigurh would still find him even without the tracker... as he did. :)

EDIT: BTW, Brolin's was pretty damn skilled. That's what made things all the more interesting, but Death was coming and there's no way to stop it.
 
Last edited:
Michael Anthony Horrigan said:
The only reason why he kept one step ahead of him was because he knew he was coming... Beep.. beep... beep... beepbeepbeepbeeeeep.....
Click to expand...
And without the device Chigurh would have more trouble finding him. Sure, he's a predator, but he DID have the aid of the tracking device to make things much faster. I think the playing field would have been somewhat leveled had he not had it.

Moss KNEW "they" would be coming after him. He took off and sent Carla Jean to her mother's in Odessa. It was Carla Jean (through her mother) that actually brought Moss down.
 
Blaine said:
And without the device Chigurh would have more trouble finding him. Sure, he's a predator, but he DID have the aid of the tracking device to make things much faster. I think the playing field would have been somewhat leveled had he not had it.
Click to expand...
Yes, I hinted to just that in my previous post.

Michael Anthony Horrigan said:
And I'm willing to bet Chigurh would still find him even without the tracker... as he did. :)
Click to expand...

But yes, the playing field would have been leveled.

My money is still on Chigurh. The guy was unstoppable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top