"No Country For Old Men"

[blownsi]

sorry

[blownsi]

Think it's time to ditch this laptop

[soundmotor]

Originally Posted by blownsi

someone please send me the spoiler --- I watched the whole movie and didn't understand it at all. A hitman and his huntee etc etc and then tommy lee jones eats at the table with his wife and the credits scroll. All of it must've went way over my head.

What I got -

When Tommy Lee Jones visited Maurice Minnehan (guy with cats), they talked about a lawman being gunned down on his porch in front of his family and it was horrifying that what used to be a respected institution was shot down so casually. That happened ~75 years before and the point was times change and bad men get more evil but men have always been evil and will always act in ways you don't understand. So, you must rise up to the challenge and beat them. Anton Chigurh was just evil and had nothing motivating him to be evil, he just was and Tommy Lee Jones could not get a handle on that. I took the last scene to mean Tommy Lee Jones was no longer a sherrif and thinking about retirement property in Florida. His life as a lawman had gotten too complex and he wanted nothing more to do with it.

I think......



Yep, that's my story and I am sticking to it! Regardless of the Coen brother's way of storytelling which you can either take or leave, Javier Bardem's performance as Anton Chigurh was staggering. Soulless, remorseless, and unplacatable. He cannot be appealed to or bargained with; he is more focused on his task than the original Terminator. IMO there has never been a better bad guy and watching the film for his performance is worth the price of admission.

[operaman]

Originally Posted by RussinOhio

(Spoiler alert!!

I did'nt like this movie as a whole. Tommy Lee Jones was great in this as the sheriff I will say. I was caught up in the cat & mouse game up until the lead charctor got killed.....and then as if that were not enough...his wife! I wanted to see the wife triumph through all that happened and the writers kill her off!

This story had no resolution. It'll hold you to your seat with suspense and then abrubtly end.

Russ

Obviously you, like most american film goers, watch movies for plot only without any appreciation of thematic or literary device. The murderer in NCFOM represents fate. He himself is almost killed by the random car crash at the end of the movie. The "Country" that's no good for old men in this film is, via metaphor, life itself. We're all done for.

It's a spectacular movie but not if you fail to view the auteuristic qualities that link it to other Coen Bros. films. The book reads uncannily like a Coen Bros script in certain ways, only much darker - Ethan and Joel must have pinched themselves when they first read it.

[pmsummer]

Originally Posted by blownsi

Someone please send me the spoiler --- I watched the whole movie and didn't understand it at all. A hitman and his huntee etc etc and then tommy lee jones eats at the table with his wife and the credits scroll. All of it must've went way over my head.

I really do recommend reading the book. The Coens were remarkably faithful to it (word for word dialog), but you get a better sense about the ambiguities of fate and the rise of amoral, dispassionate evil.

I had a friend who quit smoking dope about the time this book/movie takes place, when she started hearing about how the Mexican drug cartels were killing everyone in sight (and at one point, chopping up bodies and blending them with weed). The combination of huge amounts of money and huge amounts of firepower have rendered devastating changes along the Rio Bravo.
Remember the news story that was kinda buried last year about the Indiana (?) National Guard unit that was on patrol down their when they got "captured/surrounded" by cartel convoy. The cartel was sporting M60s mounted on trucks.

[Fast_Eddie]

It might just be the other things I'm reading and working on in my life, but I saw it as a story of acceptance. Tommy Lee Jones makes a decision. He can continue to fight evil, or accept that it is and live his life. He chooses life. I don't mean life as opposed to death, but life as opposed to struggle.

[Aage]

Originally Posted by shrinkboy

to hate the film because it doesn't deliver the payoff you desire is a basic misunderstanding of the story.

I watch movies for entertainment. Call me anything you like, but for me, that movie did not qualify as entertainment. A revenue generator for the Coen Bros, yes.

I watched it with my wife, our daughter, and daughter's fiancé, none of us enjoyed it.

Eight thumbs down for us.

[thefragger]

This movie was a remarkable story that was excellently executed and wonderfully portrayed, imo. To this date I've watched it five times each with different people and every one of them took something different away from it.

There were some funny parts.

[pmsummer]

Originally Posted by Aage

I watch movies for entertainment. Call me anything you like, but for me, that movie did not qualify as entertainment. A revenue generator for the Coen Bros, yes.

I watched it with my wife, our daughter, and daughter's fiancé, none of us enjoyed it.

Eight thumbs down for us.

Personally, I'd say it went to the "art" side as opposed to the "entertainment" side. I like both kinds of movies, and that's why they build multiplex theaters.

"Art" is usually conceived to tell the future something about the present (even when the "present" is represented by past and future events), while "entertainment" is usually created to tell the present something about the past (including most sci-fi, hence the "Western" and "WWII" motifs).

Art also attempts to defy death by projecting outward, whereas entertainment attempts to comfort and console us in the dark night.

Both art and entertainment are needed. Sometimes they overlap. Neither is necessarily better.

Picking my feet up now.

[Fast_Eddie]

Originally Posted by pmsummer

Personally, I'd say it went to the "art" side as opposed to the "entertainment" side. I like both kinds of movies, and that's why they build multiplex theaters.

"Art" is usually conceived to tell the future something about the present (even when the "present" is represented by past and future events), while "entertainment" is usually created to tell the present something about the past (including most sci-fi, hence the "Western" and "WWII" motifs).

Art also attempts to defy death by projecting outward, whereas entertainment attempts to comfort and console us in the dark night.

Both art and entertainment are needed. Sometimes they overlap. neither is necessarily better.

Picking my feet up now.

Well put. Aage, it just wasn't your kind of movie. Doesn't make it bad. Kinda like how I can't stand Pink Floyd. Doesn't make them bad. Just not for me. 'Cept for the really early stuff, of course. See Emily Play and that. But the rest of it... not so much.

[tboat4]

I thought NCFOM was a terrible movie because of the story. Now the guy that played the killer gave a terrific performance. He really WAS that character.

[roggom]

His weapon was an air tank and a plunger, man that is frickin wicked. He literally slaughtered his victims like cattle. Some of his victims just stood there almost accepting their impending doom. Very dark movie but I enjoyed it.

[soundmotor]

Originally Posted by operaman

Obviously you, like most american film goers, watch movies for plot only without any appreciation of thematic or literary device.

What credentials qualify you to make such a statement?

[shrinkboy]

you don't have to have credentials to make comments like operaman's. you just make 'em.

i have followed this thread along, because i am a fan of both mccarthy's and the coen brothers. i am fascinated by the level of discourse this movie has elicited, from those who don't like, and those who do like. of course, i do like (see avatar). the fundamental error made by many of the 'don't likers' is that they take it for entertainment. this most surely it is not. as others have pointed out, it is a meditation on evil and our participation with it or our rejection of it; and again, it meditates on fate. this was at one common fare in popular entertainment (bill shakespeare for example, or any of the ancient greek dramas, and so forth and so on)

somehow, we don't tolerate that very well any more. if these topics are approached seriously, straighforwardly, without apology, most will have no part. it is not entertaining, i.e. a flight of fancy with a 'happy' ending.

like summer and others above, i have a certain appetite for entertaining film, but i go in ahead of time knowing that i will feel the same as i do when i eat a sugary sweet. it was fun while it lasted....

when i want a solid meal, of course, i look for sturdier fare. that said, the only other thing i would say is, this movie should be backed up with a reading of the book. NOT one of mccarthy's best, in my estimation, but a strong one nevertheless. it displays all of his concerns with fate, evil, and the choices one makes in life.

if anybody is still reading, and you are interested in getting a deeper sense of what mccarthy is all about (for me, NCFOM was a cormac mccarthy movie, not a coen bros. movie), then, in order of excellence, IMO, his books are: The Road; Blood Meridian (you thought chigurh was bad? wait'll you meet up with The Judge), and Suttree.

you can also find out more at www.cormacmccarthy.com

[pmsummer]

Originally Posted by shrinkboy

of course, i do like (see avatar).

That's not Bob Crane?!?!?