No Country For Old Men

[PottedMeat]

Originally posted by: Rudee
If Chigurh was in the room next door, then why did they show him looking at the opening in the door lock, which had been blown out? The same opening that the Sheriff was looking at before he drew his gun and opened the door? Looked like the same room to me.

Theres a version floating around... all I can think is I wish I paid more attention in the theater. Anyway, looking at the rooms it's 114 - 112 ( Where Chigurh is ) from left to right with the locks on the far left and far right sides of the doors. And you are looking at the lock hole from Chigurh's POV because the light hits the wall on the left. I think the Sheriff was standing just far enough back to make a reflection in the brass on 112's lock.

Anybody read the book ( I haven't )? Supposed to be an ultra faithful adaptation so that should clear things up.

Does anyone know what kind of guns Chigurh has? He's got that silenced shotgun + a silenced machine pistol or something Moss picks up.

 

[oogabooga]

I watched this movie on Saturday. This movie was just excellent, everything was well done, from the acting to the writing. I hadn't read the book so can't compare to that but the movie itself was very good.

This film was intense, and the ending I personally liked quite a bit and made perfect sense for the sheriff character. I could tell a lotta people in the theater i was in were pissed though as one person was even vocal enough to say "What the fvck" at the end of the movie. I thought the ending was pretty good and it lends itself to a lot of thought, a bit of variety from the regular "this movie is now wrapped up nicely and neatly in a package... enjoy!"

 

[BooGiMaN]

i liked the movie, and to think if he hadnt gone back to give the dieing guy water he may have been able to get away with the money and lived.

 

[Rudee]

Originally posted by: BooGiMaN
i liked the movie, and to think if he hadnt gone back to give the dieing guy water he may have been able to get away with the money and lived.

And let that be a lesson. Never give dying people water. It'll just get you into trouble.

 

[anxi80]

Originally posted by: BooGiMaN
i liked the movie, and to think if he hadnt gone back to give the dieing guy water he may have been able to get away with the money and lived.

another lesson: if you come across a large bundle of money in a satchel, check everything out thoroughly to ensure there isnt a transponder giving away your location.

 

[oogabooga]

Originally posted by: anxi80

Originally posted by: BooGiMaN
i liked the movie, and to think if he hadnt gone back to give the dieing guy water he may have been able to get away with the money and lived.

another lesson: if you come across a large bundle of money in a satchel, check everything out thoroughly to ensure there isnt a transponder giving away your location.

:thumbsup: The next time I run into a satchel of money I'll make sure to follow these two steps. I'll also make sure to mail you each a bit from the money for your effort, assuming I survive

 

[JEDI]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
Last night my GF and I went to see the new Coen brothers film, No Country For Old Men, currently in limited release (we saw it at the grungy Uptown theater in Minneapolis).

Wow. I don't recall EVER seeing a more perfectly made film. The writing (which I am told is very true to the Cormac McCarthy novel), the casting, the acting, the direction, the cinematography - all just amazing.

The movie is relentlessly dark, and very violent. I had envisioned a return to the Coens' sensibility in making Blood Simple (also a very violent film taking place in west Texas), but if anything this is far bloodier and makes fewer accommodations to the audience's comfort.

The bad guy, Anton Chigurh (played by Javier Bardem, sporting a haircut that makes him look like he failed his audition to be the fifth Ramone), is one of the great villians in the history of modern film. He conveys a sense of menace and dangerousness that in many ways surpasses even a Hannibal Lecter, in that he seems completely emotionless (other that slight bemusement) about killing anyone and everyone who so much as inconveniences him.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, Tommy Lee Jones is brilliant as lawman Ed Tom Bell. Jones is just perfect in this role - the character is a morally-upstanding Texas sheriff, and he looks every bit the sun-burnt Texan badass. Believe it or not, Josh Brolin is also excellent, and the rest of the cast is amazing - every little bit part is perfectly cast, and even the actors who have one or two lines deliver them brilliantly.

So far every review of this movie, more or less, has been extremely positive. My view is that critics tend to appreciate the excellence of the filmmaking and are tolerant of the extremely dark nature of the film, and I imagine many people who see the movie won't be happy with it (as my GF was not), simply because it is so bleak. For me, this is a 5-star film, and one of the best films in the past several years, but I will be interested to hear what others have to say about it.

just saw it.

ok, i get the ending. it's like a comedian sets up for a punchline, and just walks away.

did the assassin get the $? the hotel room where Moss was in-> grate to vents was opened, but there's no way he could have fit the suitcase in there.

So where is the $?

 

[Goosemaster]

The film was excellent. Succinct and beautiful cinematography, cryptic characters, unconventional suspense, and an underlying reverence for fate.

It was a beautiful work that requires pensive reflection to really enjoy it.

Something that caught my attention were issues with control.

Anton said he was not in control (coin toss) and left it to the coin toss to decide his actions, but as the wife said at the end, he came with the coin and he was in control.

Everyone else was desperately seeking control and never had any, remaining victims of fate.

I kept on thinking about how the sheriff and those before him had no control over what would happen, except that this time things things didn't fit the pattern. In the most arrogant way, the outcome for TLJ's character was unexpectedly different, and he could not accept that he was powerless in trying to change it. He had expected to go out with a bang like he thought he was supposed to.

If you sit back and just focus on the first liens of the movie, the discussion about uncle mack, Anton's last discussion with the wife, and the last scene of the movie, it has deep philosophical meaning.

The one thing that I still don't really understand is the car accident scene. Much conjecture in my head about that, such as how he all but emulated the actions of Llewelyn when he was in distress, and perhaps something about how he remained relevant even in the face of death while the sheriff faded away

 

[Squisher]

Originally posted by: oogabooga

Originally posted by: anxi80

Originally posted by: BooGiMaN
i liked the movie, and to think if he hadnt gone back to give the dieing guy water he may have been able to get away with the money and lived.

another lesson: if you come across a large bundle of money in a satchel, check everything out thoroughly to ensure there isnt a transponder giving away your location.

:thumbsup: The next time I run into a satchel of money I'll make sure to follow these two steps. I'll also make sure to mail you each a bit from the money for your effort, assuming I survive

Doesn't matter even after you find the transponder the bad guy will show up with his buddy's even though he works alone. He'll find you in a motel in a big city no matter what. And, if a guy talks to you like he is billy badass in a hospital room, like he is the only other badass in the world that can stop the badass that's after you don't make any deals with him because even though he proclaims to be the ultimate badass he'll be allowed to be lead back to his hotel room where the original badass kills him just after he's been in town for five minutes.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: MiataNC
***SPOILERS****

I can see why people are annoyed with the ending, but I think they are missing the point.

Tommy Lee Jones' character is an antique in a "modern" (read extremely brutal and cold) world. While he is the only one smart/tough enough to figure out exactly what is going on, he has outlived his time, and is a stranger in a strange land.

It is my impression that he enters the room expecting to be gunned down, only to be ignored and forgotten because he is no longer relevant. The final scene, where he describes his dream shows clearly that he will continue to live in a world that has no place for him, irrelevant and forgotten.

I think the ending was perfect. The senseless waste of a good mans life juxtaposed against the senseless slaughter of other lives.

I watched this last week with my wife and some friends. This is how I walked away from the movie. It wasn't about the money or the killer. It was about Tommy Lee Jone's character and his growing obsolecense in this "new world".

At first I was disappointed with the ending but then then I started putting it together and figuring out that all of the killings and screen time with "the killer" were just filler. The real "story" was about TLJ's character.

My wife and friends were very disappointed because they didn't take away the same spin that I did. They wanted answers about the money and who did and didn't live. It doesn't really matter.

I'd like to go back and re-watch it now that I understand the main point of the movie. I'm sure I'll appreciate some of the scenes with TLJ a little better then.

 

[Saint Michael]

It's threads like this that demonstrate why movies like The Transporter XXVI will do so good.

 

[anxi80]

I'd like to go back and re-watch it now that I understand the main point of the movie. I'm sure I'll appreciate some of the scenes with TLJ a little better then.

when i first saw it i took from it pretty much the same thing you did. when i rewatched it i listened closely to the opening monologue by tlj's character and thats when it all made better sense to me. the first time i was just hearing the words. the second time, i listened.

Said he knew he was going to hell. "Be there in about fifteen minutes". I don't know what to make of that. I surely don't. The crime you see now, it's hard to even take its measure. It's not that I'm afraid of it. I always knew you had to be willing to die to even do this job. But, I don't want to push my chips forward and go out and meet something I don't understand. A man would have to put his soul at hazard. He'd have to say, "O.K., I'll be part of this world."

 

[clamum]

clamum needs to see this. Is it out on DVD yet?

 

[villageidiot111]

Originally posted by: clamum
clamum needs to see this. Is it out on DVD yet?

It came out on dvd recently.

 

[clamum]

Originally posted by: villageidiot111

Originally posted by: clamum
clamum needs to see this. Is it out on DVD yet?

It came out on dvd recently.

Cool, I shall check it out. :thumbsup:

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: clamum
clamum needs to see this. Is it out on DVD yet?

For a couple of weeks now. My wife and I watched it last week and were left confused the first time through. It started making a little more sense the more I thought about.

 

[clamum]

I just saw this over the weekend. Very good movie. :thumbsup::thumbsup: 8.5/10

Acting is f'ing great, best I've seen in awhile. The cinematography, characters, dialogue, all great. I didn't quite get the ending at first, but after reading some people's thoughts in this thread, it does make sense now. I need to re-watch it again and pay closer attention to some parts.

Not your typical film, but that's what's so great about it. Check it out if you haven't seen it yet.