Styleforum › Forums › General › Entertainment and Culture › No Country For Old Men
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

No Country For Old Men

post #1 of 77
6/7/08 at 7:50pm
Thread Starter 
I thought this movie was supposed to be good? Existential? Meaningful? A comment on the human condition?

WTF? "Huh," was all I could say at the ending.

Did anyone like that and exactly why did you like it?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 77
6/7/08 at 8:05pm
i liked it because its not the usual BS we see in movies today. solid acting throughout. i thought it was quite funny. good action scenes. awesome sound, especially in the 2nd hotel when chigur is walking down the hallway and you hear each of his footsteps and the phone ringing in the lobby. very tense scene. also loved the dialogue

little details made the movie great, like not seeing how lewellyn died.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 77
6/7/08 at 8:19pm
i could not understand a word of the dialogue but i still enjoyed the film. woody harrelson's demeanor when he had the shotgun in his face was memorable.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 77
6/7/08 at 8:23pm
I watched it a couple of weeks ago had the same "huh?" reaction. My initial thought was that the movie was well -filmed, but I didn't like it. But I couldn't stop thinking about the movie for the rest of the day, especially the ending. So then I went online and read a bunch of takes on what the movie was about. In particular, I found this page interesting. So now, have having some time to contemplate, I'd probably rate it 8/10.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 77
6/7/08 at 8:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by overdog View Post
I watched it a couple of weeks ago had the same "huh?" reaction. My initial thought was that the movie was well -filmed, but I didn't like it. But I couldn't stop thinking about the movie for the rest of the day, especially the ending.

So then I went online and read a bunch of takes on what the movie was about. In particular, I found this page interesting. So now, have having some time to contemplate, I'd probably rate it 8/10.
to me the main character was the sheriff, not the guy who found the money. the movie begins with a voice-over from the sheriff and ends with the sheriff talking to his wife (i think.) this should give us a clue. my cousin felt the film did not have an ending and that it was just part one for a sequel, but if you see the film as being about the sheriff you see there is an ending.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 77
6/7/08 at 8:47pm
if you get over the fact that it is simply a thoughtful, well acted, and shot for shot, well directed movie and stop looking for deeper meaning/a major twist, it is really enjoyable. and the performances are really really good.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:07pm
Thread Starter 
Sorry, still no redemption for me. Yes, the cinematography was not bad. If you've ever spent time in the great open spaces of the Southwest, you appreciate the camera work.

Other than that, a bunch of egregious violence, that is often hardly believable (the compressed air gun? Come on!). Lewellyn was oddly crafty, resourceful, and capable, almost super-hero like...then gets shot by the Mexicans while shagging a random chic with beer. Javier Bardem's acting was comic book horrible. Most of the rest of the characters were so stereotypical they were surrealistic.

And what story arc was related exactly? Tommy Lee's character gets bummed out by the narco-violence and crime on the Tex-Mex border? I could think of better tales to relate that.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
Sorry, still no redemption for me. Yes, the cinematography was not bad. If you've ever spent time in the great open spaces of the Southwest, you appreciate the camera work. Other than that, a bunch of egregious violence, that is often hardly believable (the compressed air gun? Come on!). Lewellyn was oddly crafty, resourceful, and capable, almost super-hero like...then gets shot by the Mexicans while shagging a random chic with beer. Javier Bardem's acting was comic book horrible. Most of the rest of the characters were so stereotypical they were surrealistic. And what story arc was related exactly? Tommy Lee's character gets bummed out by the narco-violence and crime on the Tex-Mex border? I could think of better tales to relate that.
Based on your summary, I can't explain to you why it's such a fantastic movie. I suppose it's a bit like you saying if you spend time in the southwest then you appreciate the camera work more, if you've been to film school or have edited a film you appreciate this movie infinitely more. To me, and a fair amount of others, this movie was nearly perfect. I suppose it's not as good as an episode of Entourage though...right?
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:24pm
The story plainly has an existentialist bent, if you want to call it that. It's about the struggle to cling to humanity in a seemingly uncaring universe, which is a theme that runs through several of MaCarthy's books. Anyway I thought the ending (the very ending) was perfect.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:24pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneblood View Post
Based on your summary, I can't explain to you why it's such a fantastic movie. I suppose it's a bit like you saying if you spend time in the southwest then you appreciate the camera work more, if you've been to film school or have edited a film you appreciate this movie infinitely more. To me, and a fair amount of others, this movie was nearly perfect. I suppose it's not as good as an episode of Entourage though...right?
Wow, seems I hurt your vagina. If that is perfection, I will take flawed. It is totally possible to have great technique, since this is the case you seem to be making, and still be heartless and meaningless in the end. If you want to see a movie about narco-violence on the Tex-Mex border that actually approaches perfection, try Touch of Evil.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
Wow, seems I hurt your vagina.

If that is perfection, I will take flawed. It is totally possible to have great technique, since this is the case you seem to be making, and still be heartless and meaningless in the end. If you want to see a movie about narco-violence on the Tex-Mex border that actually approaches perfection, try Touch of Evil.

it's not about narco-violence. it's not about the tex-mex border. it's about the human condition.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
Sorry, still no redemption for me. Yes, the cinematography was not bad. If you've ever spent time in the great open spaces of the Southwest, you appreciate the camera work. Other than that, a bunch of egregious violence, that is often hardly believable (the compressed air gun? Come on!). Lewellyn was oddly crafty, resourceful, and capable, almost super-hero like...then gets shot by the Mexicans while shagging a random chic with beer. Javier Bardem's acting was comic book horrible. Most of the rest of the characters were so stereotypical they were surrealistic. And what story arc was related exactly? Tommy Lee's character gets bummed out by the narco-violence and crime on the Tex-Mex border? I could think of better tales to relate that.
Sorry, you basically didn't get any of it. Better luck next time.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:40pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by matadorpoeta View Post
it's not about narco-violence. it's not about the tex-mex border. it's about the human condition.

You're telling me the Javier character was even human? LOL. I guess I'm just too old and happy to find that existential/human condition type stuff. No, even at 20 that would not have made an impact on me. I can think of many movies that comment on the human condition, this just ain't one of them IMO.

No one has yet to tell me what statement it is making about the human condition. I find that very telling.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
You're telling me the Javier character was even human? LOL. I guess I'm just too old and happy to find that existential/human condition type stuff. No, even at 20 that would not have made an impact on me. I can think of many movies that comment on the human condition, this just ain't one of them IMO. No one has yet to tell me what statement it is making about the human condition. I find that very telling.
at 20 it would have been the most shocking thing you'd ever seen. the exorcist didn't come out until the '70s. i wasn't thrilled by it either when i walked out of the theater, but it stayed with me. the scenes where javier bardem intimidates the shop clerk and the guy in overalls who only wants to help him, have to strike a chord with anyone. let's say it was that rare film where one can put themselves in the shoes of the characters and feel their horror. this touches on the universal desire for security and has nothing to do with any particular place or time.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 77
6/7/08 at 9:52pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by matadorpoeta View Post
at 20 it would have been the most shocking thing you'd ever seen. the exorcist didn't come out until the '70s.

LOL, I ain't that old. Now a movie that did come out when I was about 20, give or take, was Val Kilmer in The Doors. There was a comment on the human condition
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › General › Entertainment and Culture › No Country For Old Men