No Country For Old Men Discussion

Heyhey,

So I just watched the movie "No Country For Old Men" after reading so many good things about it. The movie also appears in many peoples alltime top 10.

And to be honest, I don't get it why it is considered such a great movie. I thought is was pretty good but not really special or anything. So maybe someone can explain to me what you liked about the movie and why it is considered one of the best movies of the century (so far)?

I know there are some "hidden" messages in it but does this instantly make it an awesome movie? The villain was portrayed very well, it was original and the chasing/fighting scenes were pretty intense. Unfortunately I didn't really care that much about the main character Llewelyn and neither about Tommy Lee Jones' character. The story wasn't that original, the soundtrack wasn't that great. What am I missing here? I thought the actors did they job very well but the writing didn't particularly appeal to me. The dialog, the cinematography and suspense were great in most of the scenes though. My opinion about movies is that it is a form of art and when I believe a movie isn't that great, while critics praise it, I believe I must lack some knowledge or understanding.

My point is, what distinguishes this movie from so many others? Why should I change my thoughts about it? By the way, I'm not saying it is a bad movie or anything but I just don't get the hype around it.

Don't ask me i'm not a fan myself . You shouldn't change your mind is the answer to the other question i bolded, unless you rewatch it and genuinely get something else out of it. Here's a thread discussing the Film that you may be interested in - http://www.movieforums.com/community...ry+for+old+men .

Also welcome to the site .

Ah cool, thanks for the link. For some reason I couldn't find a thread about it .

First and foremost, it's made by the almighty Coen Brothers.

That movie was bleeding tension, in top quality form. You felt the ominous sense of the protagonist right along with him.

The Coens deployed one of their 'unstoppable evil' tropes in the form of Javier Bardem's Anton Chigurh, of which he did a profound job. All one needs to do is watch the coin toss scene.

This kind of tension and atmospherics in film, don't happen by accident. This film had quality acting and directing all of which led to a great film.

This is one of those questions that cannot be answered, by me at least. If the movie doesn't strike a chord with you, that can't be changed. Not to say that the movie is saying something that is over some peoples' heads or there is really a grand epiphany to be had when someone explains why they think it is great. There are very small subtle moments in the movie that I enjoy that to someone with a different type of perspective may just seem like a mundane detail. I can explain why I like the film so much but ultimately, that's my personal experience and perspective that will likely not translate well or at all to someone else who says they just don't "get" the movie or why it's good. It's art. It's all a matter of perspective.

don't think you need to change your thoughts on the film, they are legitimately *yours*, as Camo said

can sometimes be challenging explaining in text why we like something, though will do my best

i treasure the presence of the chosen cast helmed by Josh Brolin, Kelly Macdonald, & Javier Bardem, fused with the command of Joel & Ethan Coen writing and direction. Based on the novel by Cormac McCarthy.

Feel that the movie has slasher / B-movie elements, yet handled with skill and care. It's not masked-villain-chases-big-breasted-victim (which i do like sometimes), rather, the story follows a hunter named Llewelyn Moss (Brolin) who happens upon a drug deal gone wrong and finds more than $2 million cash near the Rio Grande. Moss keeps the money and goes on the run. Brolin's character reminds me a lot of someone i know in my life, a competent and engaging good-ole-boy who drives a truck, drinks Budweiser, and isn't going to back down from a challenge. Balance that with our villain, Anton Chigurh. A hitman with no remorse or empathy for people or humanity in general. He's like the Terminator or Michael Myers, but without the cyborg endo-skeleton or the supernatural mask-wearing immortal. Chigurh's just a bad man. This is a great contrast for me

On top of this i like the terrain, in fact, though i live on the east coast of the U.S, i have many memories of traveling to Texas Hill Country south of San Antonio to visit family. I always loved that landscape and even imagined films or stories using this setting at a younger age
(No Country was filmed mostly in New Mexico, though i detect resemblance)

Even the title seems to be a truism... No Country For Old Men. the longer a person lives, the more friends they will see pass away. the world people grew up in gradually changes into something unfamiliar over the passing decades. People either die younger than their friends or they outlast them and face a growing loneliness. You either let all this dishearten you, or you own it. Unless you're the one who dies younger

While i don't believe everyone or anyone has to agree, tie all these elements together along with a few i likely glossed over that others can address... on the simplest of levels, No Country For Old Men represents a kind of movie experience i put value in

Very interesting replies, much appreciated. I didn't consider some of your points and I have to agree with them. I think I just went in with a bit of a wrong attitude and expected something else. Now that I think about it, the movie indeed doesn't have many flaws if any. But ofcourse a lot depends on which kind of movies someone likes. Still, even though I'm not very much into movies like this one, it's still possible to understand why it has been recieved such a positive respons. I'm just trying to open myself up for every kind of movie . Thanks

Trunks, if you don't like the movie, that's totally cool. Personally, I really enjoyed it, brilliantly acted, beautifully scripted and with just the right amount of tension and action to keep it going. But I'm not going to say it's an all time top 10 great film, although it's certainly exceptional. Bardem and Jones elevate this above your average thriller/suspense movie and the Coen's precision makes it that bit better but I'd probably rank many movies above it.

__________________
"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"

"I need your clothes, your boots and your motorcycle"

I liked it cos I liked the book and the Coens made a great job of the adaptation

Javier Bardem was great in that movie. The whole "coin toss" thing though seems too similar to Two Face from the Batman franchise so it came across as unoriginal.

I enjoyed a lot of the despite the depressing ending. Main thing that kept me from loving this film though is that the ending was never really explained (what was the point of Chigurah getting hit by the car and still surviving?), and from what I've gathered on online message boards no one who's a fan of the film seems to have a consistent answer either.

I didn't totally understand Chigurah when he said "I got here the same way the coin did" (I assume he's implying that society "made" him into a killer - the same way that metal coins are created by men), or a lot of the the dialogue between the guys at the Sheriff's office either - it was too enigmatic for me.

'No Country for Old Men' is one of my absolute favorites. I don't feel like writing a huge piece of text to explain myself, though I could easily do that as I love this film very much. But instead I will just say this...

The movie started out for me as a pretty good film back when I saw it the first time. I thought it was intense and that it truly looked stunning, although I wasn't that big of a "movie meditator" back then and focused little on those technical aspects... Still I saw some greatness hidden in there though I wasn't sure what. But I was curious enough to revisit it. And movies like that (those who you see greatness in but might not yet appreciate) often end up being amazing and personal favorites of mine, when I rewatch them later on.

So I would say revisit it some time again, maybe you'll discover something new or see it from a completely different angle.

What's your take on what the ending of the film meant? I never get the same answer from 2 different people I ask.

My take was that it was meant to be cynical (ex. "The one guy who deserves to die the most ends up being the one who lives") but that's just a guess.

I liked the movie, but to win Best Picture when it went against "There Will Be Blood" (best movie in the last 15-20 years) is one thing... Also, I felt the movie felt unfinished. I think the Bardem's acting was great, and I usually like Tommy Lee Jones, but I would have liked more philosophical stuff besides the coin.

I watched the movie 3 times, because a friend liked it, and I like to give every movie that has something plenty of chances. I notice that the "Best Picture" in the last ten years haven't been really good.. I like to go back 60 years ago and compare. In 1976, you had so many great movies, Network (one of my favs), Taxi Driver, All The President's Men, etc etc., and "Rocky" wins... It was a good movie, top 5, but not the best.

__________________
https://www.youtube.com/c/LoyalOpposition

This is a weird one for me. First time I saw it, I didn't really care for it. Somehow, it's like it kept calling to me, to watch it again and again. I've seen it 3 or 4 times now. The last time, I was actually excited to rewatch it. I don't know what it is, but, the cast of characters, lack of a happy or conclusive ending and that Breaking Bad feel I get from it, are really doing a number on my movie senses with this one. I have learned to respect and appreciate this film for what it is.

You old poet, you.

Photography, acting, choreography... No Country is a film noir, a western, an adventure and a borderline horror all rolled into one.
A lot of movies that border horror, for instance Fargo, tend to have humour laced through them, but NC doesn't really have much comedy. There's a scene with the 3 young lads at the border who ask for $100 for their beer, and the scene at the end between Sheriff Ed Tom Bell and Ellis which borders Big Lebowski style humour... but off the top of my head, that's about it.
That's where the movie works though, the humour is realistic, and having all the other sub-genres rolled into it so you can't pin it down to a single genre, makes the movie work.


In the special features though, the cast themselves say it's all of these things... and the only real way to describe the movie is to call it a Coen Brothers Movie.


Then there's the ending that almost every Hollywood movie shies away from. Short and sharp, harsh and brutal. Realistic.

__________________

I absolutely loved the movie right the way up until the end.

The ending, I felt, was flat and a disappointment. I get there was a massive point to the dialogue and whatnot, but it still spoilt the movie for me.

The entire film is a metaphor for fate, and how it can't be avoided. In many ways, Anton Chigurh is death personified, and meant to symbolize that no matter how hard we all try to collect materialism (money)... death is still inevitable.

The inevitability of death is also what Tommy LJ is alluding to in his dream monologue in the final scene.

Just a very bleak, tense, dark, brilliantly acted and executed noir thriller, and I consider it the Coen Bros' best film. And yes.... I think it should rightfully go down as an all time great film.

But as great as it was, it wasn't quite the best film of 07... that goes to There Will Be Blood. But in my opinion, There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men are the two best movies from 2000-2017.

For me personally, Javier Bardem has turned in some incredible performances over the years (such as The Sea Inside, 2004) and for No Country he had such a script to chew on, and what an amazing thing to sit and experience for 122 minutes.

My take is that he is following the "rules" of the road but still gets hit, randomness happens. Alluding to his earlier scene, if the rules you followed led you to this, of what use were the rules.

I like how in No Country for Old Men the standard rules of a film like this aren't followed.

-The Protagonist simply dies off screen undignified, having followed him up to that point he goes out like that, "nobody ever see's that coming".

-The man sent to hunt the Villain gets caught out in his hotel and quickly bumped off, no showdown, just a terrifying "conversation" in his room.

-The Sheriff, no showdown with the Villain either, just retires wearied by old age/career.

-The Villain simply walks away after suffering a random car crash through no fault of his own.

It's like Stuff happens>>randomness>>inevitable death.

__________________