Why No Country for Old Men?

@Doctor Jones. I think he means other films from 2007.

On a side note, i'd love the Coens to do another McCarthy book... Blood Meridian.
 
The movie has a silenced shotgun, Nuff said. It was awesome.
 
The gas station scene is the best. It's simultaneously chilling and hilarious. The guy who plays the cashier is perfect.

"What time do you go to bed?"
"9:30...usually around 9:30."
"Maybe I should come back then."
"Why would you come back then, we'll be closed?"

"Do you knw how insane you really are?"
"You mean the nature of this conversation?"

That always made me laugh. :woot:
 
I enjoyed No Country, but I didn't think it was amazing.

To begin with, it's hard for me to like a movie, or any story for that matter, that doesn't have a freaking CLIMAX! The action starts rising....and just stops. Not a fan of them from a storytelling angle.
 
Ok, so I have been wondering why people love that movie so much? I mean, yeah the move has good directing and good acting (specially from Bardem), but I don’t see anything else so worthy of greatness? The script is (for me) pointless, and goes nowhere. I guy finds money and that other guy start chasing him. That’s it. No message, no nothing.

And except the love from the viewers, how can any awards be called smart if they give best picture to that movie in the same category with the absolutely brilliant and smart film as Atonement!? Even there will be blood was better that year.

Can someone tell me what’s so good about that movie? What’s so special?

I personally give it a 7.5/10

I liked NCFOM for it's suspense and the cast but open-ended endings annoy me too. It was definitely a movie that was trying to appeal to the oscar crowd. Show this movie to a casual movie-goer and they'll probably curse you for wasting their time.
 
I don't get it. The Coens don't make movies that just appeal to the Oscar crowd. They make films that are interesting to them, are damned good, and catch the attention of the Oscars.

And I don't get how you would be annoyed by it. It's not the conventional Hollywood ending, which makes it great. Don't people complain there's more of the conventional now? I mean do you they need to spell it out for you? It's nice when the filmmaker entrusts the film to the audience member and treats them with respect with the courtesy for you to figure things out.
 
No Country for Old Men is an action/thriller with a downer ending. It isn't your standard Oscar movie at all.
 
I liked NCFOM for it's suspense and the cast but open-ended endings annoy me too. It was definitely a movie that was trying to appeal to the oscar crowd. Show this movie to a casual movie-goer and they'll probably curse you for wasting their time.

That's horse manure my friend. If there even is such a thing as ''trying to appeal to the oscar crowd'', it's the studios that do so by releasing it in oscar season and advertising with previous oscar wins by cast or crew. I don't believe for a second that the Coens are as obsessed with awards of any kind as some people are. Do you honestly think that they jump into a movie project thinking: ''This'll be another Oscar for us!''.

And oh, if by ''oscar crowd'' you mean movie-lovers of cinephiles you might be right. This is a flick that no righteous lover of film could deny it's greatness.
 
I don't get it. The Coens don't make movies that just appeal to the Oscar crowd. They make films that are interesting to them, are damned good, and catch the attention of the Oscars.

And I don't get how you would be annoyed by it. It's not the conventional Hollywood ending, which makes it great. Don't people complain there's more of the conventional now? I mean do you they need to spell it out for you? It's nice when the filmmaker entrusts the film to the audience member and treats them with respect with the courtesy for you to figure things out.

Heh yea it's strange. People constantly moan about unoriginality and hollywood cliches, happy endings... then a movie comes along and spits in the face of those cliches... and people still moan about it?
 
I watched both There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men back to back, and I can say: for the first time I understand the ‘’depth’’ of No Country’s story. Yes. BUT. There Will Be Blood is better, for me personally. It was really great.
 
Heh yea it's strange. People constantly moan about unoriginality and hollywood cliches, happy endings... then a movie comes along and spits in the face of those cliches... and people still moan about it?
People are very contradictive. Like you said people complain about originality but what movies are they looking forward to? The sequel to this and the remake to that.
 
I watched both There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men back to back, and I can say: for the first time I understand the ‘’depth’’ of No Country’s story. Yes. BUT. There Will Be Blood is better, for me personally. It was really great.

Glad you got it man. There is a conversation in No Country between Bell and another Sheriff just after Moss' death. "It's just beyond everythang". Sums it up perfectly for me... and i find the other Sheriff's accent funny :D

No Country and There Will Be Blood are a tie for me. Love em both.

People are very contradictive. Like you said people complain about originality but what movies are they looking forward to? The sequel to this and the remake to that.

Yea, exactly.
 
There Will Be Blood is a timeless masterpiece. How everything revolves around money, which turns into power, then turns into greed. We thrive to drive on it. It's really digs deep into the conscienceness of America. Plainview loses his humanity (even though he didn't have so much to begin with) by the end because he thrives on it. He's not really functioning as a human being anymore. He's just this thing that survives on power. And he only eats steak because it means wealth and drinks water because it's pure and flavorless, and there is nothing else in it that helps it. He's basically a metaphor for people who want to gain. Money and power is out of our hands. It controls us more than we control it. It strangles the soul.
 
Last edited:
2007 had three bonafide masterpieces.

There will be blood.

No country for old men.

and Zodiac.

Damn, what a great year for American films.
 
Indeed, but you still forgot one: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.

Now that was a year for movies.
 
Indeed. While 2007 disapointed in the summer films, films like these did not.
 
What about Hot Fuzz, Rescue Dawn, Sunshine, Eastern Promises and 3:10 to Yuma?

2007 was a great year for films.
 
Am I the only one who DID NOT like There Will Be Blood. I mean, with so much hype surrounding from people on and off SHH!, I expected a completely gripping film but I slipped right through its fingers. Aside from the end, this movie did nothing for me.

As for Assassination of Jesse James, while a superb film, it as no replay value whatsoever imo. Great movie, but low on entertainment.

Atonement though was a splendid film that kept me involved all the way through just like No Country.

Any one else feels this way?
 
The gas station scene is the best. It's simultaneously chilling and hilarious. The guy who plays the cashier is perfect.

"What time do you go to bed?"
"9:30...usually around 9:30."
"Maybe I should come back then."
"Why would you come back then, we'll be closed?"

The best part of the scene is when Chigurh chokes on the cashew after the guy says he married into it. I think I read somewhere that Bardem actually choked and the Coens thought it was so perfect they left it in.
 
Every decade has one or two magical years of film. 2007 was like that. No Country, Blood, & Jesse James are all in my top 10 of the last decade. And to me they are all rewatchable despite being so slow. But I can understand why you disagree.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"