No Country For Old Men
- Thread starter Capt. Orygun
- Start date
- Replies 72
- Views 3K
We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms
I can't wait for There will be blood to hit dvd. I realllly wanna see it.
If you haven't read the synopsis of the movie you should, but don't finish it, it has spoilers.
If you haven't read the synopsis of the movie you should, but don't finish it, it has spoilers.
so i watched this today.
it didn't grab me. the story was decent, but not unique. The characters were not developed at all. the plot ended unresolved.
i guess i just had too many questions.
1)who's money was it?
2)how did moss get killed and why didn't they show it?
3)why do they do a whole movie then have sheriff Bell be the main focus of the story?
i'm just not feeling it. it was cool watching all the shit in the 80's. but i couldn't find much else worthwhile.
it didn't grab me. the story was decent, but not unique. The characters were not developed at all. the plot ended unresolved.
i guess i just had too many questions.
1)who's money was it?
2)how did moss get killed and why didn't they show it?
3)why do they do a whole movie then have sheriff Bell be the main focus of the story?
i'm just not feeling it. it was cool watching all the shit in the 80's. but i couldn't find much else worthwhile.
1. The drug dealers.
2. Moss got killed by the assassin. It was inevitable because he keeps his word and kills everyone.
3. There is no country for old men. He was an old man. he should have retired. He was unable to track the assassin, and stop him.
There is a lot to this movie past hollywood movies. It's not a action movie. It begs questions. Many people could write thousands of words about the style of shooting, the scene with the wounded pit bull, etc.
2. Moss got killed by the assassin. It was inevitable because he keeps his word and kills everyone.
3. There is no country for old men. He was an old man. he should have retired. He was unable to track the assassin, and stop him.
There is a lot to this movie past hollywood movies. It's not a action movie. It begs questions. Many people could write thousands of words about the style of shooting, the scene with the wounded pit bull, etc.
see, this is what puzzles me.
1)who was the guy in the office building? was it his money?
2)are you sure it wasn't the mexicans who killed him.
3)he didn't even try. he just sat in the cafe the whole time.
blah, i guess i just wasn't in the mood to be thinking.
Part of the point was it being anti-climatic. Because if you are fucking around with guys like that they do not do the Hollywood shootouts or 15 minute monologues recapping their life story. They just pull the trigger and walk away.
I was not entertained either, much for the same reasons that Nick was left with questions. I understand that the point may be to be anti-climatic and to leave the story open ended but regardless the ending was just horrible in my eyes. The movie seemed to shift focus from the sheriff and the assassin, when I think it would have been more interesting to simply see the movie from one character's eyes and then gone back and filled in the blanks through the other character's eyes.
It seems the movies that win awards are always artsy bullshit movies that just demonstrate an art form and don't represent true entertainment value.
It seems the movies that win awards are always artsy bullshit movies that just demonstrate an art form and don't represent true entertainment value.
Last edited:
Very true, most of the time I stay far away from films that are big hits with critics for that exact reason. No Country is one of the exceptions though.
the mexicans killed moss. i dont know where you got that anton killed him. it was pretty obvious that the mexicans did it as it showed them shooting, then peeling off in their truck away from the scene, and then it shows moss dead.
i really liked the movie. i liked anton's character, the only thing that bothered me was that moss got killed before there was some kind of showdown between him and anton. if they had at least done that, i would have enjoyed it much more. but i still liked it. i liked how they did the entire movie with virtually no music. there is a total of 16 miutes worth of music in the entire movie, most of it being in the ending credits. you dont even notice it until the credits roll with no music at first, i thought that was neat.
i also liked there will be blood. but again, the ending didnt really sit right with me.
*SPOILER*
i dont know why he killed elijah at the end. he had already humiliated him and basically aserted himself as being better in everyway possible. he should have just made him leave feeling like shit. and ended the movie on another scene, like the scene where his son left would have been more fitting IMO (although not chronologically correct). but again i still liked the movie.
i really liked the movie. i liked anton's character, the only thing that bothered me was that moss got killed before there was some kind of showdown between him and anton. if they had at least done that, i would have enjoyed it much more. but i still liked it. i liked how they did the entire movie with virtually no music. there is a total of 16 miutes worth of music in the entire movie, most of it being in the ending credits. you dont even notice it until the credits roll with no music at first, i thought that was neat.
i also liked there will be blood. but again, the ending didnt really sit right with me.
*SPOILER*
i dont know why he killed elijah at the end. he had already humiliated him and basically aserted himself as being better in everyway possible. he should have just made him leave feeling like shit. and ended the movie on another scene, like the scene where his son left would have been more fitting IMO (although not chronologically correct). but again i still liked the movie.
Capt. Orygun
Win the Day
Anyone who doesn't fully grasp the awesomeness of "No Country" is a perfect example of how modern America degrades your appreciation for the arts
saw 3:10 to Yuma last night, awesome movie, although I felt crow was a bit to helpful to his captures at times and I wish they would have played up the "Evil Railroad" underplot a bit more, I couldn't figure out if it was Crow or Southern Pacific who were the Antagonists
saw 3:10 to Yuma last night, awesome movie, although I felt crow was a bit to helpful to his captures at times and I wish they would have played up the "Evil Railroad" underplot a bit more, I couldn't figure out if it was Crow or Southern Pacific who were the Antagonists
What does "true entertainment value" mean though? What's entertaining to one person may be garbage to someone else.
Take Transformers for example. Guys roughly our age loved it, because it's nostalgic, and it's a big-screen re-imagining of something we enjoyed in our youth. My girlfriend didn't really like it, no appeal for her. Conversely, she enjoys a lot of chick flick type movies that I find completely unappealing. Value is a relative term.
You may not always like the movies that win awards, but it shouldn't be hard to see why they do win awards. No Country may not have satisfied you personally, but it certainly has more depth to it, more thought behind it, and better acting performances then say, Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay...
To me, the strategically undeveloped plot isn't artsy or impressive, its an undeveloped plot that left me, the viewer, unsatisfied.
It was as though they only created the movie to demonstrate the art form and the entertainment value was a byproduct.
Its the difference between looking at a Greco-Roman scultping - being an art form that most people can easily interpret - and looking at contempary abstract art. You have to be very involved with the arts to actually understand the abstract piece in the way it was intended.
This is just my .02 cents. Of course the entertainment value was there for some people, clearly it was there for Silver, but for myself and what I feel is the majority of viewers simply looking for an enjoyable movie to watch, the movie left much to be desired. I generally like "deep" movies [American Beauty, Requiem for a Dream, V for Vendetta, etc., etc] but this movie just didn't strike me which was sad because I had high expectations after reading these reviews a few months ago.
It was as though they only created the movie to demonstrate the art form and the entertainment value was a byproduct.
Its the difference between looking at a Greco-Roman scultping - being an art form that most people can easily interpret - and looking at contempary abstract art. You have to be very involved with the arts to actually understand the abstract piece in the way it was intended.
This is just my .02 cents. Of course the entertainment value was there for some people, clearly it was there for Silver, but for myself and what I feel is the majority of viewers simply looking for an enjoyable movie to watch, the movie left much to be desired. I generally like "deep" movies [American Beauty, Requiem for a Dream, V for Vendetta, etc., etc] but this movie just didn't strike me which was sad because I had high expectations after reading these reviews a few months ago.
