film: No Country For Old Men (Coen Brothers) (Trailer incl)

[SonOF]

First of all, I LOVE the Coen Brothers. After seeing this movie and reading the UNBELIEVABLY positive reviews that were written about it, I want to know If the reviewers and myself saw the same film.

First of all, the movie was painfully slow. I'm talking 20 minute chunks without dialogue, music, or much of anything going on. The action, when it did come along, was excellent, but like I said, there wasn't much of it.

The Coen brothers are known for writing excellent dialogue; in this film it only came in fits and starts.

What was the point of the Tommy Lee Jones character? To simply spout off moralistic rubbish? Like a much less useful version of Marge Gunderson?

The film was too long. The film didn't have enough of the Coen Brothers dark wit. The positives simply didn't outweigh the negatives in this one.

I need to see it again when it comes out on DVD, but calling this film a "masterpiece" simply blows my mind. Perhaps Fargo was a masterpiece, this was a quirky art piece with little substance and some cool scenes of violence.

perhaps my expectations were far too high. after hearing/reading the reviews, i was expecting one of the best movies I have seen in quite a while. not even close.


two stars.

 

[Pander Bear]

^^
how slow?

Fargo slow?

Blood Simple slow?

Or (shudders) The Man who wasn't there slow?

 

[Finder]

Definitely not "The Man Who Wasn't There" slow. It was paced about the same as Fargo, IMO. I really enjoyed the film, but there was something that bugged me a little about it. I didn't feel it wrapped up as nicely as Fargo did, for instance; not that I need films to be packaged just so for me. There were just a couple details I felt were glossed over and other parts that were drawn out for too long. For instance, [spoil]it didn't seem like they spent any time at all on Llewellyn Moss's death. It was just, boom, dead, move on to the next part. Just rubbed me the wrong way, I guess.[/spoil] There is no disputing the breathtaking cinematography, however.

As with all Coen brother's movies, they tend to require multiple viewings, at least for me, in order to "get" them on a higher level. "No Country" is no exception.

 

[SonOF]

^^
how slow?

Fargo slow?

Blood Simple slow?

Or (shudders) The Man who wasn't there slow?

I'd say a bit slower than Fargo. You don't know really what is going on for about 45 minutes. Those drawn out scenes in the Texas planes were agonizing.

 

[AmorRoark]

I was too distracted by the beautiful scenery to worry about time.

 

[Finder]

I didn't find those scenes too drawn out at all.

 

[SonOF]

Definitely not "The Man Who Wasn't There" slow. It was paced about the same as Fargo, IMO. I really enjoyed the film, but there was something that bugged me a little about it. I didn't feel it wrapped up as nicely as Fargo did, for instance; not that I need films to be packaged just so for me. There were just a couple details I felt were glossed over and other parts that were drawn out for too long. For instance, [spoil]it didn't seem like they spent any time at all on Llewellyn Moss's death. It was just, boom, dead, move on to the next part. Just rubbed me the wrong way, I guess.[/spoil] There is no disputing the breathtaking cinematography, however.

As with all Coen brother's movies, they tend to require multiple viewings, at least for me, in order to "get" them on a higher level. "No Country" is no exception.

I agree with you on almost all accounts, especially about certain parts being glossed over and other parts being drawn out. Like you said, LLewellyn, the only character (other than Anton) isn't given much attention at the end, whereas that DUMBASS Tommy Lee Jones character is given WAY too much dialogue and screen time which in my opinion, did nothing to add to the film as a whole.

I also agree that the cinematography was captivating, but that isn't enough to make a great film in my opinion. And as you said, this one DEFINITELY calls for another viewing (although not in the theaters for me).

 

[SonOF]

I didn't find those scenes too drawn out at all.

In the beginning when LLewellyn was looking at the animals/ looking at the bodies/ looking around at nothing? Like Amor said, beautifully shot, but to me, maybe because I was tired, it felt like an eternity.

 

[SonOF]

trailer

imdb link

the new thriller by the coen brothers looks pretty cool. too bad i'm gonna hafta wait till next year.

The trailer makes the film look like non-stop action, which is laughable if you have seen the film.

 

[L O V E L I F E]

The Man Who Wasnt There was one of the best character studies ever.

No Country didn't aspire be to that - conceded - and I fully agree (as I alluded to in my initial post) that the pacing, the cinematography, the acting, and the linited dialogue were ALL top-notch.

I suppose that TO ME, subjectively, to be labelled "GREAT," a film has do do AT LEAST TWO (and preferably all three) of the following EXTREMELY well:

(1) Make me think

(2) Make me laugh

(3) Male me feel a connection to an / and care about the chacters.

And I suppose, that for ME (unlike, in say . . . Pulp Fiction), I wasn't enmotionally invested in most of the characters.

Not much of a disagreement here - I think it was a damn good movie, one that I'm looking forward to seeing again.

Lots of movies get better the second time, and I'm giving this one a shot.

 

[ego_loss]

Coen Bros. character studies:

Barton Fink > Man who Wasn't There

Regarding your three rules, is #2 something you expect from EVERY movie before you will give it the "great" label?

What about The Godfather or Taxi Driver? What about Citizen Kane? What about Schindler's List or Pi? The Shining or Freaks?

Hell, some of the best movies evoke emotions that are far from laughter.

 

[L O V E L I F E]

Coen Bros. character studies:

Barton Fink > Man who Wasn't There

Regarding your three rules, is #2 something you expect from EVERY movie before you will give it the "great" label?

What about The Godfather or Taxi Driver? What about Citizen Kane? What about Schindler's List or Pi? The Shining or Freaks?

Hell, some of the best movies evoke emotions that are far from laughter.

And each of those movies you mentioned hit the ball out of the Fucking Park on the other two critereon (absent Pi, which I thought was "very good" bit not quite "excellent." - we can certainly agree to disgree on that one).

And though I prefer Billy Bob's MASTERFUL performance in The Man Who Wasn't There, I *do* give much respect to Goodman's performance, and to the movie itselelf, in Barton Fink.

And, imo, Miller's Crossing might just be my personal fave of theirs (it's close between that one and The Man Who Used To Fuck Angelina).

And THAT one, in my opinion, gets better every time.

I'm hoping for a similar effect upon my second viewing of No Country.

Happy Thankksgiving, fellow movie lovers.

 

[ego_loss]

And each of those movies you mentioned hit the ball out of the Fucking Park on the other two critereon (absent Pi, which I thought was "very good" bit not quite "excellent." - we can certainly agree to disgree on that one).

And though I prefer Billy Bob's MASTERFUL performance in The Man Who Wasn't There, I *do* give much respect to Goodman's performance, and to the movie itselelf, in Barton Fink.

And, imo, Miller's Crossing might just be my personal fave of theirs (it's close between that one and The Man Who Used To Fuck Angelina).

And THAT one, in my opinion, gets better every time.

I'm hoping for a similar effect upon my second viewing of No Country.

Happy Thankksgiving, fellow movie lovers.

Miller's Crossing and Blood Simple are two of my all time favorite violent flicks (Miami Blues, Scarface and Leon round out that top five list). I'm hoping that No Country can take a spot of it's own.

When it comes to character studies in their films, Barton Fink and Man who Wasn't There are neck and neck. I dug Barton Fink a little more because it was far more surreal than Man who Wasn't There, but it seemed to engage the characters in very similar ways. I guess ultimately it's not really fair to judge the two side by side, because they both went for different angles.

 

['medicine cabinet']

saw it last night, thought it was a great movie. ive always been a fan of the cohen brothers so i was siked to see it. i was surpised the way it ended and how the film progressed, but yeah, anton was a total badass. id def watch it again.

 

[sad mafioso]

I am so pissed off, I got the last ticket to this movie friday and ended up sitting on the floor at the back but nodded out off and on throughout the whole thing and didn't retain any memories of what happened. Should I see it again?

 

[cravNbeets]

i loved it! between the slowish pace and the absence of any sort of musical accompaniment its an absolute triumph this wasnt a boring film. superb acting all the way around, even by tommy lee jones whom i normally cant stand. the dialogue that existed was cleaver and genuine. i definitely plan to watch it again to get a better handle on the ending.

 

[SonOF]

I am so pissed off, I got the last ticket to this movie friday and ended up sitting on the floor at the back but nodded out off and on throughout the whole thing and didn't retain any memories of what happened. Should I see it again?

Wait for the DVD, in my opinion.

 

[His Name Is Frank]

I just saw it last night. While I wasn't blown away,there wasn't one moment where I was bored. The story,itself,was simplistic,but the acting and tension that continued to build and build made this a solid four star movie for me. Javier Bardem(Chighur)pretty much owned this movie. I loved the simple way he would start a conversation and make it snowball into a mix of severe discomfort and regret. A lot of people mention that the ending wasn't very satisfying,but two things. One,it's based on a book and the Coen brothers went by the book. Two,I really don't see any other way the movie could have ended. Every loose end was wrapped up. Tommy Lee Jones' speech at the end pretty much summed up the movie's view on good and evil. Good men will always play their parts,but evil men play their parts to the bone(pun intended for those who have seen it) One of the best Coen brothers films made. My favorites being Raising Arizona and The Big Lebowski.

 

[MDPVagrant]

Incredible film IMO - 4.5/5. A few things wrong made me take off 1/2 a star (minor spoilers!):

NSFW:

(1) The speech at the end was unnecessary & distracting, IMO. I would have liked to see that 'you know who' in the car accident get killed, and the film end there. But "everything is random/senseless" wasn't the main message, sigh.

(2) They should have shown a bit more of Brolin's character actually getting killed, and just been a bit more revealing with certain scenes. Unless you're *riveted* while watching, it's easy to miss something -- such as the bad guy checking his shoes for blood after he leaves Brolin's wife's house near the end.

(3) Woody H's character was useless. Why? Cut him out & the film would be almost exactly as good IMO.

But I understand the film followed the book almost exactly. Near masterpiece IMO. I'm not a Coen brothers fan either (mostly unfamiliar with their other films).

 

[smotpoker]

Just saw last night this movie was bad ass. Best film all year n o doubt. Acting was superb, wasn't happy with ending but then again it was not what I expected.

Josh Brolin might be my new favorite actor.

5 stars