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

[pennywise]

It wasn't a masterpiece, but it was a lot better than 95% of the junk out nowadays. I think it was one of the better movies this year.

I think you are being too harsh, souny. I don't see why this would turn you off on the Coen bros. completely.

 

[JerryBlunted]

i liked this movie a lot. won't take fargo, o brother, raising arizona, big lebowski, blood simple, etc.'s spots. but it was something different than usual. was a little unsatisfied with the ending, but "life goes on." wasn't that the point?

i can't see why this would shake someone off the coens if intolerable cruelty didn't.

 

[mariacallas]

imo, i thought that the movie could have been so much better IF THEY HAD drawn out some of the scenes. the movie was great and i give it five stars. my only qualm was that there was much i would have liked to seen. i was genuinely disheartened when SPOILER ALERT====









=======they cut from james brolin meeting the lady by the pool, to him dead on the hotel floor when tommy lee jones shows up.



and i thought there were several parts where they should have shown MORE!

Grrr thanks a lot man. Your spoiler alert hardly disguised it from my eyes even if I tried Why, oh why, couldnt you use the SPOILER FEATURE

 

[pennywise]

Wow. I totally did not detect any sarcasm at al in your post.

Seriously man, try being a little bit less caustic. There is no reason to be angry about it.

 

[alasdairm]

Because they had consistently created such great films throughout their career and so I gave them an unprecedented three chances before I gave up on them. As I stated in my original post No Country For Old Men was better than Intolerable Cruelty, but still it was the nail in the coffin for me.

i also find it a little hard to understand when somebody says they're done with a certain artist because of a poor piece of work (or even a string of poor pieces). that said, it's your $10 s... and you can do what you like.

the net effect is that the coen brothers won't get your $10 which i'm guessing they can probably just about do without and you might miss out on the greatest movie ever made when they release their next.

in the grand scheme of things, it's a kind of laughable, pointless protest, no?



alasdair

 

[L2R]

i use the same logic souny used to have avoided all of m night shyamalan's films in theatres since unbreakable, so i totally understand where he's coming from.

but then again it's not really much of a comparison.

 

[alasdairm]

to me that just means you miss potentially good films.

some good directors make some bad movies
some bad directors make some good movies

i tend to try to judge a film on its own merits - not whether it comes after a bad film (or films) by a certain director. that seems like a tenuous criteria on which to judge a movie at best.

alasdair

 

[L2R]

i hear where you're coming from, but this mentality has actually saved me quite a few terrible theatre experience already.

 

[dshock]

what kind of weapon?

This is a bit off the current topic.
Does anyone know what kind of weapon Bardem uses? I mean aside from the cow stunner air thing.
It looks like a shotgun, but you never seem him rack it.

 

[Transcendence]

This is a bit off the current topic.
Does anyone know what kind of weapon Bardem uses? I mean aside from the cow stunner air thing.
It looks like a shotgun, but you never seem him rack it.

Lol, I think the captive bolt gun was a little more than a "stunner" But to answer your question, it was indeed a suppressed shotgun (a Remington 1100 I believe). You never see him rack it because it's semi-automatic, although it's not possible to suppress a shotgun to the extent portrayed in the movie.

For some reason that gun scared the shit out of me. Maybe I was just too high, but goddamn I would piss myself if I ever faced that.

 

[L2R]

yeah the gun was particularly frightening wasn't it.

 

[dshock]

it was truly silent but deadly, I want one

 

[L2R]

in the scene with woody harrelson, i remember the gun scaring the shit out of me

 

[dshock]

Lol, I think the captive bolt gun was a little more than a "stunner"

"A captive bolt pistol (also variously known as a cattle gun, stunbolt gun, or stunner) is a device used for stunning animals prior to slaughter."

 

[MynameisnotDeja]

I just watched it. I need to watch it again. I was a bit tired watching it last night and because it was sort of quiet and slow I had a hard time following..not really the main story but who was who and how they interconnected. Maybe Ill understand it better watching it a second time while not falling asleep.

Overall, even being a bit confused, I thought there was something fascinating about it. It was slow but not boring. Javier Bardem made the movie. Badass.

 

[jam uh weezy]

I thought this was an awesome movie. But fuck the ending. Bullshit. and fuck tommy lee jones for being in the ending.

Maybe someon could explain it to me, cause i didn't understand how the end related to the story at all...

 

[MynameisnotDeja]

^I didnt either. I really need to watch it again. I felt the whole time like I missed something (people were talking during parts of it and it was so quiet you really had to listen)

 

[CloudyHazeD]

Lol, I think the captive bolt gun was a little more than a "stunner"

Oddly enough, that is what it's called. A 'Captive Bolt Stunner'.......

Guess they didn't like the sound of captive bolt livestock killer?

 

[dshock]

A cow "stunner" is exactly what it is,
But maybe that didn't sound bad ass enough

 

[pennywise]

^probably.

you who you remind me of?