No Country for Old Men

esmufc09 said:
Just finished watching this, was brilliant, loved it. Javier Bardam was exceptional in it, played the part superbly.
Click to expand...

The best aspect of the film, without a doubt. Decent solid plot with good deep characters, very entertaining and suspenseful, really enjoyed it.
 
Didn't really rate the book. Few interesting parts that didn't make it into the film, but for the most part it's a straightforward adaptation. The film though has far more atmosphere and personality, the characters benefit so much from the performances.

Javier Bardem was great as Chigurh. But he has much, much better performances in his career. Maybe the best actor of the decade
 
UBERScholes said:
Didn't really rate the book. Few interesting parts that didn't make it into the film, but for the most part it's a straightforward adaptation. The film though has far more atmosphere and personality, the characters benefit so much from the performances.

Javier Bardem was great as Chigurh. But he has much, much better performances in his career. Maybe the best actor of the decade
Click to expand...

What else is he in?

I loved the book, thought there was a great flow to it and a real page turner.
 
Wibble said:
The Road was a stunningly good book. The film, correctly made, would sweep the Oscars.
Click to expand...

Pogue Mahone said:
It's happening.

Viggo Mortensen playing the lead, which bodes well.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0898367/

Incredibly good book but bleak as hell. Movie will be a tough watch but could well be brilliant.

EDIT: Just checked out the screen-shots from IMDB. Looks like Michael K. Williams (Omar from The Wire) is in it. Sweeeeeet.
Click to expand...

Just finished the book the other day. Brilliant book. Really desolate, and hard going at times but that seems to add to the story, when anything does happen then it creates a sense of urgency. You really feel yourself getting caught up with the characters. Hopefully the film is done as an adaptation of the book as opposed to a hollywood blockbuster loosely based on it. From seeing those photos though it looks like it could be pretty cool.
 
esmufc09 said:
Much better performances you say. In what?

I thought he was phenomenal as Chigurh, I'd imagine it'd be hard to top that.
Click to expand...

He's brilliant in just about every film he's in, even when he's in pretty shit films. Would probably recommend Before Night Falls (Not a great film, but what a performance) and The Sea Inside as his two best roles to date. Two very different roles to Chigurh. Kind of worrying to think his whole career could be defined by Chigurh, much as I love that character and performance.
 
Johnno said:
Top film, masterfully shot, wonderfully acted and an innovative storyline in there was no romantic death for Llewellyn, you don't even see him die, and it isn't even by person you are led to believe will murder him.BTW, the 'mystery' of whether the wife is killed at the end or not, she obviously is as he checks his feet walking out the house......
Click to expand...

What?! I thought the main villain with the dodgy haircut killed him?
 
Watched this again the other night, found it better and more enjoyable second time round.

Ordered the book yesterday so hopefully should have that soon.
 
Read the book yet Elvis? I'm currently reading it and I can't stop thinking in that same accent in everything I do :mad:. Up to the part where

Moss has just managed to escape from Chigurh after their confrontation in a hotel and is now in Mexico needing medical attention.

Love the way it's written.
 
Just watched this. I thought it was good but a tad overrated by some, which is obviously not the films fault, it is good for what it is. I liked the scene when he's in the hotel and trying to hear if he's outside the door, very tense. Javier Bardam was excellent, but the Tommy Lee Jones bits seemed to pass me by for some reason. I had to read about the meaning of them after the film to fully understand them. I think it might be because I'm knackered and was struggling to keep my eyes open near the end.
 
I always wanted to see this..........until i just read the massive spoiler on the first page.

Sigh.
 
Solius said:
Just watched this. I thought it was good but a tad overrated by some, which is obviously not the films fault, it is good for what it is. I liked the scene when he's in the hotel and trying to hear if he's outside the door, very tense. Javier Bardam was excellent, but the Tommy Lee Jones bits seemed to pass me by for some reason. I had to read about the meaning of them after the film to fully understand them. I think it might be because I'm knackered and was struggling to keep my eyes open near the end.
Click to expand...

I thought it was bollocks. Looking on the internet, its seems you can pretty much interpret the film anyway you want, due to most scenes being made so ambiguous, and this ambiguity is somehow seen as being intelligent.
 
Just watched this again, excellent film, really is. Not a lot of dialogue but it's still a wonderfully shot film, and extremely tense at times.
 
1871_Biscuit said:
I thought it was bollocks. Looking on the internet, its seems you can pretty much interpret the film anyway you want, due to most scenes being made so ambiguous, and this ambiguity is somehow seen as being intelligent.
Click to expand...

What scenes were seen as ambigious? The one at the end is fairly obvious

Chrigurh finds out where Llewelyn's girlfriend is living and waits for her. He said he promised Llewelyn he would kill her if he didn't return the money - which he didn't - and so he has to keep that promise. He then flips a coin and asks her to call it, which she refuses. We don't see her get killed but we can assume she does because when Chigurh walks out he checks his shoes for blood. I think not seeing it really adds to it.
 
esmufc10 said:
Just watched this again, excellent film, really is. Not a lot of dialogue but it's still a wonderfully shot film, and extremely tense at times.
Click to expand...

I thought the scene in the motel was excellent
 
1871_Biscuit said:
I thought it was bollocks. Looking on the internet, its seems you can pretty much interpret the film anyway you want, due to most scenes being made so ambiguous, and this ambiguity is somehow seen as being intelligent.
Click to expand...

Tommy Lee Jones' anecdote about his dream at the end is left to debate. But the intelligence of the movie is drawn from the underlying themes and motives of the characters; it's excellently written, beautifully shot and well acted.

Then again I can see why people don't like it. It isn't conventional. And I don't mean that in a patronising way, but the directors choice to omit a soundtrack, the off-screen death and abrupt ending with untied storylines don't adhere to the usual Hollywood structure.
 
Good film. Not enough of this genre.

Tommy Lee Jones is one 'ell of actor.
 
DouLou said:
Tommy Lee Jones' anecdote about his dream at the end is left to debate. But the intelligence of the movie is drawn from the underlying themes and motives of the characters; it's exactly written, beautifully shot and well acted.

Then again I can see why people don't like it. It isn't conventional. And I don't mean that in a patronising way, but the directors choice to omit a soundtrack, the off-screen death and abrupt ending with untied storylines don't adhere to the usual Hollywood structure.
Click to expand...

It adheres exactly to the usual Coen brothers structure though. Going into the film knowing nothing of the book, I was always expecting something similar to their other films, even though I knew their input into the writing wasn't as great as in their other films. Because I know of their fondness for certain ways of ending stories and certain elements - people chasing money which may or may not exist, unhinged characters, kidnappings and ransoms etc - I knew that I'd probably see those themes explored again to some degree.

The trouble is that I enjoy their films for the dialog more than anything and there wasn't enough of it. I didn't feel any tension during any of the film and although it looked good - as usual with Roger Deakins cinematography, it just left me a bit disinterested. I couldn't care less about any of the characters and having an inkling as to what fate would befall them made me even more apathetic towards them unfortunately. There's nothing wrong with it but it just left me cold.
 
decorativeed said:
It adheres exactly to the usual Coen brothers structure though. Going into the film knowing nothing of the book, I was always expecting something similar to their other films, even though I knew their input into the writing wasn't as great as in their other films. Because I know of their fondness for certain ways of ending stories and certain elements - people chasing money which may or may not exist, unhinged characters, kidnappings and ransoms etc - I knew that I'd probably see those themes explored again to some degree.

The trouble is that I enjoy their films for the dialog more than anything and there wasn't enough of it. I didn't feel any tension during any of the film and although it looked good - as usual with Roger Deakins cinematography, it just left me a bit disinterested. I couldn't care less about any of the characters and having an inkling as to what fate would befall them made me even more apathetic towards them unfortunately. There's nothing wrong with it but it just left me cold.
Click to expand...

I know what you are saying, but I think it has less of the typical comedy of errors and quirkiness prevalent in most their movies, probably cause of the source material. Although it has certainly has their style it's a break away from the usual and is far more serious.

But it does lack that emotional connection - Chigurh is an ice cold murderer, Tommys character is detached and questioning humanity, and Moss doesn't have much to endear you to him. That's all in line with the movies tone... but it is what makes me appreciate it for it's depth in story and how well it was shot rather than something which emotionally dragged me in.
 
How does Chigurh know which motel Llewellyn is in? He knows the room, because of the tracker, but this only worked when with in range.

Also, what is Chigurh, in relation to the drug meeting?
 
Which scene are you talking about? Is it the one where he keeps driving and at a certain point, his tracker starts beeping the car and retracts a little and find the motel? Is it the one where he tracks him down at night?
 
the one where he keeps driving and at a certain point, his tracker starts beeping the car and retracts a little and find the motel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.