Dissecting movies - No Country for Old Men

I thought no country was great. Aside from McCarthy's awesome story, I think the cinematography was good as well as the acting. The Coen Brother's make great movies. Fargo was great, Burn After Reading was great and funny, Being John Malkovich BIG LEBOWSKI. These are all good with awesome characters and a story the average viewer can follow. Blood Simple had great dialogue. No Country for Old Men had all the traits of a Coen bros film and with McCarthy's story it's not a surprise that its well liked by the general pop. I always like there use of camera and how they draw you in with the obscure angles. Must say that I loved Brad Pitt's character in Burn After Reading(when his head pops out in teh closet..hilarious)

Edit: they always seem to have a splash of humor, some more than others, but there's usually something to smirk or chuckle at. Which goes a long way I feel when its a drama. Oh and TRUE GRIT was another great movie, except that
last scene with Bridges carrying Maddie after she's bit by the snake? Looked like he was running on a treadmill
lol.
 
Last edited:
True Grit was a truly average Coen brothers movie. I think of it more as a Roger Deakins' film that a Coen brothers one because it really doesn't have a lot to do with the rest of their canon.

I loved A Serious Man although I can understand that it might be polarising. Fargo is also a fantastic film but The Big Lebowski is something I enjoy but not half as much as some people.

Generally speaking they have an extremely strong body of work and there are only a few missteps. I don't think Intolerable Cruelty is that bad a film, it's just not what you'd expect from the Coen brothers. The Ladykillers was awful though.
 
Cracker Funk said:
I'd bet we can all agree on "The Big Lebowski" and "Fargo", no? Maybe? "Raising Arizona"? :yes:
Click to expand...

Nope ;) Didn't care for them, though I did not think they were BAD movies.

Actually, I did really enjoy "Intolerable Cruelty" and was VERY surprised that it was a Coen film. As Nick said, not their typical fare. I also really liked the music in "O Brother Where Art Thou", but didn't care for the movie. Again, thought it was a great film, well done and creative. I just didn't like it. What I ought to do is sit down with all of their films and see if I can figure out WHY I don't like them.
 
I hated Burn After Reading like few other "comedies". God-awful.

And like Nick, I like Big Lebowski, but don't find it to be as engaging as many of my friends. I attended Lebowskifest here in L.A. one year (security guard and I talked for a minute and he let me in free), and watching it with a bunch of huge Lebowski fans, talking to the screen, reciting lines - it's like a new Rocky Horror to them. That softened me to the film.

I liked True Grit. It was just good story-telling. Fargo is incredible, O, Brother, Where Art Thou? is pretty great.

No Country For Old Men was excellent until the last few minutes, which I remember really pissing me off. Should watch it again, I guess, but I have always had such animosity for the ending, I never returned to it.

gelder
 
THE MAN WHO WASN'T THERE (Billy Bob Thornton) didn't do anything for me. FARGO is a weird watch, the first viewing. After that, you are dialed into its tone and I think it's great. Another good example of how the Coen's suck you in with who's going to get the suitcase full of cash and then no one gets it!

If I had read the book No Country For Old Men, then that fricken conclusion would have been easier to swallow. I can understand loving it, if you like that book. I had not read the book, so it sucked for me - but only because I was enjoying the movie so much.
 
Burn After Reading should have been Burn Before Watching. I did not like Fargo or the Big Lebowski. Raising Arizona was good. I liked True Grit for a western.
 
So, I appreciated this movie a lot more, knowing what to expect. The first time I saw it, I was turned-off, perhaps unfairly, by two things.

First, everywhere you looked, people were talking about the comedy in the movie. I know a couple people who tell me that is their favorite part -- the dark comedy. I just don't see it. I like dark comedy, but I guess whatever is supposed to be funny, in this movie, is over my head, or something. I see absolutely NO humor in any of this.

Also, I thought directorik's comments were interesting, regarding just who the real protagonist is. When I was watching it, I felt like Brolin's character was the protag, and he was the guy that I latched onto. And this is the part that might not be fair on my part -- I like happy endings. Sorry, maybe that means I have a tiny brain, or something, but when I watch a movie, I just want to be entertained, and I'm not entertained by a sad ending.

Anyway, having those things out of the way, for the 2nd viewing, I was able to enjoy it for being the tense thriller/western that it really is. So much of this movie is just dripping with unease, from the opening scene in the desert, to the scene in the hotel, in which he has to retrieve the case from the ventilation system.

I think it'd be interesting to see what the Coen Bros. could do, if they decided to do something with some bigger action-pieces. They've certainly got suspense down to a tee, and if they could add a little (more) action after the build-up to success, I think they could make a seriously thrilling movie.

It's kinda funny, I think, that this thread turned into a debate about ALL of the Coen Bros. movies. I used to be extremely loyal to them, but have been disappointed recently. Okay, I'll play the game; here is how I grade all of their movies (that I have seen):

Blood Simple: (haven't seen)
Raising Arizona: A
Miller's Crossing: (haven't seen)
Barton Fink: (haven't seen)
Hudsucker Proxy: (haven't seen)
Fargo: A-
Big Lebowski: A
O, Brother: B+
Man Who Wasn't There: (haven't seen)
Intolerable Cruelty: B+
Ladykillers: D
No Country: B-
Burn After Reading: C
Serious Man: D
True Grit: A

Wow, I've not seen a lot of them. Think I'll have to fix that. :)
 
directorik said:
Well, you tried.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Yeah, this thread didn't really turn out the way I had envisioned. Perhaps I'll try again, but maybe I need to start the discussion by asking pointed questions.

One thing I just thought of, regarding No Country -- ithis movie sure does have a lot of silence. I'm undecided as to how I feel about that. On one hand, the lack of significant musical score might be attributable to creating a level of discomfort. On the other hand, there's something to be said for a strong musical score.
 
Cracker Funk said:
:lol:

Yeah, this thread didn't really turn out the way I had envisioned. Perhaps I'll try again, but maybe I need to start the discussion by asking pointed questions.
Click to expand...
I think you did.

But most people seem to prefer to simply list films they like
and don't like rather than discuss a specific film.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top