Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => E-Board - Movies, Music, TV, Videogames, Comics => Topic started by: milfer on March 12, 2008, 06:43:01 AM
-
So i watched No Country for Old Men last night and i didint like the ending it was late and i was tired... So I'm asking you guys did i miss something? and what did his dream have to do with the movie?
-
It's straight out of the book.
I didn't like it either... a morally ambivalent universe.
-
OK i got a couple more ? how did the serial killer get involved, and who was the guy that Woody Harrelson was working for?
-
OK i got a couple more ? how did the serial killer get involved, and who was the guy that Woody Harrelson was working for?
Serial killer, hired gun for one of the Mexican parties involved in dope deal.
Woody, hired by Anglos involved in dope deal.
-
Serial killer, hired gun for one of the Mexican parties involved in dope deal.
Woody, hired by Anglos involved in dope deal.
what i thought i guess i was just hoping for more.. thanks for the help
-
Horrible movie, the non ending was typical of so many movies today. I guess some writers think not having an ending is art......well in this case it is not.
Film goes post-modern. What are you gonna do?
-
Great acting.
The serial killer was a scary looking dude.
"call it, friendo".
-
Great acting.
The serial killer was a scary looking dude.
"call it, friendo".
the acting was great , actually the whole movies was good but the ending, and the part where they didint show the main character die really sucked.... the serial killer looked twisted especially with that pedo haircut, defiantly a Oscar worthy performance
-
Great movie.
It's all about the atmosphere.
I wouldn't even call it an open ending. You know what happened.
The scene with the main actor getting killed should have been in there i agree, but didn't bother me that much while watching.
-
I liked the movie, didn't like the end.
-
good movie , great ending.
scientists have actually performed studies about open endings in movies.
turns out that 2 main groups can't handle them ........
those with a sub par iq and those who weren't breastfed :D
-
I've liked the open endings I've seen in movies lately.
NCFOM deserved all the awards it got
-
good movie , great ending.
scientists have actually performed studies about open endings in movies.
turns out that 2 main groups can't handle them ........
those with a sub par iq and those who weren't breastfed :D
What about people who couldn't get into an ivy league school?
-
Just watched it, I thought it was horrible. Why do boring movies always get nominated for awards?
-
good movie , great ending.
scientists have actually performed studies about open endings in movies.
turns out that 2 main groups can't handle them ........
those with a sub par iq and those who weren't breastfed :D
open endings suck, it's like getting a blow job and the bitch doesn't finish......pointless
-
great movie but i do agree the ending didn't quite cut it
only an idiot would not like this movie :P
E
-
great movie but i do agree the ending didn't quite cut it
only an idiot would not like this movie :P
E
:P
-
We argued about it after watching, and the final concensus was: it's a totally metaphorical film. Chirgurh represented death (in a Prince Valiant do) as well as its random unreasonableness, hence his perseverance along with the coin flipping. That's why he simply disappears at the end.
Bell the lawman, is always one step behind evil and death. He always arrives too late. Woody Harrelson represented "life" therefore the white suit, his refusal to carry a gun, and that's why he dies randomly, almost way too early in the flick.
The dreams at the end were Bell's tired musings that he didn't have the energy to chase death and evil anymore, that it's impossible to catch up anyway, so he's accepting defeat... and making a statement about mankind/society. That's what we got from it anyway.
-
We argued about it after watching, and the final concensus was: it's a totally metaphorical film. Chirgurh represented death (in a Prince Valiant do) as well as its random unreasonableness, hence his perseverance along with the coin flipping. That's why he simply disappears at the end.
Bell the lawman, is always one step behind evil and death. He always arrives too late. Woody Harrelson represented "life" therefore the white suit, his refusal to carry a gun, and that's why he dies randomly, almost way too early in the flick.
The dreams at the end were Bell's tired musings that he didn't have the energy to chase death and evil anymore, that it's impossible to catch up anyway, so he's accepting defeat... and making a statement about mankind/society. That's what we got from it anyway.
you understood it.
bench
-
We argued about it after watching, and the final concensus was: it's a totally metaphorical film. Chirgurh represented death (in a Prince Valiant do) as well as its random unreasonableness, hence his perseverance along with the coin flipping. That's why he simply disappears at the end.
Bell the lawman, is always one step behind evil and death. He always arrives too late. Woody Harrelson represented "life" therefore the white suit, his refusal to carry a gun, and that's why he dies randomly, almost way too early in the flick.
The dreams at the end were Bell's tired musings that he didn't have the energy to chase death and evil anymore, that it's impossible to catch up anyway, so he's accepting defeat... and making a statement about mankind/society. That's what we got from it anyway.
you didn't understand it
calmus
-
you didn't understand it
calmus
;D
bench
-
open endings suck, it's like getting a blow job and the bitch doesn't finish......pointless
Thats what you get for 10 bucks.
-
you understood it.
bench
you didn't understand it
calmus
Okay. ;D
Deedee
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed the movie was trying to say how absurd the violence in the world had become. No rhyme nor reason.
yet, the coen brothers went to such great lengths to graphically depict that very violence? I thought it was a little hypocritical
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed the movie was trying to say how absurd the violence in the world had become. No rhyme nor reason.
yet, the coen brothers went to such great lengths to graphically depict that very violence? I thought it was a little hypocritical
If you've read Blood Meridian or NCFOM, you would recognize a theme. It's the "lord of destruction/chaos" (Judge holden in BM, AC in NCFOM) who is most at home in this world (accdg to McCarthy).
The lawman (representing order or whatever) on the other hand is full of regret and always yearning for something that has already passed. He is impotent, whereas the Shivas are not.
-
Great movie. All the people bitching about it should try reading the book, because outside of a few scenes, the movie is almost verbatim for what was written. And it's an excellent book.
Not that I would expect most Getbiggers to read, what with their sub-100 IQs and all. :-\
-
People are always surprised that I didn't like it. I guess I was expecting more. I don't know about hidden meanings and all that, I just like to be entertained when I watch a movie and it didn't entertain me. Sure the acting was great, but I just didn't see the big fuss about the film.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed the movie was trying to say how absurd the violence in the world had become. No rhyme nor reason.
yet, the coen brothers went to such great lengths to graphically depict that very violence? I thought it was a little hypocritical
they didn't show llewelyn and his wife get killed, the violence was kept to a minimum as the movie played out
E
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed the movie was trying to say how absurd the violence in the world had become. No rhyme nor reason.
yet, the coen brothers went to such great lengths to graphically depict that very violence? I thought it was a little hypocritical
Most of the Coen brothers' films are replete with violence. Fargo, Blood Simple, etc. They're always pointing out the absurdity of violence, how it escalates out of stupidity and greed, but they don't moralize, just document. So this story does seem right up their alley, doesn't it? It's just a little darker.
-
For not having read the book, we didn't do too badly interpreting its theme..
So what finally, was the significance of Woody's character? Someone said he represented goodness and all things light, which was why he dressed in white, accepted his death (which came early) with calm courage, didn't carry a gun. I thought with a character name like Carson Wells, he also represented the old fashioned image of lawman, with morals and optimism, and a clear vision of the evil he was fighting. Or did I not understand again? :D
-
Spoiler warning for those who plan to read Blood Meridian ::)
Woody's like the Kid in BM. The Kid gets raped/killed in an outhouse by Judge Holden at the end of BM, despite his fighting skills. The difference between the Kid and the Judge in BM: the Kid feels some regret about his violent acts, the Judge has no such qualms.
The mistake you and your friends are making is looking at CM's work as a traditional good vs evil tale. In CM's world, the animating principle is violence/chaos, not "good"/order.
You can't fight the animating principle and win.... I haven't read the Road yet, but in the other books it's pretty clear that CM doesn't think violence needs to be eradicated. the ending (and the beginning) of NCFOM (as well as the title) makes that pretty obvious. All the lawman can do is think/dream about the past, which makes him impotent in the present.
in the book, the sheriff is filled with regret about a war-time incident too.
-
For not having read the book, we didn't do too badly interpreting its theme..
So what finally, was the significance of Woody's character? Someone said he represented goodness and all things light, which was why he dressed in white, accepted his death (which came early) with calm courage, didn't carry a gun. I thought with a character name like Carson Wells, he also represented the old fashioned image of lawman, with morals and optimism, and a clear vision of the evil he was fighting. Or did I not understand again? :D
You're quite magnificent :)
-
You're quite magnificent :)
I have always thought that of you. :)
-
I have always thought that of you. :)
Diesel1 makes the best threads on Getbig imo. He is always posting the pics of celebrities(and lots of them) that I want to see and usually before I see them. I know absolutely nothing about the guy, not even what country he is from, but he just happens to like all the hot female celebrities that I want to see. I have been enjoying his threads for a long time.
-
Spoiler warning for those who plan to read Blood Meridian ::)
Woody's like the Kid in BM. The Kid gets raped/killed in an outhouse by Judge Holden at the end of BM, despite his fighting skills. The difference between the Kid and the Judge in BM: the Kid feels some regret about his violent acts, the Judge has no such qualms.
The mistake you and your friends are making is looking at CM's work as a traditional good vs evil tale. In CM's world, the animating principle is violence/chaos, not "good"/order.
You can't fight the animating principle and win.... I haven't read the Road yet, but in the other books it's pretty clear that CM doesn't think violence needs to be eradicated. the ending (and the beginning) of NCFOM (as well as the title) makes that pretty obvious. All the lawman can do is think/dream about the past, which makes him impotent in the present.
in the book, the sheriff is filled with regret about a war-time incident too.
Some Getbiggers do read. ;D
I didn't think it was a traditional cautionary good vs evil story, and did get that violence was the animating principle. Lord of Destruction as opposed to my harbinger of evil/death is a better way to describe the character, but the point was obviously taken that those with a conscience end up spiritually defeated, while as always, the harbinger merrily perseveres terminator style. Violence, chaos are always there at humanity's core, while conscience, regret is just a blanket. I haven't read the book and should, probably, before speaking :) but the title didn't make clear to me what you say are CM's views on violence. It's from Yeats' Sailing to Byzantium... (quick and dirty) an old man/poet leaving the chaos of humanity behind to become an artifice, a golden bird singing on a bough, of past, present and future. But there's also much more to it, so I was getting something a little different from the poem reference.
-
Diesel1 makes the best threads on Getbig imo. He is always posting the pics of celebrities(and lots of them) that I want to see and usually before I see them. I know absolutely nothing about the guy, not even what country he is from, but he just happens to like all the hot female celebrities that I want to see. I have been enjoying his threads for a long time.
I know I'm going to sit here for a thousand years waiting for this post to load... :P but yes, Diesie is brill in all ways, and he's a Brit.
-
movie was good but not great. woody-part they might as well been skipped. and the movie was slightly too long.
-
Why did Woody offer "death" money if Woody understood that "death" wasn't doing this for the money?
-
I don't think anyone was thinking of "death" as Grim Reaper with death scythe.
-
Good movie I actually didnt like it when i first saw it but then it kinda grew on me and I rented it for my dad to see and I gotta say it really is a great movie, but the ending does kinda suck b/c you expect when watching a movie to see a definitive conclusion and this left it open a little bit so...
-
We argued about it after watching, and the final concensus was: it's a totally metaphorical film. Chirgurh represented death (in a Prince Valiant do) as well as its random unreasonableness, hence his perseverance along with the coin flipping. That's why he simply disappears at the end.
Bell the lawman, is always one step behind evil and death. He always arrives too late. Woody Harrelson represented "life" therefore the white suit, his refusal to carry a gun, and that's why he dies randomly, almost way too early in the flick.
The dreams at the end were Bell's tired musings that he didn't have the energy to chase death and evil anymore, that it's impossible to catch up anyway, so he's accepting defeat... and making a statement about mankind/society. That's what we got from it anyway.
i think your reading into it too much
-
i think your reading into it too much
A couple of paragraphs and a poem reference ain't exactly a dissertation. :)
-
A couple of paragraphs and a poem reference ain't exactly a dissertation. :)
i just dont think they would put that much thought ino a movie...to make the whole thing one intricate metaphor...... im not buying it
but what you said does make sense
i just dont think thats what they intended
-
i think the ending was fine
-
I don't think anyone was thinking of "death" as Grim Reaper with death scythe.
Even so, sense Woody is in all White with no gun, and as you put it representing life...Why would life look for a buy out? It certainly doesn't seem like something that someone with no gun and representing life would do...Woody carried himself like he was the only one who could stop him...But didn't really give any fight at all to save his life...Almost like he was expecting it...So if true, how could even even think that the guy would take part of the money that he obviously didn't give a shit about anyway?
-
the whole scene with woody was pointless and didnt add anything
it shouldve been cut out to shorten the film along with the scene where he goes to the office afterwards to take out the 2 men there
-
Even so, sense Woody is in all White with no gun, and as you put it representing life...Why would life look for a buy out? It certainly doesn't seem like something that someone with no gun and representing life would do...Woody carried himself like he was the only one who could stop him...But didn't really give any fight at all to save his life...Almost like he was expecting it...So if true, how could even even think that the guy would take part of the money that he obviously didn't give a shit about anyway?
Most people look for a buy out when the end is facing them. That's kind of reality.
It seemed like on the surface, the flick is constructed like some old wild, wild west story brought into modern times. In all the old movies, the protagonist wasn't necessarily "good" but possessed a certain code of ethics, and in the end, those who karmatically deserved the money, revenge, whatever, persevered. I'm thinking Clint Eastwood, Gene Hackman characters, and the movies they starred in. Throw Audie Murphy (sp) in there too.
In this modern day version, evil/death/chaos and destruction is the driving force, animating factor, as Calmus said, complete with a human terminator character meting out violent random death. So everything is reversed in a sense, with all those possessing empathy, a code of ethics, etc... either dying a physical or spiritual death...their regrets a weakness that renders them impotent. The psychopath on the other hand, is perfectly happy in his own skin. Judging from the title and the poem reference, seems as though the author is saying that this is a more realistic depiction of our times. Starting point: the '80s.
I'm thinking the Woody character played much the same role as the old movie secondary character, brash bounty hunter, or fresh-faced cattle rancher character... the dumb dude who thinks himself immortal, a life force by virtue of his invincible energy. In the old flicks he would've probably bought it early on too, except going out in a blaze of glory or something. In this one he faces what is more real... his unexpected end, and like all the characters begging "you don't have to do this," knowing at the same time how inevitable it is.