Author Topic: No Country for Old Men? (Read 4734 times)

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?

calmus · « **Reply #1 on:** March 12, 2008, 06:45:48 AM »

It's straight out of the book.

I didn't like it either... a morally ambivalent universe.

milfer · « **Reply #2 on:** March 12, 2008, 07:09:45 AM »

OK i got a couple more ? how did the serial killer get involved, and who was the guy that Woody Harrelson was working for?

calmus · « **Reply #3 on:** March 12, 2008, 07:13:50 AM »

Quote from: milfer on March 12, 2008, 07:09:45 AM

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.

milfer · « **Reply #4 on:** March 12, 2008, 07:17:49 AM »

Quote from: calmus on March 12, 2008, 07:13:50 AM

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

calmus · « **Reply #5 on:** March 12, 2008, 09:17:25 AM »

Quote from: Patrick_Bateman on March 12, 2008, 09:15:08 AM

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?

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #6 on:** March 12, 2008, 09:27:20 AM »

Great acting.

The serial killer was a scary looking dude.

"call it, friendo".

milfer · « **Reply #7 on:** March 12, 2008, 02:58:47 PM »

Quote from: UPINTHEMGUTS on March 12, 2008, 09:27:20 AM

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

Faust · « **Reply #8 on:** March 12, 2008, 04:27:35 PM »

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.

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #9 on:** March 13, 2008, 11:24:39 AM »

I liked the movie, didn't like the end.

BlueDevil · « **Reply #10 on:** March 15, 2008, 07:14:08 AM »

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

MB_722 · « **Reply #11 on:** March 15, 2008, 10:05:32 AM »

I've liked the open endings I've seen in movies lately.

NCFOM deserved all the awards it got

calmus · « **Reply #12 on:** March 15, 2008, 07:27:02 PM »

Quote from: BlueDevil on March 15, 2008, 07:14:08 AM

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

What about people who couldn't get into an ivy league school?

danielson · « **Reply #13 on:** March 16, 2008, 04:16:46 PM »

Just watched it, I thought it was horrible. Why do boring movies always get nominated for awards?

milfer · « **Reply #14 on:** March 17, 2008, 08:49:52 AM »

Quote from: BlueDevil on March 15, 2008, 07:14:08 AM

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

open endings suck, it's like getting a blow job and the bitch doesn't finish......pointless

Earl1972 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 26, 2008, 04:09:24 PM »

great movie but i do agree the ending didn't quite cut it

only an idiot would not like this movie

E

danielson · « **Reply #16 on:** March 26, 2008, 04:33:23 PM »

Quote from: Earl1972 on March 26, 2008, 04:09:24 PM

great movie but i do agree the ending didn't quite cut it

only an idiot would not like this movie

E

Deedee · « **Reply #17 on:** April 01, 2008, 09:25:15 AM »

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.

benchmstr · « **Reply #18 on:** April 01, 2008, 05:52:46 PM »

Quote from: Deedee on April 01, 2008, 09:25:15 AM

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

calmus · « **Reply #19 on:** April 01, 2008, 05:55:09 PM »

Quote from: Deedee on April 01, 2008, 09:25:15 AM

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

benchmstr · « **Reply #20 on:** April 01, 2008, 06:03:11 PM »

Quote from: calmus on April 01, 2008, 05:55:09 PM

you didn't understand it

calmus

bench

Faust · « **Reply #21 on:** April 02, 2008, 02:18:47 AM »

Quote from: milfer on March 17, 2008, 08:49:52 AM

open endings suck, it's like getting a blow job and the bitch doesn't finish......pointless

Thats what you get for 10 bucks.

Deedee · « **Reply #22 on:** April 02, 2008, 07:46:55 AM »

Quote from: benchmstr on April 01, 2008, 05:52:46 PM

you understood it.

bench

Quote from: calmus on April 01, 2008, 05:55:09 PM

you didn't understand it

calmus

Okay.

Deedee

SuperNatural · « **Reply #23 on:** April 02, 2008, 12:00:49 PM »

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

calmus · « **Reply #24 on:** April 02, 2008, 12:08:13 PM »

Quote from: SuperNatural on April 02, 2008, 12:00:49 PM

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.