No Country for Old Men

[JayBee74]

Re: No Country for Old Men

I whole-heartedly disagree. First what happens to Lleweylnn isn't what upset me, it was how it was shown.
And the Coens did butcher it. In my opinion, the whole movie was a long setup to an inevitable showdown. But then the Coens don't bother to show it. Imagine watching Rocky IV without the fight with the Russian - only the aftermath. In my mind, that's a very good depiction of how this movie wrapped itself up.

Good analysis, sorry that you didn't like it as much as me. I was trying to assume your slant on the flick.

[Jimplication]

Re: No Country for Old Men

Jimplication, one question about the book:

Spoiler

Did Chegher kill Llewyn's wife?

Thanks!

Spoiler

The movie paralleled the book almost identically, right up until El Paso. However, the movie and book are similar in regards to Llewyn's wife. In the book, she refuses to call the coin flip at first, but eventually calls heads. He tells her it's tails, there is some more dialogue, he apologizes, then shoots her.

A few more things...

In the book, there is more commentary in regards to the poolside girl and Llweyn. After they are found dead together, the younger sheriff comments that "I don't reckon his wife is going to like that part of it neither" ("that part" being that her husband was found dead with a skanky looking younger girl, at a motel).

Then later, after he tells the news to Llewyn's wife, there is an italicized chapter in which the sheriff thinks, "I wanted to tell her that the way they had it in the papers wasnt right. About him and that girl. It turned out she was a runaway. Fifteen years old. I dont believe he had anything to do with her and I hate it that she thought that. Which you know she did. I called her a number of times but she'd hang up on me and I can't blame her."

In the book, Chigurh's car was T-boned by a car driven by a bunch of doped up Mexicans. The case doesn't surface until later on (at least a few months), as a result of Chigurh's gun being traced by the FBI and connected to a boy who picked it up from his truck at the time of the accident. It was more recently tracked to a robbery in Louisiana, and from there back to the boy that sold it. The sheriff then interviews the boy, who ended up being the boy that was given the $100 to not have seen Chigurh. The sheriff mentions that a witness saw another boy with him, but the boy consistently denies this. The sheriff then goes to school and pulls some of his friends in for an interview and the friend that was there with $100 boy spills the beans, but nothing is really resolved, except that it's clear that it was Chigurh that walked away from the accident.

One of my thoughts on the movie is that I felt there were too many unnecessary characters. In my opinion, Woody Harrelson, his boss, as well as the sheriffs really had a minimal role in the movie and served little to no purpose. Furthermore, the Mexicans that go to El Paso are meaningless and don't tie into the story at all, aside from providing a random means for advancing a very vital aspect of the story (read: bad directing/writing). Looking back, the sheriffs did next to nothing, and Woody Harrelson's role was strictly a cameo with no real meaning to the overall plot.

In the book these characters are vital because they actually do something and play an integral role, but in the movie the focus is heavily on Llewyn and Chigurh, and everyone else takes a back seat. There is no law enforcement in the movie, and aside from checking out the crime scene, Tommy Lee Jones spends the majority of his time at diners making witty and whimsical comments about life.

I did enjoy the movie up until El Paso, but I did feel that there were too many characters given the simplistic nature of the movie, and at times it seemed to be more about inserting random celebrities than it did driving an otherwise good story through vital and meaningful characters.

Even in the book, Cormac McCarthy often tried to turn the book into something more than a fast paced action novel by including chapters of deep reminiscing and contemplation. This doesn't work that well in the book either, but instead becomes a tiring and awkward feeling break in an otherwise fast paced and enjoyable tale.

He does this in his other books as well (The Border Trilogy), and while these novels are slower paced and more suited to passages of reminiscing and deep thought, it still felt very affected and overdone, at times literally being a chore to read through just to get to the parts where the story advances again.

No Country for Old Men is nothing more than a good action book/movie. The title can be seen as a metaphor for the sheriff and his unpreparedness for the "new breed" of crime in the south, but beyond that the novel is very much a fast paced read about a drug deal gone wrong and the ensuing chase that results in the parties getting their money back.

Without using a spoiler, I did not enjoy the way the movie ended, because it seemed like a cheap attempt at making the movie something more than what it was. And due to the movie and book running parallel, I didn't really care for the ending in the book, either.

[Money99]

Re: No Country for Old Men

Good analysis, sorry that you didn't like it as much as me. I was trying to assume your slant on the flick.

That's the thing, I LOVED so much of the film. Near the end I was even saying to myself "I have to own this movie". I just didn't like how things wrapped up, is all. I think it could have been better.

Anyway, I should shut-up now. I know some people who have seen it loved the movie and I'm sure there are more that will also. The Coens are masters and if you liked their previous work I'm sure you'll love this one too. I just had a gripe with the last 20 minutes is all.

I'd love to hear other people's opinions on it as well.

Cheers.

[Money99]

Re: No Country for Old Men

Spoiler

The movie paralleled the book almost identically, right up until El Paso. However, the movie and book are similar in regards to Llewyn's wife. In the book, she refuses to call the coin flip at first, but eventually calls heads. He tells her it's tails, there is some more dialogue, he apologizes, then shoots her.

A few more things...

In the book, there is more commentary in regards to the poolside girl and Llweyn. After they are found dead together, the younger sheriff comments that "I don't reckon his wife is going to like that part of it neither" ("that part" being that her husband was found dead with a skanky looking younger girl, at a motel).

Then later, after he tells the news to Llewyn's wife, there is an italicized chapter in which the sheriff thinks, "I wanted to tell her that the way they had it in the papers wasnt right. About him and that girl. It turned out she was a runaway. Fifteen years old. I dont believe he had anything to do with her and I hate it that she thought that. Which you know she did. I called her a number of times but she'd hang up on me and I can't blame her."

In the book, Chigurh's car was T-boned by a car driven by a bunch of doped up Mexicans. The case doesn't surface until later on (at least a few months), as a result of Chigurh's gun being traced by the FBI and connected to a boy who picked it up from his truck at the time of the accident. It was more recently tracked to a robbery in Louisiana, and from there back to the boy that sold it. The sheriff then interviews the boy, who ended up being the boy that was given the $100 to not have seen Chigurh. The sheriff mentions that a witness saw another boy with him, but the boy consistently denies this. The sheriff then goes to school and pulls some of his friends in for an interview and the friend that was there with $100 boy spills the beans, but nothing is really resolved, except that it's clear that it was Chigurh that walked away from the accident.

One of my thoughts on the movie is that I felt there were too many unnecessary characters. In my opinion, Woody Harrelson, his boss, as well as the sheriffs really had a minimal role in the movie and served little to no purpose. Furthermore, the Mexicans that go to El Paso are meaningless and don't tie into the story at all, aside from providing a random means for advancing a very vital aspect of the story (read: bad directing/writing). Looking back, the sheriffs did next to nothing, and Woody Harrelson's role was strictly a cameo with no real meaning to the overall plot.

In the book these characters are vital because they actually do something and play an integral role, but in the movie the focus is heavily on Llewyn and Chigurh, and everyone else takes a back seat. There is no law enforcement in the movie, and aside from checking out the crime scene, Tommy Lee Jones spends the majority of his time at diners making witty and whimsical comments about life.

I did enjoy the movie up until El Paso, but I did feel that there were too many characters given the simplistic nature of the movie, and at times it seemed to be more about inserting random celebrities than it did driving an otherwise good story through vital and meaningful characters.

Even in the book, Cormac McCarthy often tried to turn the book into something more than a fast paced action novel by including chapters of deep reminiscing and contemplation. This doesn't work that well in the book either, but instead becomes a tiring and awkward feeling break in an otherwise fast paced and enjoyable tale.

He does this in his other books as well (The Border Trilogy), and while these novels are slower paced and more suited to passages of reminiscing and deep thought, it still felt very affected and overdone, at times literally being a chore to read through just to get to the parts where the story advances again.

No Country for Old Men is nothing more than a good action book/movie. The title can be seen as a metaphor for the sheriff and his unpreparedness for the "new breed" of crime in the south, but beyond that the novel is very much a fast paced read about a drug deal gone wrong and the ensuing chase that results in the parties getting their money back.

Without using a spoiler, I did not enjoy the way the movie ended, because it seemed like a cheap attempt at making the movie something more than what it was. And due to the movie and book running parallel, I didn't really care for the ending in the book, either.

Thanks for the info.

I think I might pick this book up over the Holidays. I'd like to learn more of who Chigurh worked for and why he

Spoiler

Killed so many of the men that apparently worked for the same people he did.

Was the Border Trilogy any good as well?

[Jimplication]

Re: No Country for Old Men

Thanks for the info.

I think I might pick this book up over the Holidays. I'd like to learn more of who Chigurh worked for and why he

Spoiler

Killed so many of the men that apparently worked for the same people he did.

Was the Border Trilogy any good as well?

The movie follows the book very closely, and I am honestly not sure there is enough difference to prevent it from being overly predictable, even boring. It is an enjoyable read, but I often have trouble reading a book if I've seen the movie first.

The Border Trilogy was very well done. The three books are generally pretty independent from one another, with the common trait being their setting in Texas and Mexico. If you're going to read a Cormac McCarthy book over the Holidays, I would recommend All the Pretty Horses. It's the first book of the Border Trilogy, and was also made into a movie, which I haven't seen yet.

[Money99]

Re: No Country for Old Men

The movie follows the book very closely, and I am honestly not sure there is enough difference to prevent it from being overly predictable, even boring. It is an enjoyable read, but I often have trouble reading a book if I've seen the movie first.

The Border Trilogy was very well done. The three books are generally pretty independent from one another, with the common trait being their setting in Texas and Mexico. If you're going to read a Cormac McCarthy book over the Holidays, I would recommend All the Pretty Horses. It's the first book of the Border Trilogy, and was also made into a movie, which I haven't seen yet.

Thank you! I'll definitely check it out.

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: No Country for Old Men

I saw this movie this afternoon and wow. Amazing film. Some very tense scenes and Chigurh was just creepy as hell.

[Money99]

Re: No Country for Old Men

I saw this movie this afternoon and wow. Amazing film. Some very tense scenes and Chigurh was just creepy as hell.

I still don't know who that actor is, but man did he do a brilliant job portraying a sociopath. He definitely deserves some Oscar talk.

[AuburnAlumni]

Re: No Country for Old Men

Saw this last night..LOVED the movie.

Except for the damn ending.

That was probably the biggest "WTF was THAT?!" moment I've ever had in a movie.

The ENTIRE Audience in unison seemed to say, "What the HELL?!!!"

[Chief Illinimac]

Re: No Country for Old Men

I just got back from seeing this, and it is probably the best movie I've seen since The Departed. Just about every single scene, action, dialogue had a point to it, and tie that with some incredible acting from Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem (Chigurh)... 9.5/10.

My opinion is that if you didn't like the ending, you probably were enjoying it just as a thriller, which is totally fine because it was a great thriller. But there was a very unifying theme that was subtly reinforced at every turn. Again, not for everyone, but I was sitting in amazement when the credits started rolling to dead silence.

I'll also note that it seems like a lot of "elitist" film fans feel this ending separates the intelligent from the dumb, and I totally disagree with that. It's definitely a love it or hate it type ending. Even if you "get" it, you might not really like it.

[Chief Illinimac]

Re: No Country for Old Men

I whole-heartedly disagree. First what happens to Lleweylnn isn't what upset me, it was how it was shown.
And the Coens did butcher it. In my opinion, the whole movie was a long setup to an inevitable showdown. But then the Coens don't bother to show it. Imagine watching Rocky IV without the fight with the Russian - only the aftermath. In my mind, that's a very good depiction of how this movie wrapped itself up.

Spoiler

His death was meant to show (by not showing it) the insignificance of his role in Chigurh trying to get his money back. This is made clear during the scene with the guy in the wheelchair (I didn't catch his name). Chigurh was throwing tons of lives away in an effort to regain what he had lost. All the shown deaths were done to provide a glimpse into what a psychopath he was. With all those brutal deaths being shown, you really have a sense of insignificance when Moss is killed, even though he seemed very significant at the time. The contrast was amazing, I thought, but I can also see how it could piss some people off.

[Brian Gee]

Re: No Country for Old Men

All I know is that this movie pissed off the entire audience that I watched it with. Young or old, there was A LOT of grumbling on the way out. I thought it was brilliantly acted, but the last half hour wasn't up to the rest of the film. I've read this thread and it looks like the book explains more without leaving you lost.

I got the point of the film and the message, but do feel (IN MY OPINION!) that they dropped the ball towards the end. Okay..maybe not dropped, but like one of those completions that is ruled complete but during the replay "may" have hit the ground.

The ruling on the field stands as a catch, but I understand how some think it was incomplete.

[Fresh Tendrils]

Re: No Country for Old Men

The crowd I was with had the opposite reaction. There was a very positive vibe going through the theatre.

I've been thinking ever since I saw it, but this was a kick *** Western - even if most people don't consider it a Western, I do. It definitely fits into that mold, IMO.

[Eton Rifles]

Re: No Country for Old Men

I would say it's a modern western.

[chrisd70]

Re: No Country for Old Men

If you guys want to read a great Cormac McCarthy book, read "Blood Meridian."

And I really liked "No Country," but I'm wondering now what it said on the headstone.