Topic: No country for old men

[Hush]

Looked like a Tarantino film, great start, good plot and then ten minutes from the end it's like they either ran out of time/money or just gave up!
Suddenly all the main characters died (and we didn't get to see them die) it was bizarre stuff.
Very disappointing after such a strong start.

[RustyOlive]

No country for old men is a Coen brothers movie.. when its them two.. the story never does follow the typical hollywood plot lines.. nonetheless.. a great film.

however you do have a point.. i too was disapointed with the way Llewelyn was killed off.. story fell apart there for a bit.. would have love to seen the gun fight at the hotel at least. and did the gunfighters get the "money"?

I have wondered.. with there be a #2? correct me if i'm wrong. but.. if the guys that killed off Llewelyn didn't get the money and if Carla Jean dosen't have it.... where is it??  So that would mean, Anton is still on the hunt for it...?

[Hush]

My point exactly.

[Damfino]

Looked like a Tarantino film, great start, good plot and then ten minutes from the end it's like they either ran out of time/money or just gave up!
Suddenly all the main characters died (and we didn't get to see them die) it was bizarre stuff.
Very disappointing after such a strong start.

I concur! I hated the ending.

[fastbroshi]

Tommy Lee Jones, just rambling like an old degenerate.  I tried to make something of it, some underlying meaning...but then it ends.  So so bad.  A let down.

[Hush]

But the idea, the plot was so good and the begining promised so much.....duh!

[sangyo soichiro]

I kind of like a movie (or book) that leaves you wondering at the end.  Think about it... if the movie has a clear-cut ending, then BAM, it's done.  But if it doesn't, then you're left thinking about it for a long time afterward.

Take Titanic for example.  Maybe Leo is still swimming around, maybe he's not.  We are left wondering.  I like that.   

[climbingaz]

You guys really didn't like the movie?  I thought it was great.  Sure it didn't end like a typical Hollywood movie usually ends, but it was adapted from the 2005 novel by Cormac McCarthy.  I think the Cohen brothers did a good job not screwing up the original story.

[paulages]

haven't seen the movie, but the book is great. actually, i thought the book was kinda boring until the last chapter, which really pulled it all together and made it an awesome book. The Road was another Mccarthy book made into a movie... good movie, amazing book.

[Hush]

I still feel cheated.

[seaweb11]

Here's a link to a bunch of links to watch it if you haven't seen it yet.

http://10starmovies.com/Watch-Movies-Online/No_Country_For_Old_Men_2007/

[RustyOlive]

watched The Road last night..
WOW!! what another stunning movie from the mind of Cormac McCarthy... Dark, scared.. sad life.. and again.. ends oddly.. leaves you hanging on for more.. but thats what makes it stand out more than your typical hollywood film. 

another great movie to add to any dvd collection!

[Duke McDukiedook]

I thought it ended properly, no Hollywood dramatic, feely-goody ending, more to reality.

Sometimes the protagonist dies in a whimper by the baddies.

Jones thought something bad had happened since sometime back when but Maurice Middlefield had to set him straight in letting him know that that territory had always been a wild and dangerous place.

Hence, No country for old men, only young bucks that live hard and die young.

[ofreen]

The movie reminded me of the Lonesome Dove books where the author created characters you care about then kills them off abruptly or has horrible things happen to them.  Doesn't make you feel good, but it is memorable.

[greenjeans]

It's (No Country for old men) actually one of my favorite movies and novels.     The movie follows the novel closer than most adaptations do.

Any of you guys that like to read should check into Cormack McCarthy.     

The border Trilogy:   All the Pretty Horses, The Crossing and Cities of the Plains are great books alone and together.
No Country for old Men is one of my all time favorites.

Needless to say, I am a huge fan of the Coen brothers.

[rallison]

The ending showed a man beaten down by an increasingly violent world that he couldnt or wouldnt try to understand. His retelling of his dream was of his father that was leading the path into the unknown for his sons inevitable death. He was feeling sorrow and anger over the previous events, knowing that he no longer could control things like he could in his youth and feeling death closing in. Sughar did get the money, when the sheriff entered the motel and had that dream sequence the camera showed the vent grill removed and a coin on the floor nearby. To show the end fight sequence with llewelyn and the mexicans and sughar would have been anti-climatic, you are supposed to fill in the how. I think the ending was brilliant in the fact it didn't just hand everyone all the information but just enough so that you could fill in the blanks. Anyway it was still better than the sopranos ending.

[Kevin D]

Sughar did get the money,  the camera showed the vent grill removed and a coin on the floor nearby.

Also showed Chigurh hiding in the shadows in the room for a brief millisecond.

Of course we were hoping for Llewelyn to better Chigurh.
 
Imagination of the unseen battle can be more powerful than seeing it. Just as you dont see what happens to the chicken farmer, you see the hit man washing the chicken feathers from the truck bed, and imagine the grisly event. IMHO.

[excellrec]

It's interesting seeing a thread on this film after I've digested it and had awhile to think about it.  First, a few caveats- I am a faithful Coen Brothers fan and also a great fan of ominous, dark, and vague films in general (It should really be a genre unto its own). 

Films like this are undoubtedly going to be polarizing.  Some viewers enjoy a film with a predictable story arc and a tight, conclusive ending.  I see nothing wrong with this and I think it makes good sense.  However, I tend more towards a film that leaves me pondering and questioning it long after it's over.  In fact, I may likely derive more enjoyment from a film in this stage of contemplation long after I've seen it. 

This film provide a great deal of contemplations.  Considering various interpretations for the ending has brought me to consider a few points.  1) The use of a quick and efficient, perhaps arbitrary, tool of slaughter by the antagonist. 2)The fact that Anton was himself characterized as completely devoid of emotion, suggesting that all of life's events are stops along a preset course.  3) Anton's continual use of a coin to determine someones fate.  4)  Woody Harrelson's (forget the character's name) insistence to Llewellyn that reason and emotion had no place in combating or escaping Anton.  In consideration of the ending, with these things in mind, I don't see how a conclusive and balanced ending would be reasoned.  I think the ending, and the film in general, stuck cleanly to the idea that no matter how hard you may want, or will, things to makes sense in life, that's just not how the world works.  Even in looking at Woody Harrelson's character- How predictable is it that you would cast a major star like that, introduce him, and then just kill him off shortly after?  Even Anton's character is shown susceptible to the arbitrary nature of things when the car he is driving collides with another, for no clear rhyme or reason. 

I'm curious if anyone has any other interpretations of the general theme of this film?  I think it is absolutely fantastic and even now contemplating it still am enjoying it a year or more after I've last seen it.

[ofreen]

Of course we were hoping for Llewelyn to better Chigurh.

Actually he did.  He was one step ahead of Chiurh all the way.  What he forgot about (and so do we) is the gang.  So he is surprised by them, and so are we.