Five pages worth.Damien wrote:I’m surprised there’s not a separate No Country thread here other than the poll.
It's that damn "last 30 days" option again.
No Country for Old Men: The Poll
-
Sonic Youth
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8010
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
- Location: USA
I’m surprised there’s not a separate No Country thread here other than the poll. I know I’ve seen comments about the movie somewhere around here.
Anyway, I hated the Coens’ debut Blood Simple so much that I didn’t see another of their films until Fargo, which was okay but still possessed of some of the obnoxious smugness and condescension that made Blood Simple torture to sit through. Next one I saw was The Man Who Wasn’t There, which was little more than a very self-conscious exercise in stylization. Although it was occasionally amusing, I thought overall the Coens were straining for irony and absurdism. And that was my complete history with the Coens.
No Country is back in the same milieu as Blood Simple and has some of the same themes. All I can say is that its acclaim mystifies me. Narratively, its ordinariness is extraordinary. But plot is the least important element of a movie to me, yet the Coens in no way compensate for what seems like an expanded script from an old “Mannix “or “Cannon” episode. Usually with acclaimed movies that are actually awful (eg, Magnolia, American Beauty) I can understand why some poor souls are suckered into thinking they’re good. But I’m at a loss about this thing. I suppose two things that stand out for me as major flaws convinced people this was Art: the over-written script which assaults the audience with stilted dialogue and all the overly-composed shots, which seem only like a storyboard stuck on celluloid and are completely drained of life. Plus, these smug Upper West Side liberals can't hide their contmempt for people in the heartland. Although their condescension isn't as pronounced as in the past, still their attitudes to some of the subordinaye characters is appalling.
And what’s with this praise for Javier Bardem’s performance. All he is is a hulking presence – and as psycho killers go, damn he can’t hold a candle (or a match, for that matter) to Richard Widmark’s Tommy Udo in Kiss of Death. It makes me so sad that Casey Affleck’s (leading
) performace in Jesse James is going to lose to this guy.
The only thing No Country For Men has going for it are the lovely performances of Tommy Lee Jones and Barry Corbin (who should have been nominated for Best Supporting Actor in 1980 for Urban Cowboy).
Edited By Damien on 1202952028
Anyway, I hated the Coens’ debut Blood Simple so much that I didn’t see another of their films until Fargo, which was okay but still possessed of some of the obnoxious smugness and condescension that made Blood Simple torture to sit through. Next one I saw was The Man Who Wasn’t There, which was little more than a very self-conscious exercise in stylization. Although it was occasionally amusing, I thought overall the Coens were straining for irony and absurdism. And that was my complete history with the Coens.
No Country is back in the same milieu as Blood Simple and has some of the same themes. All I can say is that its acclaim mystifies me. Narratively, its ordinariness is extraordinary. But plot is the least important element of a movie to me, yet the Coens in no way compensate for what seems like an expanded script from an old “Mannix “or “Cannon” episode. Usually with acclaimed movies that are actually awful (eg, Magnolia, American Beauty) I can understand why some poor souls are suckered into thinking they’re good. But I’m at a loss about this thing. I suppose two things that stand out for me as major flaws convinced people this was Art: the over-written script which assaults the audience with stilted dialogue and all the overly-composed shots, which seem only like a storyboard stuck on celluloid and are completely drained of life. Plus, these smug Upper West Side liberals can't hide their contmempt for people in the heartland. Although their condescension isn't as pronounced as in the past, still their attitudes to some of the subordinaye characters is appalling.
And what’s with this praise for Javier Bardem’s performance. All he is is a hulking presence – and as psycho killers go, damn he can’t hold a candle (or a match, for that matter) to Richard Widmark’s Tommy Udo in Kiss of Death. It makes me so sad that Casey Affleck’s (leading
) performace in Jesse James is going to lose to this guy. The only thing No Country For Men has going for it are the lovely performances of Tommy Lee Jones and Barry Corbin (who should have been nominated for Best Supporting Actor in 1980 for Urban Cowboy).
Edited By Damien on 1202952028
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
I will say this for it, Aakash. It's not as bad as Ratatouille. :pAkash wrote:Damien wrote:Saw it today. Looks liek I surpassed you, Precious.
Wait, you didn't like No Country? *Sigh*
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
-
Sonic Youth
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8010
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
- Location: USA
Precious Doll wrote:Eric wrote:I think this is the only movie for which the lowest rating isn't mine.
EDIT: No wait, someone gave Juno one star.
The lowest rating for this one is mine.
Saw it today. Looks like I surpassed you, Precious.
Edited By Damien on 1202951401
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
-
Precious Doll
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4453
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
- Location: Sydney
- Contact:
The lowest rating for this one is mine.Eric wrote:I think this is the only movie for which the lowest rating isn't mine.
EDIT: No wait, someone gave Juno one star.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
-
Sonic Youth
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8010
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
- Location: USA
This film opened here yesterday and I rushed out to see it. I thought it was wonderfully done. The directorial control was absolutely amazing in parts. Just look at how they managed to rack up so much tension in such still, quiet shots. (Anyone else think the almost complete lack of music was a master-stroke?) The acting uniformly excellent, especially Bardem and Jones, who seemed to make effortlessly believeable lines which probably would have looked quite artifical (or perhaps a bit silly at times) when written down. And as for the ending...I had no trouble with it and seemingly neither did the audience I saw it with. I think it was a haunting, melancholy way to end what really is, for all of it's tension and blood, quite a sad film.
-
Eric
- Tenured
- Posts: 2749
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:18 pm
- Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Contact:
Saw this on another MB:
Edited By Eric on 1198691057
From THE TREATMENT podcase,
Joel and Ethan Coen:
“We were aware from the beginning that there was an aspect to the story where characters are completely defined by action. W talked about it like a Bresson movie especially with the Moss’ character. That’s a character that says almost nothing and you spend a lot of time in the novel and this was very appealing to us. We thought in the movie we could spend a lot of time watching him do things with his hands or preparing to do things. Expressing a character in those details is a very appealing thing to us.”
“That’s how we pitched the movie to the studio. We told them we were going to do a ‘Bressonian western’ and that’s why they gave us all the money.”
“Yeah, we told them it was going to be kind of like AU HASARD BALTHAZAR but with a lot of blood.”
“We’ve always thought the one that was most like that was A MAN ESCAPED, the guy who escapes from a prison cell. In that, you spend all this time watching him make little things to prepare his escape. It’s all about that”
Edited By Eric on 1198691057
-
Sonic Youth
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8010
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
- Location: USA
I just wrote and then lost my review. I'm furious.
Very briefly, and then I'll expound on this later. First, I know exactly what is going to be the most outrageous snub this Oscar season: "No Country for Old Men" not getting the nomination for Best Acheivement in Sound Mixing. The use of sound in this film is simply masterful. But only loud films seem to get nominated for this category. More on this later.
Everything about it is beautifully crafted, and it's a film that screams out for repeated viewings. Hell, it screams out for a dissertation. But although I felt that much of the final fifteen minutes was very much of a piece with what came before, there was one aspect that left me frustrated, and while this is may be fealty to the novel, it still smacks of disloyalty to the viewer. Or at least, to me. I would not be surprised if this ended up being, in my opinion, the best of the Best Picture nominees. But ultimately, as far as crime films go, I preferred "Zodiac" and "Eastern Promises". If they were nominated for Best Picture, along with... oh, I don't know... "Ratatouille", then that's four films I'd rather see win Best Picture over "No Country".
Looking forward to Damien's devastating review, as well as a Sominex nomination. "Smug in its lack of smugness" will be one of the lines.
Edited By Sonic Youth on 1198647737
Very briefly, and then I'll expound on this later. First, I know exactly what is going to be the most outrageous snub this Oscar season: "No Country for Old Men" not getting the nomination for Best Acheivement in Sound Mixing. The use of sound in this film is simply masterful. But only loud films seem to get nominated for this category. More on this later.
Everything about it is beautifully crafted, and it's a film that screams out for repeated viewings. Hell, it screams out for a dissertation. But although I felt that much of the final fifteen minutes was very much of a piece with what came before, there was one aspect that left me frustrated, and while this is may be fealty to the novel, it still smacks of disloyalty to the viewer. Or at least, to me. I would not be surprised if this ended up being, in my opinion, the best of the Best Picture nominees. But ultimately, as far as crime films go, I preferred "Zodiac" and "Eastern Promises". If they were nominated for Best Picture, along with... oh, I don't know... "Ratatouille", then that's four films I'd rather see win Best Picture over "No Country".
Looking forward to Damien's devastating review, as well as a Sominex nomination. "Smug in its lack of smugness" will be one of the lines.
Edited By Sonic Youth on 1198647737
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
Win Butler