[Atheist]

Seeing that it won an Oscar for best picture, I'm surprised there hasn't been a thread for this movie. For those that have seen it, what did you think? For me it was kinda... meh. All through the movie, I kept thinking that I should have read the book instead.

[ort888]

I loved it. I found the ending to be very jarring at first, but the more I watch and or think about it, the more I like it. One of the best movies I've seen in a long time. I find any moment of it spellbinding, it's just so well put together.

[voodoo]

Damn fine movie. I thought I had commented on it in a thread here for sure, maybe it was at another forum I don't remember

[analogue SPRINKLES]

It was good. Not outstanding but it was well done and the acting was impressive.
Check out There Will Be Blood. Same sort of feel with equal awesome acting.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Check out There Will Be Blood. Same sort of feel with equal awesome acting.

The '20+ years later' ending ruined it for me. I lost all connection and sympathy with the characters and the plot. I recommend seeing it, but just stop watching when that stupidly large timegap appears. The movie will feel less disjointed and insulting that way.

The director might as well have flipped the eagle to the audience instead of using the "...and now 20 years later" text. I would have felt less offended.

[Zeeb]

I loved No Country for Old Men. The acting was superb and the characters were so. . .doomed. A perfect Cormac McCarthy story. lol

[@pplejaxkz]

Such a well made movie. It was the best film that I have seen in a while.

[Jawbone54]

I'm just not sure about any movie that wins an Academy Award anymore (sans LOTR).

Good flick, sure. But Oscar-worthy?

[turtle777]

I loved Kelly Macdonald's Texan accent. Ridiculously awesome.

-t

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Check out There Will Be Blood.

Great movie if you suffering from the insomnia. Put you to sleep like you never wake-up or maybe you no want to wake-up.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

Great movie if you suffering from the insomnia. Put you to sleep like you never wake-up or maybe you no want to wake-up.

Guess it is also a good way to test for A.D.D.

[PB2K]

it missed 2 important scenes, one in which the main character died and the final scene.

[Aquataris]

I'm not sure exactly how I feel about No Country. I haven't seen There Will Be Blood but I intend to. The ending seemed proper after you let it set in. The way certain characters are shown to be very important and then are suddenly dropped unceremoniously and with little effect to the storyline doesn't feel as odd as you would expect. I think that may be where I respect it the most. A storyline strong enough to suddenly chop down whatever it has built into its main support beam and still stay engaging is worthy of awards. Whether or not they would be awards I would have chosen to give, I'm not sure about.

[Peter]

amazing flick.

[vmarks]

Oscars used to be ways for the Studios to make actors feel like they had won awards instead of giving them more money.

In a roundabout way, it's backfired on the Studios, in that an actor with an Oscar can charge a lot more money than one without. But then, the old Studio system died a long time ago...

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I'm just not sure about any movie that wins an Academy Award anymore (sans LOTR).

I feel the opposite. I realized that the oscars mean nothing when crap like LOTR gets them.

[ort888]

The Oscars are just a way for Hollywood to congratulate itself for being so awesome. It's nothing but a giant event where they gather and fellate each other for a few hours while they let everyone know how great they are.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by ort888 

The Oscars are just a way for Hollywood to congratulate itself for being so awesome. It's nothing but a giant event where they gather and fellate each other for a few hours while they let everyone know how great they are.

[Laminar]

Did anyone else find it weird that there wasn't any music throughout the entire movie? That just didn't seem right.

[sek929]

Netflix just dropped it off at my house, going to watch it tomorrow.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Did anyone else find it weird that there wasn't any music throughout the entire movie? That just didn't seem right.

I thought it was kinda suitable.

[Aquataris]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Did anyone else find it weird that there wasn't any music throughout the entire movie? That just didn't seem right.

I think the absence of music made it more engaging. Nothing breaks up action like a set up scene muting out the sound of the surroundings with music. And without a score, you attentively await the next thing said. True silence gives scripted silence much more weight. Also, this movie has no target audience. Adding music to a movie like this could have actually added an unintended target audience.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Did anyone else find it weird that there wasn't any music throughout the entire movie? That just didn't seem right.

Funny, because There Will Be Blood is the total opposite, lots of music (sound), but very little conversation.

-t

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Did anyone else find it weird that there wasn't any music throughout the entire movie? That just didn't seem right.

I didn't notice so it must have been the right choice. I'll hafta watch it again.

Anybody ever see one of those hog zappers on eBey? Wanna get one for fun.

[Jawbone54]

The lack of music definitely added to the mood, particularly in the desert scenes. Good choice, IMO.

But I know people that literally couldn't watch the movie because it was "too quiet." Their loss, but they're not alone.

[stevesnj]

Definitely on my top ten list.. terrible ending but the rest of the movie outweighs the poor ending

[Don Pickett]

Terrible movie: just more proof that if you throw enough bullshit at the screen, someone, somewhere, will think it all means something.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

I'm just not sure about any movie that wins an Academy Award anymore (sans LOTR).

Fail.

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Good flick, sure. But Oscar-worthy?

Epic fail.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Fail.

Aw, c'mon...

Crash? Really good, but the best?

Million Dollar Baby? Chicago? Shakespeare in Love? It's hit and miss, but that's just one guy's opinion.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

Terrible movie: just more proof that if you throw enough bullshit at the screen, someone, somewhere, will think it all means something.

When enough people disagree, it can mean either of two things:

a) you know more than all of them.

b) you're wrong.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by analogika 

When enough people disagree, it can mean either of two things:

a) you know more than all of them.

b) you're wrong.

I'd like to agree with you on that one but that doesn't always work. I mean Microsoft, George Bush, Billy Ray Cyrus and Paris Hilton seem to have a lot of fans.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

Terrible movie: just more proof that if you throw enough bullshit at the screen, someone, somewhere, will think it all means something.

Proof that someone, somewhere on the internet will call anything terrible even if it's critically acclaimed.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I'd like to agree with you on that one but that doesn't always work. I mean Microsoft, George Bush, Billy Ray Cyrus and Paris Hilton seem to have a lot of fans.

But few awards.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

Million Dollar Baby? Chicago? Shakespeare in Love? It's hit and miss, but that's just one guy's opinion.

I'm just disagreeing with Lord of the Rings. I could understand some sort of technical award for some of the breakthrough work they did on the special effects software, but not the movie. Hell, King Kong got nominated for an Academy Award, and the was one of the worst piles sh*t I had to sit through. The Academy Award is sort of like politics. It's all about jumping on bandwagons and bribing people.

There Will be Blood and No Country for Old Men were refreshing movies. I like the plots, the acting, and you don't need to cover up ineptitude with millions of dollars of special effects like Lord of the Rings, and to the extreme, King Kong. I also really enjoyed American Gangster. Those movies did deserve a nod for an Oscar. Well written and played.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Proof that someone, somewhere on the internet will call anything terrible even if it's critically acclaimed.

I don't give two thoughts about "critically acclaimed." Those morons voted King Kong. KING KONG!!!

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Proof that someone, somewhere on the internet will call anything terrible even if it's critically acclaimed.

So was Titantic. It, too, won an Oscar.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by analogika 

But few awards.

Oh right, I forgot about that fool proof method of determination.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Oh right, I forgot about that fool proof method of determination.

I think there was a mixup back stage and they thought they were Janet and Michael.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

So was Titantic. It, too, won an Oscar.

Your point being?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Oh right, I forgot about that fool proof method of determination.

What the hell is that???

Of course you are right, lots of awards are given to horrible works. Neither awards nor popularity is a measurement of quality, but hopefully - just hopefully it is an indicator.

So yeah.. are people still arguing about taste? Have fun with that all.

[- - e r i k - -]

That would be Milli Vanilli.

[ort888]

Art is subjective. That's all there is to it. I can very easily understand why someone wouldn't like No Country for Old Men. It's a very unconventional movie that breaks some rules that probably shouldn't be broken. I think the risks paid off, but others might not. No big deal.

Anywho, I just got done watching There Will Be Blood... and I'm not sure why the two films were compared. I mean, they both came out in 2007 and are pretty unconventional, but I think the similarities pretty much end there. I really liked TWBB, and I also liked the part where they skipped ahead. In fact, the last scene of the movie was probably my favorite. I thought it was a great payoff.

[sek929]

Just got through watching it and I enjoyed it thoroughly, the ending took me by surprise but it worked perfectly IMO.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Saw it on opening night in Halifax. Blew me away. Saw it again on DVD and loved it more. The ending was better the second time, probably because the hotel scene didn't mess me up as much. I didn't know what to think of that scene at first.

greg

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Your point being?

Claiming a movie has merit because it's "critically acclaimed" is a useless metric.

[- - e r i k - -]

Hating on movies because "it's the cool thing to do" is even more useless in my opinion. Titanic was a fine movie.

[Aquataris]

I don't give a damn about bandwagons or popularity and I loved King Kong and LOTR. I also found nothing wrong with Titanic.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Art is subjective. That's all there is to it. I can very easily understand why someone wouldn't like No Country for Old Men. It's a very unconventional movie that breaks some rules that probably shouldn't be broken. I think the risks paid off, but others might not. No big deal.

Despite my arguing, I agree with you wholeheartedly. We're essentially fighting over our favorite flavor of ice cream.

[Aquataris]

Which we surely all agree on is Mint Chocolate Chip.

[ort888]

Wrong!