I've been pondering this one for the last few days.


Without describing it, it appears that the ending is quite faithful to the source material.

But as for the movie... was it an appropriate way to bring two hours of meticulous build-up to a close? I admire the Coen Bros' integrity, and yet... it could have been one of the greatest action/noir flicks of all time (and some might argue that it is) with a better ending, I think.

What do you think?

(For the record, I think the film is great, breath-taking at times, but the ending was a bit abrupt and deflating for my tastes. It probably made more sense in the novel.)

--THE THING

Not having read the book on which this movie is based, I guess that I can't disagree with the ending of the movie if it's meant to be consistent with the book. That leads me to the question about why folks as consistently entertaining as the Coen Brothers ever thought that the book should be made into a movie in the first place - especially since the ending ruins the movie.

I suppose one could argue that the journey is more important than the destination. NCFOM might be a good indicator of which way one's preference lies: Do you prefer great story-telling, or is it more important that the film have a memorable and lasting climax at the end of all the build-up-- a big payoff, if you will?

Not that the two are mutually exclusive, of course...

I enjoyed the ending. The more I thought about the ending after leaving the theater and over the days that followed, I enjoyed it even more. It's the correct ending to what occured beforehand and ending it with Hollywood genre expectations would have cheapend the film. But I can understand why many folks were disappointed with how it turned out. Myself, I can't wait til it's released on dvd.

quote:

Originally posted by crazed:
I enjoyed the ending. The more I thought about the ending after leaving the theater and over the days that followed, I enjoyed it even more. It's the correct ending to what occured beforehand and ending it with Hollywood genre expectations would have cheapend the film. But I can understand why many folks were disappointed with how it turned out. Myself, I can't wait til it's released on dvd.

Me too, Crazed. BTW, we should be able to have spoilers in here, I can't imagine coming into this thread without having seen the movie.

I just don't know what people want. Would the movie be so great if the Sheriff caught Chigurgh at the end? For that matter, why aren't people dissappointed with the beginning? It doesn't even explain why the hell Chigurgh is involved in the first place. We use our imagination, it's interesting.

Every time a movie comes out that doesn't spell everything out for them, people freak out. It's frustrating. The movie is about more than a simple cat and mouse chase. It's a commentary on violence, and a damn good one at that.

Having read the novel twice, I'm very much anticipating what seems to be a film, rare these days, that respects its' source material,

quote:

Originally posted by Ishmaels Coffin:
Having read the novel twice, I'm very much anticipating what seems to be a film, rare these days, that respects its' source material,

Once you see it, the A.V. Club has a nice comparison of the book vs. the movie. There are a couple of changes, and a couple new scenes (namely the most exhillirating scene in the movie), but they do say it's otherwise quite true in tone and detail.

I agree, Il Mago. The AV Club article was illuminating.

BTW, I'm a big Cormac fan, yet this is one of the few novels of his I haven't read, due to almost-universal mediocre reviews. Maybe sometime in the future...

quote:

I've been pondering this one for the last few days.


Without describing it, it appears that the ending is quite faithful to the source material.

But as for the movie... was it an appropriate way to bring two hours of meticulous build-up to a close? I admire the Coen Bros' integrity, and yet... it could have been one of the greatest action/noir flicks of all time (and some might argue that it is) with a better ending, I think.

What do you think?

(For the record, I think the film is great, breath-taking at times, but the ending was a bit abrupt and deflating for my tastes. It probably made more sense in the novel.)

--THE THING

I agree with everything you said THING (except saying it was a meticulous build up). I know people like it when a movie is faithful to the book, but I agree with the THING, this movie had a chance to be the best action/thriller/noir ever. And I mean it, I thought the first hour was as good as any movie I had ever see.

When LLewelyn is talking to Anton and says you don't have to come after me becuase I'm coming after you, I couldn't wait until their confrontation. Unfortunately it didn't happen, bbut boy was I excited for it.

All this being said it still was my favorite movie of the year (and top 25) ever, but as I said, through the first hour or so I thought it might go down as my favorite movie ever.

I like the ending. More so than when I read the book. The film's more than just an action film; as moviegoers, we have a tendency to focus in on the Llewellyn vs. Chigurh plot, but really the story's about more than that. It's called No Country for Old Men; Moss won't ever get old, and (examining Chigurh's injury from a medical standpoint) neither will Chigurh. I suppose the title still applies to them - they die young, so it works. But the old man here is the Sheriff. In the first two thirds of the story, he struggles to comprehend all the violence that's occurring. Once all the young men have destroyed themselves, he just fades out. I think it's the only way to end his story.

So it's an unappealing decision, but there's no other way to really resolve Sheriff Bell's story.

Nice thoughtful post, MXH.

I think poeple wanted an ending something like this:

[Chigurh walking away from the car wreck]
[Sheriff Bell, from behind]"Not so fast"
[Chigurh stops, not looking back]
[Sheriff Bell]"Call it, heads or tails"[doesn't even carry a coin]
[Chigurh]"Heads"
[Sheriff Bell]"That's right...yours"[BAM! Chigurhs' head is blown off]

End credits.

Best.Movie.Ever.

Do you guys think that Kelly MacDonald's charachter was killed or spared?

quote:

Originally posted by besttasteinmusicever:
Do you guys think that Kelly MacDonald's charachter was killed or spared?

Killed. He checks his shoes for blood as he's leaving the house.

quote:

Killed. He checks his shoes for blood as he's leaving the house

That's what I assumed. Part of me thought that since the kids are passing by on their bikes and he just walks out (with no gun shot, sign of a murder) that maybe they were suggesting she wasn't killed. But then again that wouldn't really be in Anton's nature.

He would've spared her if the coin landed that way. He wasn't even a real character, he was just fate.

I haven't read the book, but from a filmmaking perspective, I have to say the end (and by end I mean the last half hour or so) seemed weird.

The first hour and a half focused so intently on the noir storyline of Llewelyn Moss and Anton Chigurh (which was terrific), it seemed so jarring to completely switch gears to focus almost solely on Sherrif Bell's plaintive reflection on society and violence for the last half hour.

I also agree with the Thing that there was a lot of build-up to the Moss-Chigurh story that ended, in my opinion, abruptly and anti-climatically.

I wasn't expecting a happy ending to the story, but the last 25% of the movie almost seemed like an entirely different film from what we had seen up until that point.

I didn't think the film lived up to its potential, and I've seen much better films from the Coens.

ive already seen this flim in theaters twice. and i absoulutely loved the suspense and tension beaming off of it. The ending is actually one of my favorite parts, it leaves you in a silence that gives you goosebumps. and i love how the mainstream frat boys looking for a good ole time get up and say what the fuck?!!?

so right after i left the theater i began trying to decipher the ending. i love movies that leave me with more entertainment: finding it out yourself, i enjoy it very much.

anyways, sheriff bell had stated in the beginning that old timers back then didnt even need to carry a gun. and that throughout how alarmingly high crime a violence rates have gone up in these times, the phrase seem to speak itself: this is no country for old men, the old folks are invovled in this time the most because it changed entirely around their life. they saw the good go to shit as they aged. so i think that bell was the most important character in the movie, he basically did a commentary throughout the movie on how awful things are now and it's really just to big and perplexing for him to handle, hence his retirement. so really i just decided myslef that the movie represents just how the world works today: there are no formulas, no expected 100% all the time resolved good endings, no predictable plot that was mentioned earlier above by someone else "people expect a simple movie formula". so i think that the movie wanted to deliver a simple message: a very suspenseful story about a cat and mouse chase cleverly written to keep you at the edge of your seat, then like sheriff bell's opening statement and what i said earlier,

it ends.
world is awful: so what? you doing something to help?
he dies shes dies: happens every day to good people.
anton isnt even captured: how would you want him to?

a great movie plot wrapped around a message on how fucked up the world is.
people expect a happy ending: "this is gay no ending no fair"
well, listen to the message the world and life doesnt always turn out fair.

Ahh, EG. I'm dissappointed that the end spoiled the film for you. I think the Coens had a strong desire to go against genre conventions. I don't know if Moss dying off screen bothered you, but I found that I was shocked and saddened to see him lying in a pool of blood. I believe if we saw the Mexicans kill him that it would have been less affecting.

I really do believe that they were trying to end it in a "real world" kind of way. A sheriff like Sheriff Bell would have seen so many unsolved crimes over the years, criminals who went unpunished. It's the sort of thing that leads him to believe it's "No Country For Old Men". If he was the hero cop, always making the bad guys pay, he wouldn't be feeling so defeated, helpless.

I thought it was obvious from the get go that he was the main character in the movie. Funny enough, the "non-ending" in this movie sucked the air out of me just as much as the ending to The Departed when Damon went down. Two totally different takes, but at the same time, the people you are meant to care about get offed and you don't see it coming. It's a sad helpless feeling and, imo, it works.

Personally, I can't wait to see it again.

It's funny that you mention The Departed, because I couldn't help but draw a parallel between the two. I thought Scorsese's ending, for whatever reason, worked much better for me.

I think it was the pacing. No Country For Old Men seemed to go on for far too long after they wrapped up the Llewelyn Moss story. Plus you've got this film that's downright exhilarating for the first hour and a half, and crawls for the last half hour. The climax came too early in the film.

I will say this about the film though: Javier Bardem gave an excellent performance as Anton Chigurh. I see an Oscar in his future.

I also really liked Josh Brolin's performance, which wasn't as flashy, but just as effective. He's been in three pretty big movies this year -- the other two being Planet Terror and American Gangster -- and I'm looking forward to him doing more stuff.