I liked the concepts but Cormac McCarthy had one big problem. A problem that is many times ascerted with that "postmodernism". Obscure happenings. It's easy to write like that but you don't have to be good at it. The film also lost the little amount of character the book had. There seemed to be no drive. Tommy Lee Jones should have been in more of it.
You are saying that the Anton Chigurh character didn't have any motivation, like if it was a flat character. The thing here is, this is a Coen Bros. movie. They do know about storytelling and characters more than 90% of moviemakers. They did choose to make Chigurh a villain that comes out of nowhere and behaves chaotically, it is impossible to know what he is going to do and why.
That is pure terror, and justifies the title of the movie. No country for old men.
"Mythic" west? You guys need to get out more. Spend a week in southern Arizona (outside of the retirement village) and then tell us how mythic the modern west is.
I dont understand how it can be viewed anton chigurh as being unmotivated. I think that aspect is very simple, Chigurh is a hired bounty hunter and his motivation is retrieving the case full of money for a client. Although he is psychopathic and his character is ultimately used as a symbol of meaning, i think his human presence and vulnerability is also conveyed just as well in a few examples like the car crash near the end and the leg wound he takes from moss in the hotel shootout.
I liked this movie the first time I saw though watching it a second time I understood it more and liked it even more from what I've heard alot of ppl didn't enjoy the ending even in the book i haven't read it but it's the same way sort of but I like the movie :) Anton is a great villain
Their reaction is the typical reaction to No Country that everyone had the first time they saw the film. You can't judge every movie on just one viewing. My father hated No Country For Old Men the first time he saw it, but now he likes it.
i would like one of these harvard intellectual's to indulge my stupidity and reveal to me what this magnificent hidden message is in the film or could they please refer some clues for my retarded ass.
@sparklebucket death is a force of nature with no discrimination, that
"old men"are the people who believes death comes to the wicked as a punishment? Its a story about, the unfair, about real life, and how it all unfolds. Anton was used as death in the flesh and his unlucky victim, Llewelyn, as much as most people want him to succeed and have is millions of dollars and what not, truth thats not life. Tommy Lee narrates the finer points of this changing world.
I would say it's a movie prescient of the role of greed in our world, leading to inconceivable violence. Much of it is off screen so to speak in exploited, corrupted countries. The soliliquy in Syriana on corruption is instructive .... it's about greed, and how to get on top. In such a dynamic the young and ambitious will always hunt the older dog. The unfashionable lesson is stay small and intact not big and ego driven. Going back was good, giving the money away (Mentalist) better.
Also, there should be "No review from Old Men. Old Man, your comments are like finger nails on a chalk board. You don't get this movie. Why don't you just break out a Jimmy Cagney movie and dream about olden days.
Actually it can be considered a positive ending, in that the Tom Lee Jones character let's go of his 'old' story & begins a new one as shown by the glimmer of fire at the end of his dream. No wonder these geezers didn't understand the movie they clutch THEIR old stories too hard.
good point about the lack of a happy ending. So the only thing you take from the movie is sometimes 'bad stuff happens'. Very different from the typical Hollywood BS
He returned to the site with the water because he had amoral fiber, if you remember theres a scene where he's in his bed and he wakes up and says "ok" grabs the water and heads out there, because he can't live with leaving that guy out there even though he's probably dead. The bad guys is the complete opposite of him. Thats what the movie is about
I think the problem with these "geezers" is that they try to analyze and explain films by using their very outdated ways of thinking. They understand almost none context surrounding this film. This review is terrible.
This is my first and last time i'll watch their opinions. You mean to tell me they dont understand why he went back to the shooting site with a gallon of water? What a freaking retard.
You people are missing a lot of what the movie is about, for example you can't control destiny, that's what the coin symbolized and that what Anton was emphasizing throughout the film. OLD GEEZERS!
fate and the consequences of the drug trade originating in the greed of the business in a manifested human form. He does not spare anyone including the drug lords, innocent bystandards, or unlucky hunters. As woody harilson said 'He has principals that transcend money, drugs or anything else'. And as Chiger told him before he killed him, 'If the rule followed got you here, what good was the rule you followed'. He is the consequence of that rule. In the end there is no barganing with fate.
You're thinking of the javier charachter incorrectly. He doesnt have to have any depth. As Tommy Lee Jones' charachter says 'sometimes he reminds me of a ghost'. Those that died in this movie, would have died even without Javier's charchacter simply because of the situation they were in, the people they knew or how they were envolved in the drug trade. As Tommy Lee Jones said of the dead mexicans 'a natural death, natural to the line of business they were in.' anton chigurh reprents the
i actually was confused by the idea that this movie tried to portray existentialism. isn't every non-linear story that doesn't lead to any sort of gain or loss considered "existentialism"?
(i enjoyed the movie for the record)
very great review! the man reminds me of larry david
I really like your comments. I don't like to hear that the bad guy got away. I placed an order for the movie today. I hope I enjoy it.. Although now I am not so sure because I like happy endings. I just do....
He brought the water back to the mexican in the truck because he felt guilty. He didn't want to leave a dying man in a truck. He knew it was "dumbernhell" to go back to the scene, but he went anyway because it was making him lose sleep.
PLEASE DONT READ THIS you will die in seven days if you dont post this comment on 10 videos in the next hour. if you do tomorrow will be the best day of your life
couldnt agree with you two more. sure, javier was frightening as that character but he, as well as the other characters, lacked any depth in personality whatsoever. plus, the ending did indeed follow this new and ridiculous postmodern trend of ending abruptly with no true conclusion and overall the movie certainly was overpraised by critics. i just finished a review of this movie myself and our opinions are very similar.
It was a strange movie, definitely different from most others. And yes, it was worth watching. But, in my opinion, it doesn't deserve the academy award for best screenplay and best picture!
"just because you didn't get, don't think that it isn't there"......... love it. just like i loved the movie. as stated, the scenery alone is worth watching the movie. I do have one question, does the book end like the movie? would it be worth reading the book to get a real finish?
The review was great and entertaining. Thanks for that...........
for a movie to be great and good enough to win an oscar doesn't mean it has to have a whole lot of depth and full of character development, even though there is a little character development with tommy lee jones, but it has great directing, effective story that in its way makes sense, great acting and lots of suspense and intrigue.
i totally agree, compelling and entriging. although to say the film is about the money is a falsehood, The Coen Bros have a great habit of opening with a red herring, in T. Big L. its not about the kidnapping, in Burn. A. Reading is not about the CD.
No he wasn't, several times it referenced in the movie that even if the money was returned people would be killed simply because of anton's warped sense of fate. The retrieval of the money was only a small part of his killing.
although the money drives the story, the film is not about greed, or money, its about how America is growning too quickly for its own good, or growth.
she's right....there is a problem with luellen returning to the scene for agua...he doesn't care enough, obviously, after he tracks down the moneyboy....unless...he wanted to play the game a bit...which he gets. he wants to see the coin flip instead of bangin his plain jane girl for the rest of his life regardless of the money.
It was a film with complex motivations, but the Bardem character wasn't without motivations; in fact, he has a couple of scenes where he expresses them.
It's not smart-ass for the good guys to die here -- it is a full expression of the theme. And it is the Sheriff's comments which bring that point to the fore. I don't agree with the theme, personally, but it's there in so many lines and character actions, that I think it was willful ignorance on these experienced geezers' parts to miss it.
I think they both missed the point. The film was about how people are willing to transform themselves into beings without moral character. Ed Tom, a man of tradition, can not understand this concept, and the movie thrives on his point of view, one that can't comprehend the extreme violence that results from this new generation of anti-ethical people. Who dies at the end is irrelevant, as both Moss and Chigurh simply illustrate the sherrif's sentiments.
I agree. The past that stuck with me was the two boys taking the money from him with his blood on it, & arguing how they would split it. The kid offered him the shirt off his back for free to help his injury, but took the money to keep quiet.
For me, that was the theme of the 1980's
In simpler times, kids did not need $
The part that in hindsight did not make sense was the water. When he went back with the jug, he jumped into a river that was right by the dying man who was pleading for water.
ugh, Anton being unmotivated does not make the movie "flat". Jesus Christ, have you people never heard of using characters as symbols rather than actual human beings?
@3SirCrimson3 There ya go. I saw Anton as a deadly force of nature more than i thought of him as a complex character. He was frightening in his unrelenting and morbid passion to find the money.
the old lady saying that him returning with the water and kicking off the chase is dumb is a very bold but at the same time ignorant statement. He returned because it was haunting him and he wanted to do what he could to make things right without getting the cops involved.
This is my favorite movie though, along with Fargo.
The geezers always offer a refreshing view. Two FYIs: The sympathic characters were killed off in the McCarthy novel as well. The Shadow was the radio character who asked, "What evil lurks in the hearts of men?"
In the movie, the old sheriff explains what the geezers are trying to understand -- that in the old days he believed that good would eventually win out. Everything made sense then. But now he could only shake his head at the senselessness of the violence. It made no sense, and it wasn't going to stop. The good guys aren't going to kill all the bad guys. No, it had no hollywood ending, and that was the point.
wow I have to disagree, this is one of the best movies I've ever seen. It was wonderful, acting, directing and producing all around. The movie was perfection and bardem was beyond excellent!
Everyone I knew bitched and moaned about this ending. So when I saw it,I was totally biased AND I thought the ending was perfect! To do it any other way may have been more satisfying for the masses,but totally wrong.
Really enjoyed watching this as well as reading the comments, though it is distressing how the lack of artistry in popular filmmaking has created a situation where people are conditioned so that they cannot respond to an important artwork. They have no reference for it. That people would complain about the ending is very sad to me. This is such an important film, and you owe it to yourself to try to understand it.
OOPS As I was saying,,there was nothing un-typical about this flick,until the "ending".However,the abrupt"ran-outta-film" finale did force us find reasons to justify watching the whole movie!!Now we are forced to focus on"the lovely scene shots",the strange psycho-intellectual chats between Chigurh and his victims,and the supposed "enlightening" qualities" hidden in the seemingly usual thriller plot,I gotta admit,it was a great joke guys,,thanks to a certain Asian host, I didn`t pay to see it!:)
It is customary for a DP to occasionally hold the camera. They're the DP for GOD SAKE! The old man understands then he doesnt, nah he doesnt. You dont know how to analyze a great movie like this. Everything in this movie was PERFECT. Bardem, Brolin, Jones, the Coens, Deakins of course, and the script. And he is not a pure psychopath, evil of course, but not purely. Flattens? Wow. Classic film. Its about us and people, and the old ones. Ironic how its about them but they didnt like it.
There are numerous DoP's who never operate the camera - in fatc I'd go further and say that most don't operate it. Some (not many) don't even look through the viewfinder. At a Hollywood level, it's not really a job that requires physical contact wit the camera.
The director did not forget the ending. The film ended the way Cormac McCarthy wrote tho novel that the film is based on. And the ending is Lewellyn (good guy) dies, Lewellny's innocent wife dies, the sheriff (other good guy) fails and retires from fighting evil, and assassin (Bad Guy) does what he sets out to do and succeeds. Unlike most stories, this one ends with evil triumphing over good.
well said, it's little more than a simple chase film (which a lot of their films are) because they removed the Tommy Lee Jones back-story from the book. It will not age well and it certainly isn't as good as Fargo, which is essentially the same film (with a few plot variations.) Also, I thought Bardem was a comic character and not in the least bit scary.
i dunno about this review ... i found chigurh very highly motivated, laid out as far as it could be, IMO, in the infamously brilliant coin-flip scene.
i DO agree tho about being killed off-screen. that was kind of odd.
how can this chick not get why he returned, he is good, the movie is good vs evil. louellen is a good guy, he doesnt cheat on his wife, he is a humanitarian bringing the water, if i was shot in the desert in a drug deal gone bad id want someone to bring me water!
I like to feel sexy....knowing someone is watching me ..wanting me...turns me on!BADLY! I like to flirt and pose..and sometimes i like to get WILD! how? ..he he..come in video and youll see:-)) maybe u can teach me something..or maybe i will ! come visit me at ... MeetYourFling (.COM) ... my user-id there is eulalie-tgqi chat soon on cam :-) wksiofcdqnf
This movie is a not as wickedly funny as its cousin "Fargo". The Coen's theme of the eternal good guy against a present-day evil is getting tiresome. I cannot believe the hubris of our protaganist! Lynch did it better and scarier in "Blue Velvet". And they all lived happily ever-after. After the wood-chipper, the car accident, or the robin's return. But the tire tracks, the inept deputy, the subtle, "I'm too old for this shit!" sensibility? Stop making the same movie!
No motivation? Please, a briefcase full of two million dollars and a paid contract for Lewellyn's head? That's some damn good motivation if you ask me.
What I think is important about this review is it fails on many levels but its biggest weakness is that it reveals the fate of the characters, and the major developments of the story. Generally a very dissapointing and extremely negative review, I didnt find it beneficial.
Yeah, I agree that they shouldn't have revealed the ending. But then again, it seems to go with the modern approach to endings. Basically the ending doesn't have the same significance it would have in most movies, so giving it away is next to trivial. Unless there really was a profound meaning to the dream telling at the end. I don't know i just finished watching it 10 minutes ago.
I saw this movie and There Will Be Blood, and I thought "Blood" was by far the better of the two. It's plot was so much more intricate, the camera work was amazing, the acting was fantastic, and I think the villain was much better-and he was also the main character.
McCarthy makes it clear in his book that Moss is a moral person who is aware of the danger of taking the money, and then returning to scene to bring the man water. He knows that doing this will probably be the end of him. But he cannot resist the urge to test himself, to face the challenge.
Why the big debate on why he went back? It's not presented as a mystery. It's quite clear he returned to give the man the water. On arriving he took out his gun because there were extra cars present.
Could be two ways to examine why Moss went back. His conscience was bothered by leaving the man dying so he either went back to save him (water) or he went back to take him out of his misery. A hunter/soldier would never leave an animal/enemy half-alive.
My take on the book and the movie is the portrayal of evil as the constant. People have to try hard to be good and mostly fail (Moss) but the current of evil (Bardem) is always flowing steadily, available to all mankind whenever weak.
I personally believe the reason he went back was because he was so stricken with curiousity of who or what was gonna be looking for the money... he felt he needed to see for himself. He knew that guy would be dead but he wanted to see if anyone had figured out he had been there yet.
Sorry dude, but people around the world have good feelings and fail to comprehend evil, so do muslim people. There is civilization outside the US. Try travelling.
Bardem's character is a Psychopath and as such has no moral constraints to his behavior plus a distorted understanding of reality which lowers his fear threshold.
It is about how fear, overconfidence and desire makes us vulnerable, yet honestly human.
Also, how far in getting it his own way can a Psychopath go. Think Bush.
Seemed to me to be a message in there about honesty, truth - keeping your word no matter what. Take into account Chigurh's conversation with Llewelyn's wife before he killed her.
She tells him he doesn't HAVE to kill her. He says that he in fact absolutely does have to kill her because he gave his word that he would - didn't matter that the husband was dead already. The guy was obsessed with TRUTH. Look at the conversation he had with the guy who he made call the coin toss.
He returns to the trucks to kill the guy in the truck. He didnt want a survivor eye witnessing him. But ends up getting caught anyway. He felt he could get away clean with the money but doesnt.
Think about it, why would he bring water back to the guy? Dont forget who the guy was, a drug dealer. Not some innocent victim in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was a piece of shit and Brolin's character new that. He went back to kill him or to make sure he was dead from his wound.
This movie is about the innocence of the American soul, and how vulnerable it is in the face of true evil. All of the characters except the sheriff are naive, unable to protect themselves from evil which they have no way of understanding, because they live in a rational culture with normal expectations about human behaviour. Bardem hides his evil with an outward show of civility. None of the victims is able to comprehend the evil, and is therefore victimized by it. Think Islam.
i love this movie. if you watch it again, notice that there's no music played through the whole thing other than the mexican band that wakes up lu ellen or possibly some radio
For me, the movie ran out of gas after Josh Brolin's character died. One fatal flaw I noticed in terms of historical accuracy is the sherrif's Chevrolet Caprice police car. It's at least circa 1986-1989 yet the date of the mother's death on the headstone was 1980. Oops.
Bardem the hitman was one of the best charactors after the Sherif. Bardem represents what we all fear, an untimelly death! He represents fate and or Karma. He wasnt just a psyhco killer without a purpose and who´s thinking was totally crazy. The store cleark lived after meeting Bardem and calling the coin. "Fate", others died. His job was to kill people, he wasnt just doing it for fun so he had a purpose. People are too caught up in the killing to learn anything from this film. Bambi suits them.
The hit man still would have found Lou Allen and the money cause, if every one forgot, there was a tracking device stuck in between the bills. That how the hit man found him in the motel in the first place. It was stupid to take money from a blood bath like that but people always think they can get away with it. People who dont like this movie are the same way, scared of Death and professionals at avoiding reality. Go watch a Disney film.
One person's opinion may differ from that of another so here's mine, not that it will buy lunch next week. If we fear an untimely death then most of us guard against it, and if we find 2 mil out in the parking lot we look into the container like a mother looks at the fingers and toes of a new baby. At least the blacks caught a break. They didn't get shown off as stupid. My twenty bucks can buy better than a movie like this. Thank goodness it's free online and I didn't pay to feel like a sucker.
Lewllyn returned to the man dying of thirst in the car because he felt guilty about taking the money. He thought that he could get rid of his guilt by doing this deed, but it turns out too late and that's when the Mexicans show up and the movie takes off.
well the film is called no country for old men, it shoud be a tell to not take these two reviewers' word on it, no offense. and as far as bardem's character being without reason and a simple write, that is wrong. he was the only character with a strick set of principals, so he got away. moss was irrational in his decisions such as empathizing with the mexican for water yet jeopardizing his wife in the end. chigurh stuck to his guns, however callous he may have been. please put a spoiler alert!
hongquaio - phone from a public payphone, not from home! No interrogation would ensue. Y'know, drive away a little, park up and then walk to a payphone. make the call, that's it. What you dont do is go back and try to save a bullet-riddled dying man with a canteen of water.
the old lady is spot on. Moss went back with water coz of his conscience...that's illogical and dumb. Surely a phonecall to police/emergency services would be the only thing a person would do. A bit of water aint gonna help him, even if the guy did ask for water. What was he gonna do, give him some water and then leave him? job done? ridiculous.
the book was excellent. couldnt put it down once i got into it. the movie was great. cohen bros. have done some seriously entertaining movies. bardem deserved the oscar. theres too much garbage in films and then finally you get movies like this
tp500 - the movie was not a dream. The sheriff was in retirement and described two dreams to his wife. The first dream he describes is about him losing some money that his father gave him. And the second one is about him and his father riding horses into a forest and his dad says hes gonna go make a fire and to meet him there. Then the sheriff/cop (whatever his name is) says he wakes up. Those dreams dont relate to the plotline at all. Everything actually happened (in the movie ofcourse)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This review sucks. Talking about the old days. New movies are great. They are wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
The whole movie until the end was a dream, if you didn't catch that. He said the first one quickly, it was about him and his dad and he owed him money, but he thinks he lost it. That isnt really the point though. If you dont catch the themes in the movie like everyone stated, you won't really understand the movie.
Anton Chigurh isn't some crazy killer. i mean sure they didn't give much detail about him, but it's clear that he's hired by someone to get the money back
so he's not just killing for no reason
why the fuck would you tell people that 2 of the main characters dies in the movie
great way to ruin the movie for people who haven't seen it huh?
it's a fucking movie review, you're not suppose to tell us everything about the movie
And in defence of the book, it goes into more details about llewlyn and his wife dying a little more, and when Wells the bounty hunter gets shot its very detailed and more brutal...if anything the book toned down the darkness by alot
The brief case had a tracking devise on it, he returned because he felt bad for just letting him die, if he would of stayed in his house asleep he would of died..so thats why..to the old chick
The dream meant now that sheriff Bell is retired he basically has nothing better to do than wait and die, the dream is kind of an interpretation but i think it must be saying his father is now waiting for his sons death, waiting for him to pass away and meet with him again. the dream says that he is waiting ahead while Bell catches up, meaning he is waiting to see him again after death. There is a lot of great messages in this film, it isnt just a thriller or crime story, watch it many times.
TripodLeNoel, the film is about many things, but the real jist is that this is no longer a country for old men, Sheriff Bell is bent on the old times of sherrifing without a gun and doing things peacful like but he just cant anymore. the world is going to hell fast, his old ways just wont cut it anymore and he has to retire because in this country evil can win regardless of how set in his easy going ways he is......
I just don't get the movie - the bad guy walks away, the good guy gets wasted... his wife dies.. I just don't get it. Especially the bit where Tommy Lee explains his dreams to his wife. Can someone tell me what the go is?
Right on the mark I think. These two are insightful, smart and amusing. They've earned a new listener. The character admitted it was stupid to return with water but his conscience ruined his sleep. He took a calculated gamble and lost.
perfect review, the whole movie was based off the guy going back to the trucks with the water. He must have been the stupidest guy ever to go back there. STUPID MOVE, but a great movie!
Oh, I almost forgot. Scariest western villain=Frank.
NeverAloneForever 1 day ago
I liked the concepts but Cormac McCarthy had one big problem. A problem that is many times ascerted with that "postmodernism". Obscure happenings. It's easy to write like that but you don't have to be good at it. The film also lost the little amount of character the book had. There seemed to be no drive. Tommy Lee Jones should have been in more of it.
NeverAloneForever 1 day ago
You are saying that the Anton Chigurh character didn't have any motivation, like if it was a flat character. The thing here is, this is a Coen Bros. movie. They do know about storytelling and characters more than 90% of moviemakers. They did choose to make Chigurh a villain that comes out of nowhere and behaves chaotically, it is impossible to know what he is going to do and why.
That is pure terror, and justifies the title of the movie. No country for old men.
bostria 2 days ago
"Mythic" west? You guys need to get out more. Spend a week in southern Arizona (outside of the retirement village) and then tell us how mythic the modern west is.
tjenkins83 4 months ago
@tjenkins83 Mythic in how movies show it. Indeed, I've been to Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico and I sure didn't see any myth.
NeverAloneForever 1 day ago
I dont understand how it can be viewed anton chigurh as being unmotivated. I think that aspect is very simple, Chigurh is a hired bounty hunter and his motivation is retrieving the case full of money for a client. Although he is psychopathic and his character is ultimately used as a symbol of meaning, i think his human presence and vulnerability is also conveyed just as well in a few examples like the car crash near the end and the leg wound he takes from moss in the hotel shootout.
lovebuzz125 7 months ago
Marcia obviously loved this movie and can't admit it. Look at how much she modeled her hair after anton chigurh's
blaklodge 7 months ago 4
@blaklodge ha!
nfnkalyan 7 months ago
The reason Llewelyn and Carla Jean die off screen is to demonstrate how unimportant they are in the grand scheme of all things.
Killermike2178 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Meet your dream girls rockmycity.info
gatjjadkaa 9 months ago
I liked this movie the first time I saw though watching it a second time I understood it more and liked it even more from what I've heard alot of ppl didn't enjoy the ending even in the book i haven't read it but it's the same way sort of but I like the movie :) Anton is a great villain
Killnatas 10 months ago
He returned because he was being a good christian. You can see it when he was filling up the jug of water, talking to his wife.
MrDurcon 1 year ago
Darn, the ending was confusing and not uplifting. That means the movie is one of the worst ever made.
itputsthelotion1 1 year ago
Their reaction is the typical reaction to No Country that everyone had the first time they saw the film. You can't judge every movie on just one viewing. My father hated No Country For Old Men the first time he saw it, but now he likes it.
Tarantinosucks 1 year ago 2
Thank goodness Anton did not have some traditional motivation.
dtstrain 1 year ago
i would like one of these harvard intellectual's to indulge my stupidity and reveal to me what this magnificent hidden message is in the film or could they please refer some clues for my retarded ass.
thank you geniuses
sparklebucket 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sparklebucket death is a force of nature with no discrimination, that
"old men"are the people who believes death comes to the wicked as a punishment? Its a story about, the unfair, about real life, and how it all unfolds. Anton was used as death in the flesh and his unlucky victim, Llewelyn, as much as most people want him to succeed and have is millions of dollars and what not, truth thats not life. Tommy Lee narrates the finer points of this changing world.
joker9494949494 10 months ago
I was very dirappointment with the movie too, though an ardent Coem Bros fan. It just didn't make any sense this time.
tunderbomber 1 year ago
I would say it's a movie prescient of the role of greed in our world, leading to inconceivable violence. Much of it is off screen so to speak in exploited, corrupted countries. The soliliquy in Syriana on corruption is instructive .... it's about greed, and how to get on top. In such a dynamic the young and ambitious will always hunt the older dog. The unfashionable lesson is stay small and intact not big and ego driven. Going back was good, giving the money away (Mentalist) better.
Tom5578 1 year ago
The pain of a tainted conscience is why he goes back to the thirsty man.
dutchhaze1 2 years ago
omg... im only on my 20s and i share a pretty similar vision about movies those days... im afraid of what i will become when i turn your age.
marvincontendo 2 years ago
Enjoyed your comments on the film, enlightening :)
simplicity135 2 years ago
Comment removed
majorhoop 2 years ago
Also, there should be "No review from Old Men. Old Man, your comments are like finger nails on a chalk board. You don't get this movie. Why don't you just break out a Jimmy Cagney movie and dream about olden days.
jazzgent 2 years ago
You guys sound whining and complaining. Do you like anything.
jazzgent 2 years ago
Just saw this movie.
I was blown away.
JacksInn 2 years ago
Am I the only one who thought this movie was stupid?
mashdoctor 2 years ago
yes
saxonsnowredux 2 years ago 2
Probably. It was a masterpiece. Sorry you didn't like it.
elrodracing 2 years ago
no i think its a stupid movie tooooo i didn't like it
tanori9 2 years ago
Yes, you are.
brklynjay5 2 years ago
Actually it can be considered a positive ending, in that the Tom Lee Jones character let's go of his 'old' story & begins a new one as shown by the glimmer of fire at the end of his dream. No wonder these geezers didn't understand the movie they clutch THEIR old stories too hard.
spacestate 2 years ago
Comment removed
spacestate 2 years ago
good point about the lack of a happy ending. So the only thing you take from the movie is sometimes 'bad stuff happens'. Very different from the typical Hollywood BS
alaincharnier1971 2 years ago
He returned to the site with the water because he had amoral fiber, if you remember theres a scene where he's in his bed and he wakes up and says "ok" grabs the water and heads out there, because he can't live with leaving that guy out there even though he's probably dead. The bad guys is the complete opposite of him. Thats what the movie is about
CrashmagProductions 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'If the Road you followed got you here, what good was the Road you followed?'.
Yoganao 2 years ago
Comment removed
Yoganao 2 years ago
i feel sorry for those who do not have the intellectual capacity to understand the depth of film
ocfan66 2 years ago 2
I think the problem with these "geezers" is that they try to analyze and explain films by using their very outdated ways of thinking. They understand almost none context surrounding this film. This review is terrible.
essemgy 2 years ago
the killer is after the money- that is his motive.
XIPM3 2 years ago
This is my first and last time i'll watch their opinions. You mean to tell me they dont understand why he went back to the shooting site with a gallon of water? What a freaking retard.
buddacafe 2 years ago
I think these people are too old to appreciate the art of this movie. At least the lady.
jazzgent 2 years ago
It takes place in th early 1980's NUTS
Its not 2009 it's 1981 ! OMG !
ART1975CZ 2 years ago
You people are missing a lot of what the movie is about, for example you can't control destiny, that's what the coin symbolized and that what Anton was emphasizing throughout the film. OLD GEEZERS!
Laughingman90 2 years ago 3
shes a bitch
killwhitey88d 2 years ago
fate and the consequences of the drug trade originating in the greed of the business in a manifested human form. He does not spare anyone including the drug lords, innocent bystandards, or unlucky hunters. As woody harilson said 'He has principals that transcend money, drugs or anything else'. And as Chiger told him before he killed him, 'If the rule followed got you here, what good was the rule you followed'. He is the consequence of that rule. In the end there is no barganing with fate.
leftbehind81 2 years ago
You're thinking of the javier charachter incorrectly. He doesnt have to have any depth. As Tommy Lee Jones' charachter says 'sometimes he reminds me of a ghost'. Those that died in this movie, would have died even without Javier's charchacter simply because of the situation they were in, the people they knew or how they were envolved in the drug trade. As Tommy Lee Jones said of the dead mexicans 'a natural death, natural to the line of business they were in.' anton chigurh reprents the
leftbehind81 2 years ago
Some really good points.
Incidentally, it's spelt "character". You've got some crazy version of the word going on there. Meh, maybe it's post-modern.
robohobo1982 2 years ago
I need to see this movie. I think everything they said about law and order is SOOO!
True!
tmoore74 2 years ago
i actually was confused by the idea that this movie tried to portray existentialism. isn't every non-linear story that doesn't lead to any sort of gain or loss considered "existentialism"?
(i enjoyed the movie for the record)
very great review! the man reminds me of larry david
blap316 2 years ago
I really like your comments. I don't like to hear that the bad guy got away. I placed an order for the movie today. I hope I enjoy it.. Although now I am not so sure because I like happy endings. I just do....
blahzescoop 2 years ago
well ur not getting a happy ending
8VXU6 2 years ago
He brought the water back to the mexican in the truck because he felt guilty. He didn't want to leave a dying man in a truck. He knew it was "dumbernhell" to go back to the scene, but he went anyway because it was making him lose sleep.
1974moparman 2 years ago 2
wow that movie was pretty violent cant believe you guys watched it.. awesome movie though i loved it
NinjAroha 2 years ago
You thought that this film was violent - wait until Blood Meridian comes out.
Hoo, nelly.
robohobo1982 2 years ago
who says "hoo, nelly"?
leftbehind81 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PLEASE DONT READ THIS you will die in seven days if you dont post this comment on 10 videos in the next hour. if you do tomorrow will be the best day of your life
i read this i must comment sorry :D
Corkid88 2 years ago
couldnt agree with you two more. sure, javier was frightening as that character but he, as well as the other characters, lacked any depth in personality whatsoever. plus, the ending did indeed follow this new and ridiculous postmodern trend of ending abruptly with no true conclusion and overall the movie certainly was overpraised by critics. i just finished a review of this movie myself and our opinions are very similar.
ImTylerDurden99 2 years ago
agreed
what made him compelling and different from the cliche villain is his code of rules
blap316 2 years ago
dang..
josh brolin shot to dog in 2007 ... american gangster & no country for old men
MrCruZ1992 3 years ago
nice couple
onepath09 3 years ago
I absolutely agree with them!
It was a strange movie, definitely different from most others. And yes, it was worth watching. But, in my opinion, it doesn't deserve the academy award for best screenplay and best picture!
fuhrerschein2008 3 years ago
"just because you didn't get, don't think that it isn't there"......... love it. just like i loved the movie. as stated, the scenery alone is worth watching the movie. I do have one question, does the book end like the movie? would it be worth reading the book to get a real finish?
The review was great and entertaining. Thanks for that...........
pikerun 3 years ago
for a movie to be great and good enough to win an oscar doesn't mean it has to have a whole lot of depth and full of character development, even though there is a little character development with tommy lee jones, but it has great directing, effective story that in its way makes sense, great acting and lots of suspense and intrigue.
Brettwbeyer14 3 years ago
i totally agree, compelling and entriging. although to say the film is about the money is a falsehood, The Coen Bros have a great habit of opening with a red herring, in T. Big L. its not about the kidnapping, in Burn. A. Reading is not about the CD.
Some of the best acting ive seen that year.
a 10/10
rorrt 3 years ago
Bardem was motivated by money, he was payed to retrieve the money.
willobeen 3 years ago
No he wasn't, several times it referenced in the movie that even if the money was returned people would be killed simply because of anton's warped sense of fate. The retrieval of the money was only a small part of his killing.
ToolshedEd3TF 3 years ago
Wellhis motivation to KILL might not of been money, but it was the money that motivated to kill THEM.
willobeen 3 years ago
although the money drives the story, the film is not about greed, or money, its about how America is growning too quickly for its own good, or growth.
rorrt 3 years ago
she's right....there is a problem with luellen returning to the scene for agua...he doesn't care enough, obviously, after he tracks down the moneyboy....unless...he wanted to play the game a bit...which he gets. he wants to see the coin flip instead of bangin his plain jane girl for the rest of his life regardless of the money.
crowleyjohn301 3 years ago
totally cool old geezers. atleast thanksgiving would be cool with these two instead of them bitching about the cranberries coming from a can....
crowleyjohn301 3 years ago
These are nothing but two old SENILE geezers.
cracknik 3 years ago
Nick Jonas is a stud muffin.
shanis2spoild 3 years ago
It was a film with complex motivations, but the Bardem character wasn't without motivations; in fact, he has a couple of scenes where he expresses them.
It's not smart-ass for the good guys to die here -- it is a full expression of the theme. And it is the Sheriff's comments which bring that point to the fore. I don't agree with the theme, personally, but it's there in so many lines and character actions, that I think it was willful ignorance on these experienced geezers' parts to miss it.
apointwelltaken 3 years ago
i'm pretty sure neither of these folks would enjoy cormac's best novel, blood meridian,
those of you who haven't read it, do so.
take a look it's in a book.
maitlanr 3 years ago
I think Suttree is Cormac McCarthy's best novel, but I think he has a lot of them.
AddictedToFunAndMeth 3 years ago
ITS NOT DUMB. Llewellyn had consideration for the guy in the truck!
munoxxx 3 years ago 2
I think they both missed the point. The film was about how people are willing to transform themselves into beings without moral character. Ed Tom, a man of tradition, can not understand this concept, and the movie thrives on his point of view, one that can't comprehend the extreme violence that results from this new generation of anti-ethical people. Who dies at the end is irrelevant, as both Moss and Chigurh simply illustrate the sherrif's sentiments.
coasterman16 3 years ago 8
I agree. The past that stuck with me was the two boys taking the money from him with his blood on it, & arguing how they would split it. The kid offered him the shirt off his back for free to help his injury, but took the money to keep quiet.
For me, that was the theme of the 1980's
In simpler times, kids did not need $
The part that in hindsight did not make sense was the water. When he went back with the jug, he jumped into a river that was right by the dying man who was pleading for water.
murphicus 3 years ago
ugh, Anton being unmotivated does not make the movie "flat". Jesus Christ, have you people never heard of using characters as symbols rather than actual human beings?
3SirCrimson3 3 years ago 7
@3SirCrimson3 There ya go. I saw Anton as a deadly force of nature more than i thought of him as a complex character. He was frightening in his unrelenting and morbid passion to find the money.
JangoFett07 1 year ago
the old lady saying that him returning with the water and kicking off the chase is dumb is a very bold but at the same time ignorant statement. He returned because it was haunting him and he wanted to do what he could to make things right without getting the cops involved.
This is my favorite movie though, along with Fargo.
streetsurfer14 3 years ago 4
The geezers always offer a refreshing view. Two FYIs: The sympathic characters were killed off in the McCarthy novel as well. The Shadow was the radio character who asked, "What evil lurks in the hearts of men?"
davevanfunk 3 years ago
In the movie, the old sheriff explains what the geezers are trying to understand -- that in the old days he believed that good would eventually win out. Everything made sense then. But now he could only shake his head at the senselessness of the violence. It made no sense, and it wasn't going to stop. The good guys aren't going to kill all the bad guys. No, it had no hollywood ending, and that was the point.
andrewl2007 3 years ago 3
Exactly. Good to see that Youtube is not completly choked with idiots.
MelvinFett 3 years ago 3
wow I have to disagree, this is one of the best movies I've ever seen. It was wonderful, acting, directing and producing all around. The movie was perfection and bardem was beyond excellent!
amanahill7 3 years ago
this was a good movie that had a very realistic feel.
why did the guy return to that horrible seen to give a dying man some water? what u mean u guys don't get it? What happen to morals?
just because u wouldn't go back doesn't mean the next guy wouldn't.
-If u can't do something smart do something Right.
Morcridx1 3 years ago
Everyone I knew bitched and moaned about this ending. So when I saw it,I was totally biased AND I thought the ending was perfect! To do it any other way may have been more satisfying for the masses,but totally wrong.
hamtrak 3 years ago
Really enjoyed watching this as well as reading the comments, though it is distressing how the lack of artistry in popular filmmaking has created a situation where people are conditioned so that they cannot respond to an important artwork. They have no reference for it. That people would complain about the ending is very sad to me. This is such an important film, and you owe it to yourself to try to understand it.
epstone1 3 years ago 3
OOPS As I was saying,,there was nothing un-typical about this flick,until the "ending".However,the abrupt"ran-outta-film" finale did force us find reasons to justify watching the whole movie!!Now we are forced to focus on"the lovely scene shots",the strange psycho-intellectual chats between Chigurh and his victims,and the supposed "enlightening" qualities" hidden in the seemingly usual thriller plot,I gotta admit,it was a great joke guys,,thanks to a certain Asian host, I didn`t pay to see it!:)
law245 3 years ago
well you lucked out. I also saw it for free so I don;t have to 'like' the film to make up for being robbed.
0lord0kinbote0 3 years ago
I watched this ,like any other thriller,,to get closure!!There was nothing beyond typicality in this..until.."
law245 3 years ago
It is customary for a DP to occasionally hold the camera. They're the DP for GOD SAKE! The old man understands then he doesnt, nah he doesnt. You dont know how to analyze a great movie like this. Everything in this movie was PERFECT. Bardem, Brolin, Jones, the Coens, Deakins of course, and the script. And he is not a pure psychopath, evil of course, but not purely. Flattens? Wow. Classic film. Its about us and people, and the old ones. Ironic how its about them but they didnt like it.
Templar613 3 years ago
There are numerous DoP's who never operate the camera - in fatc I'd go further and say that most don't operate it. Some (not many) don't even look through the viewfinder. At a Hollywood level, it's not really a job that requires physical contact wit the camera.
GoughHawke 3 years ago
The director did not forget the ending. The film ended the way Cormac McCarthy wrote tho novel that the film is based on. And the ending is Lewellyn (good guy) dies, Lewellny's innocent wife dies, the sheriff (other good guy) fails and retires from fighting evil, and assassin (Bad Guy) does what he sets out to do and succeeds. Unlike most stories, this one ends with evil triumphing over good.
Wailwulf 3 years ago 3
well said, it's little more than a simple chase film (which a lot of their films are) because they removed the Tommy Lee Jones back-story from the book. It will not age well and it certainly isn't as good as Fargo, which is essentially the same film (with a few plot variations.) Also, I thought Bardem was a comic character and not in the least bit scary.
I guess it was their year.
watchlunchtv 3 years ago
he returned to give the guy water
themellowmello 3 years ago
i dunno about this review ... i found chigurh very highly motivated, laid out as far as it could be, IMO, in the infamously brilliant coin-flip scene.
i DO agree tho about being killed off-screen. that was kind of odd.
Alexsy82 3 years ago
you guys are great. Not to be condescending but utterly cute cheers guys.
GIANTSTALKLIKETHIS 3 years ago
'I don't have my cell phone and I don't know his number.'
LOL
celshader 3 years ago
how can this chick not get why he returned, he is good, the movie is good vs evil. louellen is a good guy, he doesnt cheat on his wife, he is a humanitarian bringing the water, if i was shot in the desert in a drug deal gone bad id want someone to bring me water!
mikemoair 3 years ago 3
look the hit man was a perfectionist who's word was everything! if he says he is going to do it he does it! refreshing in this day and age!
mikemoair 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I like to feel sexy....knowing someone is watching me ..wanting me...turns me on!BADLY! I like to flirt and pose..and sometimes i like to get WILD! how? ..he he..come in video and youll see:-)) maybe u can teach me something..or maybe i will ! come visit me at ... MeetYourFling (.COM) ... my user-id there is eulalie-tgqi chat soon on cam :-) wksiofcdqnf
sweetofasfoury 3 years ago
This movie is a not as wickedly funny as its cousin "Fargo". The Coen's theme of the eternal good guy against a present-day evil is getting tiresome. I cannot believe the hubris of our protaganist! Lynch did it better and scarier in "Blue Velvet". And they all lived happily ever-after. After the wood-chipper, the car accident, or the robin's return. But the tire tracks, the inept deputy, the subtle, "I'm too old for this shit!" sensibility? Stop making the same movie!
spide429 3 years ago
No motivation? Please, a briefcase full of two million dollars and a paid contract for Lewellyn's head? That's some damn good motivation if you ask me.
Buehlysses01 3 years ago
What I think is important about this review is it fails on many levels but its biggest weakness is that it reveals the fate of the characters, and the major developments of the story. Generally a very dissapointing and extremely negative review, I didnt find it beneficial.
ghostydoggy 3 years ago
Yeah, I agree that they shouldn't have revealed the ending. But then again, it seems to go with the modern approach to endings. Basically the ending doesn't have the same significance it would have in most movies, so giving it away is next to trivial. Unless there really was a profound meaning to the dream telling at the end. I don't know i just finished watching it 10 minutes ago.
peanut18544 3 years ago
I saw this movie and There Will Be Blood, and I thought "Blood" was by far the better of the two. It's plot was so much more intricate, the camera work was amazing, the acting was fantastic, and I think the villain was much better-and he was also the main character.
kikomiko1 3 years ago
seek, Les Miserables
johnafter909 3 years ago
what is the French thriller they mention?
seek83 3 years ago
McCarthy makes it clear in his book that Moss is a moral person who is aware of the danger of taking the money, and then returning to scene to bring the man water. He knows that doing this will probably be the end of him. But he cannot resist the urge to test himself, to face the challenge.
phoric 3 years ago
The psycho in Cape Fear & a few other films are straight-up psychopaths as well- no reason, just evil:
Silence of the Lambs
Goldhelmriel 3 years ago
he went back to take care of the witness, d'ah.
NaturalTvventy 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You guys are too old and dumb.
bearo657 3 years ago
Why the big debate on why he went back? It's not presented as a mystery. It's quite clear he returned to give the man the water. On arriving he took out his gun because there were extra cars present.
okstereohead 3 years ago
Could be two ways to examine why Moss went back. His conscience was bothered by leaving the man dying so he either went back to save him (water) or he went back to take him out of his misery. A hunter/soldier would never leave an animal/enemy half-alive.
My take on the book and the movie is the portrayal of evil as the constant. People have to try hard to be good and mostly fail (Moss) but the current of evil (Bardem) is always flowing steadily, available to all mankind whenever weak.
scottylove25 3 years ago
I personally believe the reason he went back was because he was so stricken with curiousity of who or what was gonna be looking for the money... he felt he needed to see for himself. He knew that guy would be dead but he wanted to see if anyone had figured out he had been there yet.
LairdNicole1985 3 years ago
@camrant
Sorry dude, but people around the world have good feelings and fail to comprehend evil, so do muslim people. There is civilization outside the US. Try travelling.
Bardem's character is a Psychopath and as such has no moral constraints to his behavior plus a distorted understanding of reality which lowers his fear threshold.
It is about how fear, overconfidence and desire makes us vulnerable, yet honestly human.
Also, how far in getting it his own way can a Psychopath go. Think Bush.
sinelnic 3 years ago
I meant no socially accepted/mediated moral constraint but his own "heavily personal" moral constraints, which he does follow.
sinelnic 3 years ago
Seemed to me to be a message in there about honesty, truth - keeping your word no matter what. Take into account Chigurh's conversation with Llewelyn's wife before he killed her.
She tells him he doesn't HAVE to kill her. He says that he in fact absolutely does have to kill her because he gave his word that he would - didn't matter that the husband was dead already. The guy was obsessed with TRUTH. Look at the conversation he had with the guy who he made call the coin toss.
odetoinsolence 3 years ago
lo mostraron en el diario clarin de rgentina, felicitaciones
mariotalarico 3 years ago
He returns to the trucks to kill the guy in the truck. He didnt want a survivor eye witnessing him. But ends up getting caught anyway. He felt he could get away clean with the money but doesnt.
hhkhkhkhhkh 3 years ago
He returns to the trucks to give the guy water.
TheLostHiro 3 years ago 2
Think about it, why would he bring water back to the guy? Dont forget who the guy was, a drug dealer. Not some innocent victim in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was a piece of shit and Brolin's character new that. He went back to kill him or to make sure he was dead from his wound.
hhkhkhkhhkh 3 years ago
This movie is about the innocence of the American soul, and how vulnerable it is in the face of true evil. All of the characters except the sheriff are naive, unable to protect themselves from evil which they have no way of understanding, because they live in a rational culture with normal expectations about human behaviour. Bardem hides his evil with an outward show of civility. None of the victims is able to comprehend the evil, and is therefore victimized by it. Think Islam.
camrant 3 years ago
why did he say the coin flip scene resembles to the are you talking to me scene from taxi driver?
calucha05 3 years ago
i love this movie. if you watch it again, notice that there's no music played through the whole thing other than the mexican band that wakes up lu ellen or possibly some radio
chawoosemothergoose 3 years ago
Actually, there is musia when Anton Chigurh is talking to the gas station clerk
FreemanFollower19 3 years ago
these two old people are the coolest movi critics ever. they dont see the genious of the movie really. ncfom is one of the greatest films ever
scutter28 3 years ago
I've just found my new favorite channel on YouTube!
reddropdrop 3 years ago
He returns with the water because he is the good guy. This is to illustrate it.
wardnikoff 3 years ago
Right. It quickly lets you know that he has a conscience. I've got to read the book.
rustyquoin 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For me, the movie ran out of gas after Josh Brolin's character died. One fatal flaw I noticed in terms of historical accuracy is the sherrif's Chevrolet Caprice police car. It's at least circa 1986-1989 yet the date of the mother's death on the headstone was 1980. Oops.
wolfgar2 3 years ago
Bardem the hitman was one of the best charactors after the Sherif. Bardem represents what we all fear, an untimelly death! He represents fate and or Karma. He wasnt just a psyhco killer without a purpose and who´s thinking was totally crazy. The store cleark lived after meeting Bardem and calling the coin. "Fate", others died. His job was to kill people, he wasnt just doing it for fun so he had a purpose. People are too caught up in the killing to learn anything from this film. Bambi suits them.
napaketku 3 years ago
i concur
scutter28 3 years ago
The hit man still would have found Lou Allen and the money cause, if every one forgot, there was a tracking device stuck in between the bills. That how the hit man found him in the motel in the first place. It was stupid to take money from a blood bath like that but people always think they can get away with it. People who dont like this movie are the same way, scared of Death and professionals at avoiding reality. Go watch a Disney film.
napaketku 3 years ago
One person's opinion may differ from that of another so here's mine, not that it will buy lunch next week. If we fear an untimely death then most of us guard against it, and if we find 2 mil out in the parking lot we look into the container like a mother looks at the fingers and toes of a new baby. At least the blacks caught a break. They didn't get shown off as stupid. My twenty bucks can buy better than a movie like this. Thank goodness it's free online and I didn't pay to feel like a sucker.
sparkleplenty101 3 years ago
Lewllyn returned to the man dying of thirst in the car because he felt guilty about taking the money. He thought that he could get rid of his guilt by doing this deed, but it turns out too late and that's when the Mexicans show up and the movie takes off.
Lexd1989 3 years ago
well the film is called no country for old men, it shoud be a tell to not take these two reviewers' word on it, no offense. and as far as bardem's character being without reason and a simple write, that is wrong. he was the only character with a strick set of principals, so he got away. moss was irrational in his decisions such as empathizing with the mexican for water yet jeopardizing his wife in the end. chigurh stuck to his guns, however callous he may have been. please put a spoiler alert!
wildncrazykeds 3 years ago
He returned too the guy with water because he is human.
anisblond 3 years ago
well said.
suchsweetthunder47 3 years ago
hongquaio - phone from a public payphone, not from home! No interrogation would ensue. Y'know, drive away a little, park up and then walk to a payphone. make the call, that's it. What you dont do is go back and try to save a bullet-riddled dying man with a canteen of water.
callendrellist 3 years ago
the old lady is spot on. Moss went back with water coz of his conscience...that's illogical and dumb. Surely a phonecall to police/emergency services would be the only thing a person would do. A bit of water aint gonna help him, even if the guy did ask for water. What was he gonna do, give him some water and then leave him? job done? ridiculous.
callendrellist 3 years ago
if he called the police he would get interrogated
hongquiao 3 years ago
the book was excellent. couldnt put it down once i got into it. the movie was great. cohen bros. have done some seriously entertaining movies. bardem deserved the oscar. theres too much garbage in films and then finally you get movies like this
mikeandcooper 3 years ago
Old people shouldn't review movies.
Best film in years!
SugeKnight187 3 years ago
saudummer Kommentar, Blödmann...
It's STUPID people (like you) who shouldn't review movies
The woman e.g. mentions movies you probably never fuckin' HEARD of, and the author of the book, Cormack McCarthy, will be 85 this summer
got it, nitwit, got it?
oldpossum 3 years ago
...that referred to SugeKnight187,
some pathetic kraut asshole who wrote:
"Old people shouldn't review movies."
oldpossum 3 years ago
I think the only movie villain that is on par with Javier Bardem's character is Dennis Hopper's Frank Booth in Blue Velvet.
noonthat 3 years ago
read the book. way better. more suspense and character build up. different characters and alot more stunning. movie was very beautiful movie though.
theplaidmonkey 3 years ago
Why did he RETURN? I don't even know!
moeezS 3 years ago
Because he wanted to take water to the Mexican. Because he felt guilt at just leaving the guy to die.
batguano 3 years ago
Thanks, I forgot about that :) What a nice guy. Too bad it doesn't turn out too well for him! :P
moeezS 3 years ago
tp500 - the movie was not a dream. The sheriff was in retirement and described two dreams to his wife. The first dream he describes is about him losing some money that his father gave him. And the second one is about him and his father riding horses into a forest and his dad says hes gonna go make a fire and to meet him there. Then the sheriff/cop (whatever his name is) says he wakes up. Those dreams dont relate to the plotline at all. Everything actually happened (in the movie ofcourse)
canada9393 3 years ago
His motivation is the lust of money....
And the guy returned because he couldn't bare his concious on leaving a guy to die.
Miryr 3 years ago 2
That old lady is an idiot. Moss went back cuz his conscience is eating away at him. He even states that going back is a dumb idea.
RaoulDuKe313 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This review sucks. Talking about the old days. New movies are great. They are wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
Wjrchadwick 3 years ago
It's from a different perspective. Sorry it's not conventional enough for you.
Also, I didn't hear ANY talking about the old days.
GilbertSmith 3 years ago
The whole movie until the end was a dream, if you didn't catch that. He said the first one quickly, it was about him and his dad and he owed him money, but he thinks he lost it. That isnt really the point though. If you dont catch the themes in the movie like everyone stated, you won't really understand the movie.
tp500 3 years ago
I wouldn't say I get the ending completely, but the story was about Ed Bel's last case before he retired.
he decided to retire when he realized he's going to die if he kept chasing Anton Chigurh
he retired so he won't end up like his dad
i don't know what movie are you two talking about, but throughout the whole movie Anton Chigurh never killed anyone for no reason.
wkh19890101 3 years ago 2
this review is bullshit
Anton Chigurh isn't some crazy killer. i mean sure they didn't give much detail about him, but it's clear that he's hired by someone to get the money back
so he's not just killing for no reason
why the fuck would you tell people that 2 of the main characters dies in the movie
great way to ruin the movie for people who haven't seen it huh?
it's a fucking movie review, you're not suppose to tell us everything about the movie
wkh19890101 3 years ago
And in defence of the book, it goes into more details about llewlyn and his wife dying a little more, and when Wells the bounty hunter gets shot its very detailed and more brutal...if anything the book toned down the darkness by alot
Juggaloserialeater 3 years ago
The brief case had a tracking devise on it, he returned because he felt bad for just letting him die, if he would of stayed in his house asleep he would of died..so thats why..to the old chick
Juggaloserialeater 3 years ago
The dream meant now that sheriff Bell is retired he basically has nothing better to do than wait and die, the dream is kind of an interpretation but i think it must be saying his father is now waiting for his sons death, waiting for him to pass away and meet with him again. the dream says that he is waiting ahead while Bell catches up, meaning he is waiting to see him again after death. There is a lot of great messages in this film, it isnt just a thriller or crime story, watch it many times.
TheHorrorAnthem 3 years ago
TripodLeNoel, the film is about many things, but the real jist is that this is no longer a country for old men, Sheriff Bell is bent on the old times of sherrifing without a gun and doing things peacful like but he just cant anymore. the world is going to hell fast, his old ways just wont cut it anymore and he has to retire because in this country evil can win regardless of how set in his easy going ways he is......
TheHorrorAnthem 3 years ago
I just don't get the movie - the bad guy walks away, the good guy gets wasted... his wife dies.. I just don't get it. Especially the bit where Tommy Lee explains his dreams to his wife. Can someone tell me what the go is?
TripodLeNoel 3 years ago
This review is great! So captivating.
HLimmen 3 years ago
This review is great! So captivating.
HLimmen 3 years ago
This review is great! So captivating.
HLimmen 3 years ago
Right on the mark I think. These two are insightful, smart and amusing. They've earned a new listener. The character admitted it was stupid to return with water but his conscience ruined his sleep. He took a calculated gamble and lost.
dyingtodeath 3 years ago
This was nought but Fargo without the humour.
USamAlien 3 years ago
If you think this movie was about anyone but the sheriff, you arent as smart as you think you are. Its a message, not a story.
ibmexican 3 years ago
Best review of this movie I've heard/read. I didn't like the movie much either. As they said: "Over praised" Yep.
padster123 3 years ago
These guys are great together....
robotwookie 3 years ago
perfect review, the whole movie was based off the guy going back to the trucks with the water. He must have been the stupidest guy ever to go back there. STUPID MOVE, but a great movie!
EdMajinLee199999 3 years ago
Well yeah realistically it was a bad idea, but he simply wanted to help the poor guy