SPOILERS: No Country For Old Men

[Janice]

DON'T READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE.

I CAN'T GET ANY CLEARER THAN THAT!


S
T
O
P


R
E
A
D
I
N
G
!








With that out of the way, I don't want to hear any moaning about spoilers. Okay, who saw this movie, and what the hell was with the ending, or should I say the NO ENDING?!? I almost fell off my sofa. A total rip-off. They had viewers invest themselves into the film for two hours, then were served up a Sopranos finale style ending.

After I watched the movie, I was reading the IMDB boards. Wow, some people are writing thesis type posts on what symbolized what, lol. It's makes for interesting reading. Despite the crapfest of an ending, I did love the movie. It was a psychological thriller, and I was almost choking on the suspense. They did a fantastic job of building the suspense and tension, and then pulled the rug out from underneath us.

WOW and Holy with the crazy killer, Anton! He was like the Terminator, a killing machine. Javier Bardem deserved that Oscar. His performance was positively chilling. It's funny when I see him on talk shows and other things, he's so normal and funny. He even looks different, and not just the Moe Howard haircut, lol. Those makeup people did wonders.

I'm seeing more and more of Josh Brolin these days. He's been around for years, but seems to have stepped up to an A-lister. He looks so much like his father, to me. In the last two weeks, I've seen him in, American Gangster (loved it), In The Valley of Elah (loved it) and Planet Terror.

Fantastic turn by Woody Harrelson. I knew he was a goner the minute I knew what he was doing. He was certainly no dummy, so how he allowed himself to end up in that position is beyond me.

Tommy Lee Jones was fantastic as Sheriff Ed Bell. From what I read, Bell was the central character in the book. The last half hour, they seemed to ramp up his importance in the movie. That felt contrived to me. A poster on IMDB said the problem with the ending was that the viewers were shown the wrong ending. That ending was the one for the book's version, which Bell was a huge character.

A classic tale of morality and greed, and a sad commentary of what money does to some people. Llewelyn Moss put his wife in danger, and basically sold her life out. Had he just turned the money in, quite a few people would have lived, including Moss. It was similiar in premise to the movie, A Simple Plan, which starred Billy Bob Thorton and Bill Paxton. Excellent movie for those who didn't see it. If you liked No Country For Old Men, you'll like A Simple Plan.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/simple_plan/

It won the Oscar for Best Picture. I don't know. Maybe Best 3/4 of a Picture? I loved the movie, but really felt robbed at the end. It's not cool to cheat your audience. I never expected that from the Coen brothers.

[Dean Winchester]

since it's a spoiler thread. I'll spill it out

I felt ripped off when we spent 90 minutes cheering on Josh Brolin and then he gets an anti-climatic offscreen death? What a freaking waste. And I hated there was no resolution... who got the $2 million, will Anton ever get captured, etc.....

It was great and riveting but the last 20 minutes totally killed it to me. I agree, it seemed odd that the last 20 mins of it relied heavily on dialogue scenes with Tommy Lee Jones, when he was such a small part of the movie up until that point, since the movie was Brolin and Bardim's until that point.

[LucyCompanyPhan]

I can certainly understand the feeling about the ending and I think the audience has every reason to feel that way. However, it's an adaptation from the novel and it's very true to the novel. The title of the film is No Country For Old Men and the film ends the way it does because it's suppose to shift back to Tommy Lee Jones.

In certain ways as a viewer, I do feel cheated but on the other hand, I sort of admire the ending. The book is heavily loaded with philosophies and themes and the film rather than just telling the story, includes everything and more from the novel into the film. It's rare to see something like that in a movie. While the ending might not be entertaining as it could've been and doesn't flow the way it naturally should - it's quite tragic and potent. It won best picture almost because of the ending. Films almost don't end like that enough.

[Janice]

^ Please, if you ever watch a movie that has an ending like that one, let me know, so I can avoid it at all costs. I'm serious, lol. I am beside myself with that ending. I didn't read the book, but I think this is one of those cases where they should have done a rewrite. At imdb, it's like mob fury going on there. People hated the ending.

I wanted an ending to the movie I saw for 90+ minutes, not whatever that was. I actually yelled, "No!", I was that disappointed. For one thing, on the Netflix sleeve, it stated that the movie was 2 hours and 22 minutes. So when it ended at the two hour mark, I was confused, but not as confused by that.....guess I have to call it an ending, lol.

I wish I could find some good in the ending as you did, but I just can't. What makes me so angry is that I LOVED the movie. It almost had me in a hypnotic state, then someone pulled the plug.

[Dean Winchester]

Originally Posted by Janice

^ Please, if you ever watch a movie that has an ending like that one, let me know, so I can avoid it at all costs. I'm serious, lol. I am beside myself with that ending. I didn't read the book, but I think this is one of those cases where they should have done a rewrite. At imdb, it's like mob fury going on there. People hated the ending.

I wanted an ending to the movie I saw for 90+ minutes, not whatever that was. I actually yelled, "No!", I was that disappointed. For one thing, on the Netflix sleeve, it stated that the movie was 2 hours and 22 minutes. So when it ended at the two hour mark, I was confused, but not as confused by that.....guess I have to call it an ending, lol.

I wish I could find some good in the ending as you did, but I just can't. What makes me so angry is that I LOVED the movie. It almost had me in a hypnotic state, then someone pulled the plug.

I began losing interest when Brolin was killed. We spent 90 minutes aiming for this major showdown between him and Bardem (granted, we had one earlier in the movie, but I wasn't expecting that to be IT) and then the character we've been siding with and rooting for the entire movie gets killed OFFSCREEN?

[LucyCompanyPhan]

Originally Posted by Janice

^ Please, if you ever watch a movie that has an ending like that one, let me know, so I can avoid it at all costs. I'm serious, lol. I am beside myself with that ending. I didn't read the book, but I think this is one of those cases where they should have done a rewrite. At imdb, it's like mob fury going on there. People hated the ending.

I wanted an ending to the movie I saw for 90+ minutes, not whatever that was. I actually yelled, "No!", I was that disappointed. For one thing, on the Netflix sleeve, it stated that the movie was 2 hours and 22 minutes. So when it ended at the two hour mark, I was confused, but not as confused by that.....guess I have to call it an ending, lol.

I wish I could find some good in the ending as you did, but I just can't. What makes me so angry is that I LOVED the movie. It almost had me in a hypnotic state, then someone pulled the plug.

Well considering it won best picture and had critics raving it giving it 4 stars, I don't think the ending ruined it too much.

I understand though. That's how I feel about Return of the King. As far as I'm concerned, I just shut the movie off after the king returns and the rest of it doesn't exist to me.

Anyway, I just bought No Country For Old Men today so a rewatch is coming up for me.

[Max Whittaker]

It ends with Tommy Lee Jones' character realizing that he is too old to do his job. I think that was the point. Everybody else was dead. There was nobody else to pursue the villain. It can be assumed that he is eventually caught, or perhaps dies of his wounds(despite his proficiency with medicine), or he could go on doing what he always did.

It doesn't really matter. The story was complete when Bell retired and stopped playing the game. That was it. It wasn't designed to be a happy ending. I was surprised with the ending, but I am not disappointed. It made sense, in an unconventional way. I liked that. I would have been disappointed if they had given it a cookie cutter happy ending.

It also leaves you with a lot the think about.

[Janice]

Originally Posted by Max Whittaker

It ends with Tommy Lee Jones' character realizing that he is too old to do his job. I think that was the point. Everybody else was dead. There was nobody else to pursue the villain. It can be assumed that he is eventually caught, or perhaps dies of his wounds(despite his proficiency with medicine), or he could go on doing what he always did.

It doesn't really matter. The story was complete when Bell retired and stopped playing the game. That was it. It wasn't designed to be a happy ending. I was surprised with the ending, but I am not disappointed. It made sense, in an unconventional way. I liked that. I would have been disappointed if they had given it a cookie cutter happy ending.

It also leaves you with a lot the think about.

True, I've been thinking a lot about how much the rip-off ending sucked. It's not about cookie cutter or happy endings. Who in the world wants that? The majority of people felt cheated. Movies are supposed to have a beginning, a middle and an end. That was the poorest excuse for an ending I've ever seen.

Originally Posted by LucyCompanyPhan

Well considering it won best picture and had critics raving it giving it 4 stars, I don't think the ending ruined it too much.

You're movie savvy enough to know that critics and the general public are world's apart in opinions. Critics savage great movies and praise crap. I'm not saying this movie is crap because I loved it. Just saying that the ending was a disgrace, and most viewers feel that way.

[jimpickens]

The book is allot better than the movie but on the other hand had they faithfully followed the book page by page it would've been three hours long and todays movie audience don't have the patience to sit through a three hour movie but then again I'm not a big Cohen Brothers fan.

[Brian Damage]

I haven't seen the movie yet, but everyone, and I mean everyone I've spoken to HATED the ending. I'm not reading this thread until I see the movie, and I don't even know what the problem is with the ending, but it's gotta be bad because it's all I've heard about from everyone who's seen it.

[Max Whittaker]

Originally Posted by jimpickens

The book is allot better than the movie but on the other hand had they faithfully followed the book page by page it would've been three hours long and todays movie audience don't have the patience to sit through a three hour movie but then again I'm not a big Cohen Brothers fan.

I don't agree. Lord of the Rings was three hours long. If it's a good story, I don't want it to end. Three hours is perfect. A lot of people might not feel as I do. But most would.

[Dean Winchester]

Originally Posted by Max Whittaker

I don't agree. Lord of the Rings was three hours long. If it's a good story, I don't want it to end. Three hours is perfect. A lot of people might not feel as I do. But most would.

you're telling the truth. I am not a LOTR fan myself, but it seems like more and more movies are in the 2 1/2-3 hour mold these days. The Harry Potter movies are almost all over 2 1/2 hrs, American Gangster was almost 3 hours, Into The Wild was 2 1/2 hrs, Zodiac was 2 1/2 hours, etc... I think people seem not to mind a movie that keeps them engrossed so long

[LucyCompanyPhan]

Originally Posted by Max Whittaker

It ends with Tommy Lee Jones' character realizing that he is too old to do his job. I think that was the point. Everybody else was dead. There was nobody else to pursue the villain. It can be assumed that he is eventually caught, or perhaps dies of his wounds(despite his proficiency with medicine), or he could go on doing what he always did.

It doesn't really matter. The story was complete when Bell retired and stopped playing the game. That was it. It wasn't designed to be a happy ending. I was surprised with the ending, but I am not disappointed. It made sense, in an unconventional way. I liked that. I would have been disappointed if they had given it a cookie cutter happy ending.

It also leaves you with a lot the think about.

This is exactly how I feel about it. What I love is that you have this rich story that can be engrossing but really reaches you on a philosophical way. All the killing is just a backdrop to what the film is really trying to say about good and evil and how it just keeps going. I personally enjoyed the film more for what it made me stop and think about. Just because it's a movie, doesn't mean it doesn't have layers.

Originally Posted by Janice

True, I've been thinking a lot about how much the rip-off ending sucked. It's not about cookie cutter or happy endings. Who in the world wants that? The majority of people felt cheated. Movies are supposed to have a beginning, a middle and an end. That was the poorest excuse for an ending I've ever seen.


You're movie savvy enough to know that critics and the general public are world's apart in opinions. Critics savage great movies and praise crap. I'm not saying this movie is crap because I loved it. Just saying that the ending was a disgrace, and most viewers feel that way.

I think part of the appeal of the film is that it's not necessarily about beginning, middle and end. Not all stories would have all that formed together to "feel complete". I don't see how critics and "general" public are always constantly all that off. People like to think that, but they enjoy movies just as much as the "general" public.

I view the film as being deep and philosophical. As stunned as I was at when and how the movie ended, I thought about it and saw the characters/plot as it was. I loved this film more and more because of it's ending. It's a film that challenges you to accept it. If the Coen brothers would've showed you Brolin's death and not had the closing monologue in it, part of that deep thought would've been lost in the glory of the climax. For the film to have an "anti-climax" it slows you down and stops the chaos for you to observe what this "old man" had witnessed.

Give the ending of the film another chance and rewatch it sometime. You may change your mind. Just because "general public" feels that way about the ending, does not mean you have to. It's always best to get the fullest enjoyment out of something. You may have missed the point. I'm not trying to preach or anything about what you HAVE to get out of them. I can't tell the whole general public to try again, but I can suggest that chance for you.

[Janice]

Originally Posted by LucyCompanyPhan

I think part of the appeal of the film is that it's not necessarily about beginning, middle and end. Not all stories would have all that formed together to "feel complete". I don't see how critics and "general" public are always constantly all that off. People like to think that, but they enjoy movies just as much as the "general" public

I read reviews after I've seen a movie. That's the way I've always done it. I had no idea that people were angry at the ending until I went to some message boards, mainly imdb. If you think I hate the ending, they're looking for a pound of flesh there, lol. Regarding critics, I'm referring to when I love a movie, then go to RottenTomatoes, and the critics hated it, and vice versa. It happens all the time.

I view the film as being deep and philosophical. As stunned as I was at when and how the movie ended, I thought about it and saw the characters/plot as it was. I loved this film more and more because of it's ending. It's a film that challenges you to accept it. If the Coen brothers would've showed you Brolin's death and not had the closing monologue in it, part of that deep thought would've been lost in the glory of the climax. For the film to have an "anti-climax" it slows you down and stops the chaos for you to observe what this "old man" had witnessed.

Give the ending of the film another chance and rewatch it sometime. You may change your mind. Just because "general public" feels that way about the ending, does not mean you have to. It's always best to get the fullest enjoyment out of something. You may have missed the point. I'm not trying to preach or anything about what you HAVE to get out of them. I can't tell the whole general public to try again, but I can suggest that chance for you.

I'll probably watch it again, but I'll never like the ending, and it has nothing to do with how others feel about it. We either like something, or we don't. I've loved and hated other movie endings. This ending is in my top five of worst endings. My husband joked (sort of) the other day and said the movie would have been better off without Tommy Lee Jones character, lol. I don't know about that, since it's really about him, the title and all that. It did give me pause for thought though. I wouldn't have minded if the movie played out with only Anton and Moss. As much as I like TL Jones as an actor, it wouldn't have broken my heart if he wasn't in the movie.

[LucyCompanyPhan]

Originally Posted by Janice

I read reviews after I've seen a movie. That's the way I've always done it. I had no idea that people were angry at the ending until I went to some message boards, mainly imdb. If you think I hate the ending, they're looking for a pound of flesh there, lol. Regarding critics, I'm referring to when I love a movie, then go to RottenTomatoes, and the critics hated it, and vice versa. It happens all the time.

I'll probably watch it again, but I'll never like the ending, and it has nothing to do with how others feel about it. We either like something, or we don't. I've loved and hated other movie endings. This ending is in my top five of worst endings. My husband joked (sort of) the other day and said the movie would have been better off without Tommy Lee Jones character, lol. I don't know about that, since it's really about him, the title and all that. It did give me pause for thought though. I wouldn't have minded if the movie played out with only Anton and Moss. As much as I like TL Jones as an actor, it wouldn't have broken my heart if he wasn't in the movie.

I tend to never look at IMDB's ratings because I can't stand half of what the people say on there. Usually the only place I look at reviews and comments from users is from Rotten Tomatoes. It's like two different worlds as far as film bloggers go because RT is more about cinema and art and stuff and IMDB is where every Tom, Dick & Harry go who have a computer. Not to say I don't look at IMDB, but certainly not the message boards. RT have more passion and knowledge for independent and foriegn films.

I read one review for Old Country before I saw it and it really stuck with me and as soon as I saw it, I knew exactly what the writer was talking about. He described the ending like your watching your favorite sports game and all of a sudden your television goes out for 30 seconds and when it comes back on the announcer goes "Oh My God, that was the most amazing moment in sports history and if I hadn't seen it for myself, I wouldn't believe it." I completely agree with that statement, but the more I looked into the film and the more I thought about it (and I thought about it a lot) I realized what it all meant and how important that sort of stuff was.

People are acting about the ending on IMDB like the Coen Brothers had just got lazy at the end. It's the way it was intentionally suppose to be told. Whether or not it works for some people, I would hope at least they understand that.