No Country For Old Men --

[Tuesday Afternoon]

who got the money?

[liberaltrucker]

1. .....

Huh? Hitting the sauce a bit early?
:rofl:
That's OK, so am I.

:beer:

Note to drivers on I 81 in PA:
I got a room.

:party:

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. the movie --- No Country for Old Men

Violence and mayhem ensue after a hunter stumbles upon some dead bodies, a stash of heroin and more than $2 million in cash near the Rio Grande.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477348/

[bicentennial_baby]

2. IIRC, either Chigurh (sp?) or the Mexicans...

I saw it awhile ago, so I'm not sure.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

4. I think "sugar" was still looking for it when he got hit by that

car that ran the red light...

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. wrong spot

delete

[liberaltrucker]

6. Kinda hard to park a rig at the local theater

Guess I'm a bit out of the loop.

:blush:

[Tuesday Afternoon]

7. awww....no worries.

:hug:

:pals:

[triguy46]

8. In the book...

Chigurh does. And he returns it to the 'owner' less his expenses.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

10. I bet the book is Good -- I need to read All The Pretty Horses, too

No Country for Old Men By Cormac McCarthy

In his blistering new novel, Cormac McCarthy returns to the Texas-Mexico border, setting of his famed Border Trilogy. The time is our own, when rustlers have given way to drug-runners and small towns have become free-fire zones. One day, a good old boy named Llewellyn Moss finds a pickup truck surrounded by a bodyguard of dead men. A load of heroin and two million dollars in cash are still in the back. When Moss takes the money, he sets off a chain reaction of catastrophic violence that not even the law–in the person of aging, disillusioned Sheriff Bell–can contain.As Moss tries to evade his pursuers–in particular a mysterious mastermind who flips coins for human lives–McCarthy simultaneously strips down the American crime novel and broadens its concerns to encompass themes as ancient as the Bible and as bloodily contemporary as this morning’s headlines. No Country for Old Men is a triumph.

[triguy46]

14. I liked Blood Meridian. The 'Texas Trilogy' of his is highly regarded.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

18. I will add it to the list ---

the Looooooooong List :D

[Orrex]

26. Read "The Crossing" before you read "All the Pretty Horses"

Cities on the Plain is good, but IMO Horses is the best of the three.

I really like No Country and The Road, but for my money Blood Meridian is his most engaging work. Suttree is also excellent, and very different from what you might expect if No Country is your first exposure to McCarthy!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

27. Thanks. I loved the movie "All The Pretty Horses". The book is

bound to be good.

[Orrex]

28. The movie's pretty good

But the book, naturally, is vastly more satisfying. In particular, Grady's retrieval of the horses and flight across the Mexican desert is much more vivid in the book.

As I understand it, Billy Bob Thornton was forced to edit the hell out of it to get it down to standard theatrical length. Not sure how long it might otherwise have wound up being, or if we might some day hope for a director's cut.

I happened to see the film on tv last week. It ran in a two-hour slot in primetime, so they had to hack it down still further, probably to a running time of about 90 minutes. If I hadn't read the book, I'd have had no idea what was going on most of the time!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

29. I hate movies on TV. I bet they butchered "All The Pretty Horses"

Between editing for content and cutting to commercials...All is Lost.

[Lautremont]

9. That's the least interesting question in the whole movie, I think.

I don't fault you for asking it, mind you. But the movie's so not about the money or climactic cat-and-mouse shootouts any of that typical crime thriller stuff. That's why I loved it!

A kind of tonally similar movie that IS all about the money is 'A Simple Plan.' Don't know why I mention it, but my mind has grouped those two movies together, and their different treatments of the money McGuffin strikes me as interesting.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

12. ahhh...you see the irony of my question, then

;)

[triguy46]

13. I agree. The lack of catharsis at the end bothers some people...

the idea that there has to be 'resolution.' IMHO, this style of ending is trademark Cormac Mccarthy. Life is not all tied up with a ribbon, nice and neat. Nor do the good guys always win.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

17. I loved the ending ---

You got to keep on keeping on!

[davsand]

23. That ending pissed off the entire theater when we saw it.

I am dead serious, I bet I heard four or five different people say something about that ending WHEN it happened. I don't think I have ever been in the theater for a movie that pissed off any greater percentage of the audience with the ending.

I have to admit, I do think that part of the audience response is the fact that they were just SO uncomfortable with the idea that this stone killer is still walking around. I think that many movie goers want the whole thing tied up in a nice neat package where truth, justice, and the 'Murrican way reigns supreme. They just didn't get that with this movie.

I joke with my husband about the "John Wu" endings where everybody dies (usually in a hail of bullets and buckets of blood,) but if you stop to think about it, those movies just don't DO that well in the US. It pisses people off because the sensibility is to root for the "good" guy (least flawed, maybe?) and to expect the bad guy to go down in a spectacular fashion.

The Cohen brothers don't always live up to that, but they do usually offer some pretty spectacular endings for the really bad guys and some funny stuff for the marginally unlikeable ones. They didn't do that this time around and I think it pissed off people.

I liked this film but I will admit it is not my favorite Cohen brothers film of all time.


Laura

[DS1]

16. That's what I was going to post

As the movie ended, I didn't even remember the money

[Tuesday Afternoon]

25. You know what...I think I can see the parallels of these two

movies. It IS a good comparison/contrast.

[Dawggie]

11. A spoiler notice might have been nice!

Spoiler!























The last living Assassin in the story (Chiguhr) was my take.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. When did he get it?

I did not spoil anything...however, other posters in this thread may have;)

[Dawggie]

19. My guess is... Spoiler Alert

Wehn he killed Brolin's wife, but I'm not sure on that. I'm going to have to see it again. Awesome movie!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

21. ohh....so Moss had stashed the money at his MIL's house.

wonder how true to the book this film was?

[triguy46]

20. In the book, from the motel room where Lewellen....

had holed up with the young hitchiker. I understand that she is not in the movie, and it leaves a hole in the plot development. In the book the final ending between Chigurh and Lewellen is referred to, you do not witness that fight.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

22. thanks ---

BIG HOLE is right ;)

[Fire Walk With Me]

24. Ah- that's why I was wondering how he ended up dead in that room...

Thanks.

[davsand]

30. Spoiler!

He told his wife to meet him at that motel. The Mexicans got that info from the MIL at the bus station, and my assumption was that Chigar trailed the Mexicans to the motel or else got there after the fact.

Remember, he was IN the room when the sheriff went back later that night. He got out thru the bathroom window (which they showed you was unlocked.) He got the money from out of the motel vent because they showed you the open vent cover along with the dime he used to open it up--just like he did in the first motel room when he spotted the marks from the suitcase full of cash.

What I wondered about in it all, was why Chigar walked away rather than kill the sheriff. He never hesitated to kill anybody ELSE in the movie why was this different?


Laura