NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
 

STUPIDEST ****ING ENDING EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Plus all the entertainment of other things.

I know nothing about it, but I can tell you that my wife hated the book, and that's extremely rare for her.

A pretty good movie until the end.
The ending ruins all that was good.

More proof that J Diddy is one of the lowest forms of life known to man.

Guess you have some company now. :D

More Proof that J Diddy is one of the lowest forms of life known to man.

by CE Wendler

HI. I'm not fat anymore. J diddy sucks cause he can get laid. The end. Btw Gailey eat crow.


















stupid ****

I agree it was great til the end. It just stopped.

When the credits rolled I honestly thought it was a joke.
The wife and I just looked at each other and said. "WTF?"
I felt ripped off.

The ending was great, but I stopped trying to argue why a long time ago.

No Country's ending is excellent.

No, really. It is superb.

Agreed.

I am not arguing, but why did you think so?

Let me guess:

You didn't figure out that Harrison Ford's character in "Blade Runner" was an android, did you?

Didn't see it, so I don't get the reference.

I liked the ending

Because it was the perfect bookend to the film and ties together the real theme of the movie. If you'll recall, the first few minutes of the film is just shots of landscape as Sheriff Bell tells a story about a murderer who says, before he's about to be executed, that he would have done it again if given the chance. Bell wonders how you stop that kind of evil. He wonders if it's really worth trying.

(Spoiler alert for those who haven't seen the movie yet)




At the end, Anton has gotten away with the money. All the good guys died. Evil wasn't stopped, despite Bell's efforts. All the pursuit was ultimately for naught. So Bell retires. And it ends much the way it began: with Bell telling a story.

The entire movie is a misdirection, really. You think it's about Moss and Anton and the money. It's really about Bell. It's about an aging lawman who comes to the cold realization that he's been fighting a futile battle all these years. It's about following his dad to the camp, to peace. The dreams he describes occurred because of this realization, because of his decision to retire.

Now, from what I've read this is extremely faithful to the book. So it's not like the Coens made some wacky decision to end it weird. It was a part of the book, and it was vital to the completion of the film. No other ending would have worked the way this ending did.

(I loved the end of Burn After Reading for much of the same kinds of reasons. It exemplified the "much ado about nothing" nature of the film, and was the perfectly frivolous ending to a story about frivolous people doing frivolous things.)

And you call yourself an American?

Where'd I do that?

Nor did he ever see the unicorn.

Yeah, screw that. The problem I have with that is for the majority of the film he wasn't involved. I had no connection to him. Seemed like the beginning and the end he was there.

We all ain't got them fancy houses with them vcrs.

ROFL

This. Though, FTR, there is a lengthy exposition somewhere on this site from back when I was trying to make the case.

But then, I thought The Sopranos ended the best way it possibly could have.

great movie, great ending.

Chasing down evil truly is: "No Country for Old Men"

Its a very un-hollywood ending that is for sure. The problem is the author (McCarther?) is notorious for have slow build up through out his stories with very disappointing endings. Like you want to burn the book its so maddening.

The Road is the same way. except you have a little kid through out the story annoying the shit out of you. Look for that hitting theaters next year. I will avoid it like the plague.

Not a problem with the Coen Brothers, they are good storytellers, but they had a horrible story to work with in NCFOM.

I liked the ending. But I've read a lot of his books and maybe that made it easier to get. When he talks at the end about his dream where his father is carrying a torch or fire or something, it's something McCarthy uses in other books.
In the book The Road the Man and the Boy make references to "carrying the fire", and in the book it means they're fighting for Good against Evil. In that book 90% of humans are evil. The boy asks the the father, "we're the good guys right?" and says, "we're carrying the fire."
Jones's charcater in the Old Country knows his father spent his life fighting for Good against Evil, his father was carrying the fire, and at the end Jones is saying he can't fight the fight anymore, he feels overwhelmed and he let his father down.
I guess some people like cookie cutter movies with nice easy endings all the time. Maybe we should just make Lethal Weapon movies again and again.

This is the first time I've ever heard that. :hmmm:

Yeah, I didn't know that either.

Why does he feel pain when Rutger Hauer is kicking his ass?

Most film watchers these days have been conditioned for everything to have a nice happy clean ending.

People do not like open ended or ambiguous endings.


Thats partially the dumbing down of mainstream hollywood flicks and partially the nature of movie watching itself. Its a completely different experience than reading a book obviously.

To me this movie represented what is probably the most accurate true to life ending I've ever seen. The bad guy gets away and everyone else just moves on. That's the way things go sometimes. It's not Hollywood glory but I found it to be very entertaining.

What he said.

If you want a nice happy ending at the end of your story with all the ends tied up so you can go to bed without having to think about what happened go watch that bile that Michael Bay regurgitates.

Bet you loved "Transformers" didn't you?

Evil "won", life isn't fair and God forbid your asked to use your imagination a bit.

The onlr real problem I had with "The Road" is nobody has a ****ing name, what the **** is that about?

I didn't care about the ending, as everything that came before it was awesomeness.

If I want to use my imagination I will imagine the beginning and the end or perhaps read a book. I watch a movie to get the director/casts interpretation of the story.

FWIW, I loved the Transformers movie, but I don't see how that applies here.

I would agree. i was totally into the movie then it just seemed to stop.

That's what I was thinking too.

At first, the ending caught me off guard, but after thinking about it I thought it made sense for the reasons already mentioned. If the body of the movie hadn't been so excellent, I might not have bothered thinking about what initially seemed like a "WTF ending" and might have just written it off as a weird ending to a bad movie.

I liked Transformers and didn't have a clue that Harrison Ford's Blade Runner character was an android. Is that for real?

I think in the original cut, there is no mention of it or allusion to it. There are however different versions of it where it might be mentioned??

I posted a similar question in the Movies thread and got a similar answer.

Knowing what I know now, I appreciate the movie and that aspect, but I went in wanting some mad passionate mindless violence.

It's a pretty good flick and definitely one that makes you think, but it is certainly not one of my all time favorites.

I was more or less ranting about the movies I consider 'canned' like transformers vs. a unique interpretation such as 'No Country for Old Men”.

Many people seemed to dislike the film because everything isn’t wrapped up in a neat little package and topped off with the bad guy being brought to justice and the husband and wife living happily ever after like some quasi Disney Film.

I had a good friend become mad at the film because they didn’t show Chigurh killing Llewelyn’s wife. I tried to explain the parallel of when he walked onto the porch after that scene and looked at his shoes. Remember when he killed Carson (Woody)? See the parallel?

Subtlety is good.

It just pisses me off when people get mad at a movie because it isn’t dumbed down enough and lacks an ending where every little detail is explained so a feeling of closure can happen at the ending credits. Use your imagination, fill in the blanks.

If that’s not the case here I apologize but to me this problem just adds to the dumbed down, regurgitated, no substance shit like Michael Bay puts out and it pisses me off!

:cuss: end rant

If you don't have compassion for that little boy, you don't have a soul. Annoying? Please...

The ending did take me off guard for a few moments.

But after thinking about it. I thought it was a good ending.

I also thought, that along with the title of the movie, it was about the sheriff and the changes going on that he ultimately can't control.

Like Otter said, it's not a typical dumbed down ending Hollywood style. At that is what i found most people complaining about.

Agreed 100%.

Also, from what i gather they put these movies before test audiences and give them a questionnaire to fill out, one question stating what they thought of the ending.

So the Coen brothers already knew what was coming around the corner for them.

I'm sure there were people in Hollywood suggesting to the Coen brothers to change it.

But they didn't go along with it.

Maybe they should have had two different endings for the DVD.

One for the intelligent crowd and one for typical Hollywood endings.
Insert which CD fits you.

Maybe I am a glaring example of the problem (neat packages, no imagination etc.) but I for some reason found it hard to get attached to "the boy" or "the man". Icould not get past the fact that they remained un-named

I can't understand why it matters if they were named. It just shows that the world no longer cares about names, professions or anything else.

If you rewatch the entire movie, you'll see a few clues alluding to the fact that his character may be an android as well.

That's one of the reasons the film is so highly revered. It's kind of like "Catcher in the Rye". The author never really comes out and tells you that he's talking to a therapist the entire time.

I'm not going to lie, I thought it was a clever movie, but for them to kill a character I had been attached to 3/5 of the way through the movie kind of pissed me off. It differs from the Departed because not only did Leo die, Wahlberg gets revenge on Damon at the end of the movie and it seems some justice was at least achieved. (pardon me for not knowing actual character names)

I can't explain it, it just bugged me, I was at least hoping for some hint of a name when he was remembering his wife. I just couldn't find the humanity I guess, I don't even think that makes sense but names would have given them an element of their humanity that I probably needed. I felt that the father should have at least referred to his son by name.

That ending made me want to beat the shit out of somebody. It sucked dick.

Would you have liked The Godfather if Al Pacino had been killed offscreeen?

Would you have liked Unforgiven if it had ended with Clint Eastwood getting sideswiped off his horse by an out-of-control wagon?

Would you have liked Seven if the box hadn't been delivered because the delivery truck broke down?

**** THAT ENDING.

Yeah, I didn't care much for. And no, I am not one who loves a lot of the canned Hollywood flicks. Just didn't think this movie lived up to the hype, frankly. But hey, we are entitled to our opinions. Doesn't mean one is better than the others.

I agree. It was good, but geez... the hype was unreal.

Another of McCarthy's books is being adapted into a movie- Blood Meridian. I honestly don't see how they're going to do it. It's basically non stop killing all the way through.

until what? the end, they just fade to black.

The title of the movie was definitely helpful in that regard.

Some people are not very receptive to art.

More or less actually. I'll put it this way: if you didn't like the ending to No Country For Old Men, I doubt you'll like the ending to Blood Meridian.

Yeah, no kidding. Blood Meridian has a very similar anti-climactic ending, although there are various theories about exactly what goes on in that outhouse. I never really cared to know that much.

I think the movie could be good, but there's definitely some stuff I don't think the MPAA would let them get away with if its true to the book.

Gonna avoid it like the plague.

Ending make brain hurt!!
Hulk SMASH!!!

This...

The ending was perfect.

I'll explain. The entire point was:

Art my ass. I get tired of people trying to put a pretty bow on a steaming turd and call it "art," and then poo-poo the people who "don't get it."

I got it. I understand the point.

AND THAT DIDN'T STOP THE ENDING FROM SUCKING ASS.

Thank you.

:shake:

How would you have ended it?

What I found annoying was the fact that he was crammed down your throat for you to sympathize with. He was so pure and so good, almost like the conscience of the Man. It was annoying that even at the end of the book, despite this world being a truly horrible place and full of horrible people, that he was still being so naive.

1. At least show Brolin getting killed. Too major of a character to get greased offscreen. And to get popped by people who were barely part of the story?

2. Skip the wreck. Pointless and annoying.

I don't care that the bad guy won. That's fine. But the whole story is leading you to a confrontation, and then when it should happen they just shove shit in your face and call it art. If I'm somehow lame for wanting the storyline resolved, well, sue me. If I want to see a bunch of disjointed random shit I'll look out the window.

You're lame and don't get it.

Shouldn't you be sipping espresso in Greenwich Village right now?

Sigh:shake:

THere is a reason this film was up for many Oscars (and won many Oscars)...CAUSE ITS BRILLANT!!!

Seriously, if you hated the ending then if I were you I would rewatch it or something cause the ending is the best part. It is deep and touching. Tommy Lee Jones' monologue really hits home.

As far as showing Brolin getting killed goes...why??? The Coens were doing something less conventional and it worked out perfectly. Brolin was offed just like that and that was a great move.

Of course, I dont expect a number of you "simpletons" to understand this film or book. That would be asking too much.:shake:

Everybody who loved this movie - meet your new friend. LMAO

Do you write those McDonald's coffee commercials?

Id like to see Michael Bays: "No Country for Old Men" starring Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck.

Bruce Willis saves Julia Roberts from the gas chamber.

Cut Fraz some slack, he hasn't been the same since the 65 Newport Folk Festival.

Went for some troubador wisdom, got some jive boogity-woogity electrified shit.

The mere fact that this douche likes it proves my point

The fact that you posted this proves your lack of facility with regards to logic or the mechanics of establishing points.

That, and the fact that you're not self-aware enough to be embarassed that you didn't get a movie capable of being comprehended and appreciated even by a spraytan douchebag clubboi.

The best ending would have been to have Bell walk into a room and see this:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GUDcSeUvkOw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GUDcSeUvkOw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Word.