no country for old men

By the time Bell(TLJ) gets to the hotel, Chigurh is long gone. You do not even get the story on how they were killed, except what a bystander says. You never hear of Chigurh going to the hotel or of him killing them. The next time you hear from him is when he is sitting in Carla Jean's room.

There is no him going back and or TLJ going to the room. Chigurh kills Moss, hitchiker and another guy was shot in the leg, maybe by stray gunfire.
 
Thanks, that clears up my main question about the killer hiding behind the door. It just didn't seem possible. Will have to read the book now.
I also wondered how Moss was followed to Del Rio and Eagle Pass until the transponder went off when Chigurh was close enough. I thought the killer found out Moss was in Del Rio by calling the phone numbers on the phone bill located in the trailer. But I didn't see how he knew Moss went to Eagle Pass.
The transponder, or second transponder would explain it.
Everything else seemed plausable enough to me. Sure, most bad guys are idiots who get high on meth and stick up a 7-11 and get recorded by cameras and escape with $34 and a box of Milk Duds, but there are some professional criminals that commit undetectable burglaries, the great train robbery, serial murders-sensational crimes that movies and novels like to portray, and audiences like to read about-the criminal mastermind. There are some out there-and dumb luck may save them for some length of time, or dumb luck may see them get captured or killed. This is what No Country for Old Men accurately portrayed, from my point of view.
 
One thing that Im still unclear on. Did Chigurah work for the same guy that Woody Harrellson worked for? The guy in the big office that he killed (Steven Root?) The way that Chigurah was introduced into the movie he looked more lke a random psychopath than an organized killer.
 
My understanding is that Chigurh worked for the same guy, and didn't like the boss hiring a back-up to do his job. Chigurh took offense, and a pissed off Chigurh is not a good thing to find in your office. Almost worse than the guy who steals BBQ out of the break room refrigerator.
 
I'll tell you one thing that was totally unrealistic, and that was tossing the suitcase full of money over the bridge. First of all, someone would have seen it. Secondly, it would probably have hit someone on the head underneath the bridge. It wouldn't have lasted two minutes down there. There are people everywhere down there, or there used to be.
 
OK, that bit about the briefcase hitting someone is really funny.

I don't want to sound like a prick here, but do some of you realize that this is fiction? The list of fictional stories that you must like (because they are just exactly like real life) must be really short.

I hate it myself when moviemakers or writers go and obliterate actual historical events, but that's not what we are talking about here.
 
t-hoof:

i remembered it was just a movie about half way through my last response. its a passionate movie and it really got me wrapped up in it.

i enjoyed it.


jason
 
I'm happy to hear you say it, Jason.

McCarthy is not really all about realism. This movie sort of got that, and I think that's why a lot of people who like McCarthy like this movie. His stories are contemplative, haunting, and beautiful in their own way. To me, the way that they are closest to real life is in the realization that there are truly events that cannot be explained definitively. Events like that tend to make you think about things like fate, good, and evil. This movie did that for me, and it sounds like it did it for you, too. You just had more trouble with suspending disbelief than I did, probably because I've read enough McCarthy to know that I enjoy his books for what they are, not for what they are not.

I enjoyed this one, too. My wife and I went to the Bijou (San Antonio), and I enjoyed a couple of glasses of wine during the viewing. My wife had to move, though, because the guy we were sitting next to fell asleep and was snoring pretty obnoxiously.
 
There would have been no movie if that dumbass hayseed didn't insist on taking agua to that guy.
biggrin.gif
 
I thought Moss was going back to the scene to put a bullet in that Mexican who was the only guy who could have tied him to the money. Taking the guy water? En la noche?? What a ******* idiot. And if it's me that finds that money, the first thing I do (other than putting a bullet in that last Mesican) is take it all out to look at it, etc. He never did that, even after he found the first transponder. Idiot.
 
Yes, Moss definitely went back to take the wounded man agua, resulting in all his subsequent troubles. Although maybe they would have found him anyway with the transponder(s).
There is nothing so unrealistic in this film to make me lose my "suspension of disbelief." We want to be entertained by buying a ticket to a movie, so we will go a fair distance away from nitpicking details of reality to buy into the premise. This doesn't mean we don't like to discuss every detail later.
This is a great movie, and I might go see it again while it is in theatres.
How is it doing financially?
 
I like to nitpick details as well, but this movie was infinitely more realistic than "24"(or other similar "real life" programs). I like the way the book describes the #10 birdshot that Chigurgh used on the Houston bigshot. Didn't want to shatter the big glass windows behind the guy.
 
I have a question about the money itself. In the movie, Moss opens up the satchel of cash and flips through the money bundles. On the outside are $100 denominations but within the bundles themselves are $1s and $10s. If I remember correctly, he appeared unconcerned by this. Is this in the book? Seems to me that the satchel would have suddenly lost value to Moss, but not to the others who are after it.

I guess at the point he realized that there was less money in the case it didn't matter. Chigurh would kill him no matter what, especially if Chigurh thought he was given a ringer.
 
In response to Longhorn94's rant on page 6: Well, did you consider that big drug money buys a lot more information than showing a badge does? When Wells and Moss meet at the hospital, Wells indicates that there are other ways to find him besides the tracking device. McCarthy leaves the reader to connect the dots, but I really have no problem believing that bankrolled professional hitmen can stay ahead of West Texas local law enforcement for a good while. Also, consider the fact that Ed Tom says that the FBI guys tell him as little as possible. He is all too happy to avoid them. So he's left with making phone calls, looking at crime scenes, waiting for forensics, chasing down empty trails, while guys like Chigurh and Wells get to throw gobs of money at people for information and/or threaten lives for the same. I think it's less a question of competence and more one of resources and flexibility. Go watch the movie Traffic. It's a very realistic portrayal of how uneven the playing field is.
 
SPOILER






I caught Harrelson's reference to 'ATM' to get money......don't think they had ATMs backin 1980....I can't imagine the Coens missed that. One of my favorite aspects of the movie is how well they recreated 1980, clothes, cars, decor, but ATM??

BL
 
During college, I worked as a teller for a bank from '85-88, and Fridays were hell because there were no ATMs in town.
 
I actually thought the ATM bit was a joke from the Coen Bros.

While it existed in 1980, it likely was not in West Texas. And the way the character said it, it seemed like it was sarcastic.

There was some dark humor in there, in parts.
 
Finally got to the theater to see this tonight. I enjoyed it quite a bit but on a first viewing I put this behind Miller's Crossing, Fargo, The Big Lebowski, Raising Arizona and (possibly) Blood Simple. I liked it better than O Brother. Without question, it was much, much better than the past few movies the Coen Brothers have given us.

It was a beautiful movie to look at and had some really good performances. I loved how they "caught" West Texas life. I must be in the minority but I thought there were several performances better than Javier Bardem's. I thought TLJ, Josh Brolin and Woody Harrelson did more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top