wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

*No Country for Old Men* is a masterpiece. It is one of those rare films that combines suspense while saying something about the human condition. Despite all the talk - and rightfully - for Javier Bardem, Tommy Lee Jones's vulnerable spin on his tough guy persona was a revelation.
* * *
*Zodiac* was robbed of Oscar nominations in several possible categories: best picture, director (David Fincher), actor (Jake Gyllenhaal), supporting actor (Robert Downey Jr., John Carroll Lynch), adapted screenplay (James Vanderbilt), cinematography (Harris Savideshy), film editing (Angus Wall), art direction & costume design. This was my favorite film of the year. Too bad films that are released early are forgotten by the AMPAS.

His name is actually Bardem. Anyway, isn't that makes his performance so chilling is he showed very little emotion convincingly while being able to slice right through you with his eyes? I wouldn't consider it a one trick pony and see it as getting into the character. What else did you want him to do? Just curious.

Rain, boo :(

I thought that Marion Cottilard was incredible as Edith Piaf, but also loved Julie Christie's performance. Here goes a controversal opinion; Barden was one note - once he put on the wig and got the voice and the walk down there was no deviation - as I said "One trick pony" Casey Affleck or Tom Wilkenon should take supporting.

haha, Lu you are one tough cookie ;)

I agree with Dubya. Go see the film for yourself ab, you might actually be blown away by the unconventional soundtrack. It captures and interprets sounds of an oil field and also the emotions of the actors into noise.

Snow, yay!

But how can you comment based on OTHER peoples comments? Films are a personal experience and you should experience it yourself. You're only shortchanging yourself. I had many friends who hated Lost in Translation but I loved it because the story resonated with me.

As for the music, there really was none in Blood. It was more nuanced noise if you will, but if you are expecting Korn or Chumbawumba, then yes, this film will disappoint.

Moral is, never go by friends or critics recommendations. Especially a film like this which hasn't been panned across the board. It is pretty much divided, either you love it or you hate it.

THERE WILL BE BLOOD OVERRATED IN EVERY RESPECT = DAY-LEWIS CHANNELED JOHN HUSTON. OLD MEN A ONE TRICK PONY. UNDERRATED: THE ASSASINATION OF JESSE JAMES B THE COWARD ROBERT FORD - BEAUTIFLULLLY ACTED, CINAMATOGRAPHY AND A STORY UP TO DATE - THE HERO WORSHIP OF CELEBRATIES -

Love the Clayton soundtrack.

Dubya,

Ummm..go back and read the post again. You would see that I clearly said I had HEARD that from OTHER people and that disuaded me from shelling out my 11 plus dollars to see it.

How can you comment on a post without actually reading it????

I loved No Coutry not just for mood but also for taking some non-typical, non-predictable non-Hollywood plot paths (especially concerning the big final showdown that the story was gearing up to). Everything just worked in that movie.

"music doesn't match up to the inaction on screen"

um, if you haven't seen the film, how can you make that analysis?

I loved No Country for Old Men... picked up the book before going to see it and was impressed with the accuracy in the story and script. I haven't seen a film in quite a while that could accurately portray an entity such as evil so subtly and artistically. It was a beautiful piece of cinema and I'm glad to see the Cohen brothers up there, but when it comes to best picture, there's no contest for There Will Be Blood... cannot compare. The Oscar picks this year were well chosen, cannot think of any they've missed from this past year.

No Country is a superb film in every respect. There will be blood is not a cohesive piece of work. both movies share the thematic strain of the death of optimism. I think tommy lee jones was amazing. Perhaps it was his dialogue

Both movies were very different with different emotions. You can't compare the two in the story line but you can judge it in it's own merit. There Will Be Blood was a great film and entertaining carried mostly by Daniel Days performance. No Country For Old Men was a more finely crafted film from it's script, to the acting, the cast and the nuances. Doesn't mean There Will Be Blood is inferior, it's just different.

Movies are subjective to the viewers life experience so even the best movies to you are the worst for others. Thats what makes films interesting and personal.

Well...despite the end summing up "Michael Clayton" was pretty dark or moody at least...which I really liked.

"No Country For Old Men" was amazing.

Dark is good.

i only saw michael clayton, and it's a seriously good movie. great music, editing [family in the business], good legal angle [again, family in the business], the story was 99% on for the psychiatry stuff [friends in the business], and clooney was as good as anyone else, except..when he..breaks up..sentences.

but that 'clayton' soundtrack..

still have to see juno and 'before the devil' and 'no country'

I didn't see it but I've heard a lot of people say the same thing about "There Will Be Blood"..that it's overrated, nothing happens and the music doesn't match up to the inaction on screen. So much so that I lost my enthusiasm to see it.

I think "No Country For Old Men" was by far the best in the lot in every respect. And I am rooting for it all the way.

I can't help noticing the bollywoodization of Hollywood in "There will be blood": it was long, it was melodramatic, it was completely unsubtle about the point it was making, had a great soundtrack, and the ending - oh my god- even bollywood might baulk at that one. The second half of the film, where the protagonist is all tormented and all - my question was Why?

why was 4 months 3 weeks 2 days not nominated for anything? this was easily the best movie of the year, in all categories, not just foreign language...