Comments on: No laughing for young Jen

By: Jenny

Jenny — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 17:28:00 +0000

I’ll be interested to hear what you think. You will probably like it, especially if you go in not expecting the usual Coen Brothers quirkiness.

By: Dar

Dar — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 14:49:57 +0000

I loved the man who wasnt there, but mostly for the bungalow they lived in. heh jk. sorta.

I want to see this one really badly but life keeps getting in the way! I’ve seen 3D Beowulf twice tho! once w/kids and once w/dh.

By: Jenny

Jenny — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:58:06 +0000

serror! Thanks for your in depth commentary. Unrelated question: Where do you live? I thought you were local-ish, but you just wrote ‘humour’ lke some kind of Canadian or something.

Ed: I recall liking, or at least appreciating ‘The Man Who Wasn’t There’. You are right, the Coen’s aren’t always funny, but there is usually an element of quirkyness that was totally missing from this movie.

Kate: I’m with you, Kate. Like I said, I just don’t get all the critical gushing.

By: Kate

Kate — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 20:31:42 +0000

Did not like it, Jenny. Husband enjoyed it. I found it disturbing and upsetting; it toyed with me psychologically. It is the stuff that nightmares are made of.

By: Edward Gibbs V

Edward Gibbs V — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 06:04:43 +0000

Did you see “The Man Who Wasn’t There”? It’s so bleak it makes a slate tile seem lush. While there is humor, it’s so dark and so subtle that to call it comedy is to call Twain a ditherer with the pen. I’m just sayin’ the Coens don’t always do more comedy than they do clever.

By: serror

serror — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:12:48 +0000

hmm. I actually loved the movie, but I think it was a perfect melding of Cormac McCarthy and the Coen Bros. I haven’t read No Country for Old Men, but the movie felt like McCarthy’s other books with an Coen interpretation. I think this movie was missing some of the humour that Fargo and Blood Simple had, there were moments when I laughed out loud, but not like other CB movies.
It was more mysterious and moody than Fargo and Blood Simple, because that is exactly how McCarthy writes… It was a little bit more raw than their “noir” films are but there was a TON of thought put in to the aeshetic of the imagery which I thought was stunning. It was somewhere between the “noir” and the “crime” movies of the Coen brothers,and it did lack the quirky comedy bits that makes so many CB movies fantastic.
I will stop babbling now.

By: Jenny

Jenny — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:14:10 +0000

Aaack! I’m sorry about those 4 paragraphs! I hate it when that happens.

Erik, you are not helping. You loved it, too! Enough to see it twice!

I read your Exit 133 review ( http://www.exit133.com/2440/no-country-for-old-men-at-the-grand ) and I agree on all points. I just was not blown away. Maybe I need to read the book. I guess. Or maybe I need to see it again? I just didn’t find this movie to be as awesome as all other CBs movies or as awesome as all the critics say. As far as the crime triliogy, I liked Blood Simple and Fargo WAY MORE than this one.

By: Erik Hanberg

Erik Hanberg — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:20:52 +0000

I’ve tried to write a long review of what I think, but it didn’t work because my computer ate it.

Suffice to say that I loved this movie. I reviewed it at Exit133 last Wednesday. I’ve seen it twice now and I think that I saw the Coen’s touches a lot more on the 2nd viewing.

Alas, you don’t get to read the 4 paragraphs I wrote on why I like it so much… too bad.