OBJECTION!
Overruled.
It may be acclaimed a modern day classic. It will always be over-rated.
Is No Country for Old Men a Modern Day Classic?
yes.
No
Fredo – This to me is the most interesting thing that happened in the movie world in 2007. I know you don’t want people to mention There Will Be Blood but I really have to in order to make my point. When I saw No Country For Old Men I was mightily impressed. I’ve enjoyed every Coen Brothers film to a greater or lesser extent (mostly greater – their more recent output like Ladykillers and Intolerable Cruelty were a little disappointing and derivative but I thought still enjoyable and better made than most) but NCFOM just blew me away and became my favourite Coen Bros film there and then. I knew the only film that could top that would be the then upcoming There Will Be Blood and as Magnolia was my favourite film I was very much looking forward to it, but I found it hard to believe that I would enjoy it more than NCFOM. Anyway I saw TWBB and I liked it a lot – with a few provisos. So my favourite film of 2007 was NCFOM. Then just last week I watched TWBB for the second time and was absolutely blown away. The things that bothered me the first time didn’t bother me at all second time round. I truly believe that TWBB is a masterpiece and will still be watched a hundred or more years from now – a towering achievement. I’m on the cusp of re-watching NCFOM to see if the same happens with that film but right now I’m in general agreement with your views on NCFOM. I’ll report back when I’ve watched it for a second time. As a side note, for me 2007 will go down as the best year for American films in recent memory simply because these two films were both released. It’s a shame they weren’t released a year apart because then they both would have won Best Picture at the Oscars.
no
Since we’re sharing. I saw NCFOM while on vacation. I enjoyed it well enough, it is certainly beautifully made and the acting is mostly beyond reproach, the complicated story is clearly told, and all that. It eventually got to the point where I just lost interest, nothing going on seemed very important or very interesting beyond the buzz of wondering what was going to happen next. By the time that Tommy Lee Jones delivered that final monologue I’d pretty well tuned out altogether. I’ve seen the film since, and have found nothing, and I mean NOTHING to have changed: I find it as dull and ultimately uninteresting as I did that first time in the theatre. I imagine I’ll put it on every couple of years or so, I guess, just to see if I finally get what all the shouting is about.
A modern classic? I’m sure there will be those who acclaim it as such. I could never do so.
The film bores me. I saw it in theaters, and loved it. I own it. I can not re-watch it after having seen it twice. yes, despite this, I like it more than TWBB, overall. no bad taste in my mouth, only something that I have to sit and mull over.
The question is like an invitation to hate—like asking in 1982 Is The King of Comedy a modern classic? Or asking the same of Blade Runner, Brazil, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, etc.—at the time of their release.
Yeah, but…
KING OF COMEDY, BLADE RUNNER, BRAZIL, BARRY LYNDON and THE SHINING weren’t nearly as widely acclaimed upon their first release as NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN has been. Yeah, the others got a lot of good attention when they were first released, but nothing, as far as I know, to come near the lavish critical praise and award recognition that NO COUNTRY has so bizarrely received.
I’ve only seen it once, but walked away from it thinking it was a great film. I thought the cinematography was excellent and I also loved it’s minimalistic approach. My impression is that it will indeed become a classic of American cinema – it pretty much has something for everyone.
All right already.
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is the masterpiece of masterpieces. It will outlast Shakespeare and the Bible. It makes CITIZEN KANE look like SHOWGIRLS. Those poor deluded fools who do not appreciate the majesty of NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN must be taken out and shot as the, well, deluded fools they are.
Happy now?
Roscoe – I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over.
There are plenty of folks that don’t care for No Country – and that’s fine. No need to get your feathers all ruffled over a film. If it’s not your thing – that’s cool – nobody’s trying to convince you that you have to like it. Relax.
This raises an interesting question. For the naysayers here I wonder what American film of 2007 do you consider a modern day classic (if any)?
I think The Lives of Others was better than No Country For Old Men. But was that 2006 or 2007?
Edit: I would think Pan’s Labyrinth would get a lot of votes for top film. I haven’t seen it yet myself, but there’s no shortage of praise for that film on this site.
What I find odd is people act like there can only be a select few classics/ films that will be remembered from this decade. Looking back from each year there are a handful that are remembered. Now I am fully aware this isn’t the 50s/60s/70s but there have been plenty of films that will be remember. Everyone in the future isn’t going to have Alzheimer’s!
I think that No Country has the iconicness to be one of the classics. To be classic dosn’t always mean to be amazing or even greatest ever but to hit the masses in a way so that it sticks with them. I think it has a good chance of doing so, its already been parodied on The Simpsons over a year after it came out, so its still in peoples minds. There something about it that people will come back to, I think it could really stick around and in ten years people will come back to it and still enjoy it and after that because it has a timelessness about it.
Also I don’t like how hostel some people get on some of these threads, if you don’t like it don’t respond. You don’t have to be an ass just because you think you are above American Cinema and think that the only movies that are good today are about Romanian abortions. This site is for movie lovers not haters who like to bash films that didn’t fit their golden standard.
@Christopher – They’re not American films.
@Drew – I meant that there weren’t any other American films from 2007 that will be regarded as highly in the future as NCFOM and TWBB. Nobody has yet suggested any alternative American films released in 2007 that could be considered modern day classics.
Norbit could become the classic of the decade… just jokes.
Most people, I think, thought Ratatouille was the best Pixar movie and it was top on Rotten Tomatoes for that year. Then Wall-E came out the next year…
Reading over some of these responses, I found it interesting that indeed it is impossible for some people to talk about No Country For Old Men without mentioning There Will Be Blood. Why is this? They are two completely different films that just happened to come out the same year; I mean, you don’t hear people inadvertantly feel the need to reference The Apartment when talking about Psycho.
Jordy, I think you make a good point that it doesn’t have to be the greatest film ever to be timeless or stick in people’s minds. But I do think that for the general public and even film historians, there are certain films that come to define an era or decade. There were plenty of great films from the 1990s but when asked to name them, most people will name only a handful and usually they’re the same films everyone lists.
What I intended when creating this thread was if people thought No Country For Old Men would be one of those defining films and whether it would stack up when compared to the whole pantheon of American film. When I look at the AFI list (just for the sake of reference), Schindler’s List is the only modern film in the top ten. That to me says something about how Schindler’s List has broken into the upper echelon on what people consider the great films (I’m not talking about the merits of whether it should be on the list, merely stating that it is on the list) and very few contemporary films have been able to do this. Is this something that you think No Country is capable of?
Rumplesnik, My comments weren’t directed at you, but I will add Zodiac as another American film, and The Diving Bell and the Butterfly as a non American film. What I was saying is we were very lucky to have two films (NCFOM and TWBB) that were so incredible in 2007, and I think both will be remembered as two of the best from the decade.
Fredo –
“What I intended when creating this thread was if people thought No Country For Old Men would be one of those defining films and whether it would stack up when compared to the whole pantheon of American film”.
Yes. I do.
“Schindler’s List is the only modern film in the top ten. That to me says something about how Schindler’s List has broken into the upper echelon on what people consider the great films”
But I often wonder how much political correctness has to do with Schindler’s List being rated so highly by so many. It seems like it’s become a film that you’re not allowed to speak ill of. (I happened to like it when I saw it on release – haven’t watched it since though).
Oh God, Rumplesink, I dare you to speak ill of Schindler’s List. People will want your blood. I think it is a fantastic film, but I have problems with it like I have problems with most Spielberg. I have mentioned them to a few people and immediately I become this monster who is pretentious and does not feel human emotion.
You can criticize Schindler’s List all you want. But I refuse to believe that people voted for Schindler’s List simply to be politically correct. In any event, that’s not really the point of why I brought it up. The merit of the film is irrelevant to what I’m talking about; what’s relevant is that the general consensus is that it’s considered a great film.
Fredo, I wasn’t saying the film is bad, but that I don’t think its flawless. I think the reason people automatically label it a masterpiece is because it is grand on scale and effects almost everyone’s emotions. It is a big film that has no special effects. It has that masterpiece quality to it, that is easy to identify.
Fredo
Sorry – I seem to have inadvertently de-railed your thread by my observation about Schindler’s List. Back on track people!
Is No Country For Old Men a modern day classic?
No
hahha-Rumplsink. Yes, it’s easy to get off track sometimes. When I see this happening I’ve learned to ignore certain comments in hopes of moving forward and staying focused on the task at hand.
I think maybe it’s just going to take some time for us to get some perspective on No Country For Old Men. I think that what might help it’s reputation is if the Coens. make more films like this. It’s easy dismiss the Coens when you try to compare them to Kubrick (just as an example) because they’ve made so many films, some of them really crappy, and that are very different from each other while someone like Kubrick made only a handful of films and so much was put into every one of them. This is somewhat unfortunate because I think you can compare a film to another film without involving the filmmakers and their overall filmmography in the discussion. No Country For Old Men stands on it’s own and I’ll stand by the fact that it’s as good as 2001 or Eyes Wide Shut.
Fredo
Inspite of Josh Ryan’s objections, I’m creating a new thread on this.
Much has been discussed on this forum regarding No Country for Old Men but I wanted to pose a thoughtful question: Do you think No Country For Old Men will go down as one of the finest achievements in cinema? I don’t want to argue about There Will Be Blood being better or other Coen films being superior – I want to talk about where this film stands in relation to the generally accepted mainstream top films of all time. For instance, do you think No Country For Old Men should be included on the AFI Top 100 list?
I’m more interested in hearing from people who loved the film and thought it was the best film of 2007. Obviously if you hated this movie than you’re not going to like comparing it to Casablanca or 2001. But for the people who thought it was a landmark achievement, how does it compare to Vertigo or The Maltese Falcon or whatever?
This is somewhat difficult because I think you need time and perspective to really place a film in the context of the history of cinema. I’m open to the fact that this may be wishful thinking and I’m not being objective enough. But I really feel, for one of the few times in my life, that No Country For Old Men is a great piece of cinema and will only increase in stature as time goes on.
On a previous thread I mentioned that I think it’s as good as anything Kubrick has ever done and I stand by that. People may call me crazy but I look at No Country and see just as much control and knowledge of the art form being exhibited by the Coens as any of Kubrick’s films. I’m not saying it’s a better movie than A Clockwork Orange or 2001 but I do believe the level of craftsmanship is equal. Everyone always talks about the Coens only shooting what they need – that there are never any deleted scenes or anything on the cutting room floor – and I think No Country perfectly showcases this in terms of it’s precision in storytelling.
Anyways, I’m wondering if anyone else shares in this crazy idea or if the people who even loved No Country For Old Men don’t think it’ll stand the test of time.