West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Sports & Entertainment => Topic started by: S P I C E on June 28, 2008, 09:36:40 AM
-
It was a solid movie and yes Daniel Day-Lewis was incredible and Paul Dano as "Eli" was impressive as well but overall this just want a great movie at all. I have a hard time understanding what people think was so great about this, again don't get me wrong, I don't think it was a bad movie in fact I think it was solid but in no way do I think this deserved all of the acclaim that it received, Lewis deserved it because he was superb but overall as a movie it just wasn't that great. No Country For Old Men was 10 times better than this was.
-
It was a very interesting character study of an anti-hero. These type of movies aren't made often, it may not be perfect but shit it's refreshing to see that a young filmmaker is taking risks with the films he has decided to make. Big props to him. This is where masterpieces can come from. Paul Thomas Anderson has the talent to make a film that will make most people's top ten of all time.
-
Lewis deserved it because he was superb. No Country For Old Men was 10 times better than this was.
-
I think it received praise because there are so many layers to the plot, you can interpret it yourself, and so many movies are just point a-b...so it was really refreshing just the way it was presented, with such dark sarcasm that it was almost a comedy... i dont know...i really like it, but i can feel you on it just being solid too.
-
I think it received praise because there are so many layers to the plot, you can interpret it yourself, and so many movies are just point a-b...so it was really refreshing just the way it was presented, with such dark sarcasm that it was almost a comedy... i dont know...i really like it, but i can feel you on it just being solid too.
-
You have pretty rubbish tastes.
-
i just rewatched it, havent seen it since movies, damn ,so good, very different movie then you expect from hollywood, but not those lame weird independent movies (i know theres good ones, but usually directors think by being odd and different means they are good),
-
TWBB > NCFOM (yeah, Im lazy)
-
there will be blood and no country for old men are both EXCELLENT movies.
-
there will be blood and no country for old men are both EXCELLENT movies.
Yes, both were miles better then anything else last year. NCFOM had a better story, but TWBB had better acting. Their both very different movies, TWBB tends to be a tad too long though, not a movie you can watch more then twice.
-
You take the Tommy Lee Jones scenes out of No Country and it's nothing but a cheap Terminater rip off (Brolin does a better Reese though). The Jones scenes saved it for me. They were brilliant but TWBB was brilliant from top to bottom. It's not even close in my book. There Will Be Blood is the best film of the decade so far.
-
It was a solid movie and yes Daniel Day-Lewis was incredible and Paul Dano as "Eli" was impressive as well but overall this just want a great movie at all. I have a hard time understanding what people think was so great about this, again don't get me wrong, I don't think it was a bad movie in fact I think it was solid but in no way do I think this deserved all of the acclaim that it received, Lewis deserved it because he was superb but overall as a movie it just wasn't that great. No Country For Old Men was 10 times better than this was.
You speak the truth. No Country had more substance and was still more entertaining imo.