Watch, Watching, Watch -- Keep the change you filthy animal!

[Ran]

6 hours ago, DMC said:

Plus it's pretty derivative of their prior work.  They even admit this regarding Fargo. 

Treading some of the same thematic ground, sure, but derivative seems odd. Sometimes artists return to the same themes because they're not done examining them, or have realized they'e come to different conclusions or what have you. It'd be like saying... I don't know, Silence is derivative of The Last Temptation of Christ or something. Or Fitzcaraldo is derivative of Aguirre, The Wrath of God 

Though, they did use the same briefcase from Fargo for the money in No Country for Old Men. But that's an easter egg, not derivation.  

6 hours ago, DMC said:

While that's incidental to them adapting McCarthy's novel, it still kinda mars my perspective on it, because I think Fargo is a significantly better film with much more rich characterization.

No Country for Old Men is, in purely technical areas, the better film. As one would expect, after ten additional years of film-making under their belt. The direction and cinematography is impeccable, and more ambitious than Fargo.

In terms of story and character, I guess that's kind of an eye of the beholder thing. For my part, No Country for Old Men is a lot more moving, and beguiling, the language of it richer, but then again Fargo isn't trying to move you so not worth comparing them on that point.

 

[DMC]

57 minutes ago, Ran said:

Treading some of the same thematic ground, sure, but derivative seems odd. Sometimes artists return to the same themes because they're not done examining them, or have realized they'e come to different conclusions or what have you.

This is largely arguing over semantics, and no it's not just returning to themes.  The premise is strikingly similar to Fargo - again as the Coens admit - and give me McDormand's portrayal over Jones' all day every day and twice on Sunday.  As far as returning to similar themes, characters, or other aspects, there are varying kernels that parallel Raising Arizona, O Brother (which I'm decidedly not a fan of), and even Lebowski.

1 hour ago, Ran said:

No Country for Old Men is, in purely technical areas, the better film.

I disagree on the photography - I prefer Fargo's to No Country's.  But we're comparing Deakins mid-career to Deakins..late-to-mid career.  Either way it's pretty similar (which returns to the derivative thing).  As for the "purely technical" aspects of directing, I'm not really sure what this means, but you seem to want to apply and assert an objective standard here when there's not.

1 hour ago, Ran said:

In terms of story and character, I guess that's kind of an eye of the beholder thing.

It's all an eye of the beholder thing, and in that vein, I'll take Fargo, Lebowski, and Raising Arizona over No Country - and rather easily.  Then I'd probably put True Grit slightly over it as well, as a better adaptation, in large part due to No Country's lack of characterization.  I don't care about anybody in the film, and that's a very odd failure for a Coens film.  I don't think the former is a very controversial ranking, although I suppose the latter may be. 

Regardless, No Country is nowhere close to Shawshank or Pulp Fiction for me and, again, I don't think that's a particularly controversial take at all.  For a 94 analog I'd put it with Leon.  Like I said, I do still think No Country is a great film, just not my particular cup of tea.  My original statement was actually more directed at There Will Be Blood, which I do not think is a great film, is insanely self-indulgent, and is the last PTA film I've seen (although I am interested in Licorice Pizza, just not in theaters).  And I even liked Magnolia.

[Rippounet]

I never understood what was great about There will be blood. It's a pretty boring, pretentious film. Not bad, of course, but definitely overrated. 

[BigFatCoward]

7 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

I never understood what was great about There will be blood. It's a pretty boring, pretentious film. Not bad, of course, but definitely overrated. 

So much this. Also as usual in his later work, DDL chews up every scene and overacts to the nth degree. 

 

[DMC]

12 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

It's a pretty boring, pretentious film.

I fell asleep the first time I tried to watch it.  Granted I was drunk, but not anywhere close to passout drunk.

[3CityApache]

2 hours ago, Ran said:

For my part, No Country for Old Men is a lot more moving, and beguiling, the language of it richer, but then again Fargo isn't trying to move you so not worth comparing them on that point.

As someone above noticed, No Country for Old Men feels like a soulless movie. For me it's a perfect description. Fargo, on the other hand, moved me to the core when I first watched it. It's a deep study of human stupidity, which causes a downward spiral. On emotional level, there was simply no comparison between the two for me.

[Veltigar]

"Veltigar sees a two-party war brewing and decides to turn it into a Mexican stand-off"

I remember both Fargo and No Country as vastly overrated films. No Country I saw once many years ago, so I'm willing to take that one out of the running as I have no clear memory of it apart from the feeling of boredom I experienced while watching it. Fargo however, that was pure torture for me. The endless ja-ja-ja jacking drove me crazy.

There Will Be Blood on the other hand is one of the best films made in new millennium in my opinion. Such a tour de force performance from DDL, even though it is hammy, I love it. 

[polishgenius]

 

[Ran]

2 hours ago, DMC said:

The premise is strikingly similar to Fargo - again as the Coens admit

But the film was written by Cormac McCarthy based on his novel that he rewrote from a screenplay he wrote around the time of 9/11 as a reaction of sorts.

Are you saying he was inspired by Fargo? Cormac McCarthy? The Blood Meridian, Pulitzer Prize-winning writer... ?

Color me dubious. 

2 hours ago, DMC said:

As for the "purely technical" aspects of directing, I'm not really sure what this means, but you seem to want to apply and assert an objective standard here when there's not.

When the cinematographer says that the film had some of the most challenging and difficult sequences he's ever shot (as of 2013, anyways, when he made that remark), I think that's what I mean by "purely technically". You can tell that there are a number of shots that are more technically complicated than anything comparable in Fargo. Harder to light, harder to lens, more choreography between action and cameras.

 

[Mexal]

4 hours ago, Veltigar said:

Just finished the first season of Yellowstone. I read somewhere that ranching vacations are becoming popular again and that this show's popularity is a contributor to that trend. I'm not entirely sure why though. If I have to believe this show, people in Montana have the same life expectancy as those in South Sudan.

All joking aside, I was really hooked by this show and I find it curious that I have never seen much talk about it on here despite the fact that it has been going since 2018. The writing is melodramatic, but it has an amazing cast with Kevin Costner, Kelly Reilley and Wes Bentley amongst others and the setting is just magnificently beautiful. With Taylor Sheridan as creator it also has one of the more popular screenwriters of the last couple of years on board.

The first season was apparently not well received. Perhaps that and the fact that it stars on a channel I have never even heard about (the Paramount network) were barriers to it reaching mainstream appeal, but I hear the latter seasons are lauded by critics so perhaps this is a bit of a Black Sails situation where the true depth and strength of the show only became noticeable after the first season.

Wildly entertaining show. It gets more and more ridiculous. We still haven't started season 4 but very much on our things to do after the way Season 3 ended.

[polishgenius]

9 minutes ago, Ran said:

 

Are you saying he was inspired by Fargo? Cormac McCarthy? The Blood Meridian, Pulitzer Prize-winning writer... ?

Color me dubious. 

 

I mean, I don't think the Coen bros were forced to pick up that particular story for adaptation? Presumably the argument is that they saw similarities to their previous work and picked it up on purpose to revisit the themes. I don't really see it - there might be some surface similarities of both plot and theme but the tone and general vibe is so different as to make it an entirely different piece, and if it relates in any direct way to Fargo it's in conversation with it, not derivative- but it existing as a book independently doesn't mean the Coen's couldn't have reached for it with Fargo in mind. 

I'm also not sure why it's so impossible that McCarthy could have been inspired by two highly influential filmmakers, though as I say I'm not sure there's more than trace similarities in the stories- ones that honestly mostly are just genre stuff, noir staples- to say that he was in this case.

 

[Ran]

6 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

I mean, I don't think the Coen bros were forced to pick up that particular story for adaptation?

No, but derivative has a particular meaning which I don't think is at all right for the relation of the two films to one another.

And I happen to agree that the similarities between them are pretty superficial, which makes it even more strange.

(Also, apparently I was wrong on the dating of when he wrote the original screenplay that he turned into a novel when he couldn't sell it -- it was, apparently, written in the 80s [which makes sense, given that it was set in the 80s...]. Funnily enough, a reviewer of the novel when it was published 2005 felt that there was so much authenticity to his depiction of small-town folk and rural life that they figured McCarthy would not be writing a screenplay for the Coen Brothers any time soon... heh.)

[DMC]

23 minutes ago, Ran said:

Are you saying he was inspired by Fargo? Cormac McCarthy? The Blood Meridian, Pulitzer Prize-winning writer... ?

Color me dubious. 

No, that's not what I was saying - as I stated before, it's incidental to the Coens adapting McCarthy's novel.  I'm saying the similarities are striking and rather apparent irt to Fargo and, in general, No Country revisits similar aspects of many of their other films.  If you find the term derivative as too offensive a way to describe that, ok, but I suppose I'll let the Coens explain it themselves:

Quote

Joel sighs. 'I know. There are parallels.' He shakes his head. 'These things really should seem obvious to us.'"[43] In addition, Ethan Coen states that "we're not conscious of it, [and] to the extent that we are, we try to avoid it. The similarity to Fargo did occur to us, not that it was a good or a bad thing. That's the only thing that comes to mind as being reminiscent of our own movies, [and] it is by accident."[71]

 

[Zorral]

5 hours ago, Veltigar said:

it curious that I have never seen much talk about it on here despite the fact that it has been going since 2018.

I've watched the first three seasons, and have completely lost interest in it, despite splendid landscapes, and my abiding love for westerns.

It's a soap opera, and most (not all, and some are mixed) of the characters are vile. Also it streams elsewhere than on the services I've already spent more on than I should, and a service that really carries little that interests me.  Criticize as almost all of us like to do about Netflix and amazon, if they were the only two services I had, I could always dig out something, if I was patient enough in searching, that would appeal.

In the meantime I'm watching Beyond Ridiculous Clothes.  Agatha Raisin's Christmas Murder Mystery, in which her blindingly color blocked wardrobe could kill all by itself at 20 paces, And Just Like That, sequel to Sex And the City, and Darren Starr's latest, Emily in Paris (skipped the first season, so I'm in ep. 4 of the second one). Gosh these clothes are -- hideous, and in Emily in Paris, so are the characters, so it's all one outfit.

Plus My Fair Lady, which is about Clothes you betcha, but over the top brilliant costume design, not ridiculous, well, not quite, not really.  After all, Audrey Hepburn's no Lily Collins or Sarah Jessica Parker, both of whom urge the viewer to bitch slap them with every moue, which is their idea of acting, in every beat, every scene.  

[DMC]

41 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

though as I say I'm not sure there's more than trace similarities in the stories- ones that honestly mostly are just genre stuff, noir staples- to say that he was in this case.

Both films are structured around wholesome local police chiefs out of their element chasing hardened sociopathic criminals with a third party (Macy and Brolin) motivated by greed providing the inciting incident.  They both end with the police chief lamenting the increasing nihilism of society.  I don't think these are just "trace similarities," nor are they really noir staples.  If I were asked to describe No Country to my mom (or I suppose my dad since he's more familiar with Fargo), I'd say it's like Fargo without the humor but much more suspenseful with a way cooler villain.

[DireWolfSpirit]

Wow such wide opinions with our subjective tastes.

I love both No Country and Fargo, it's not an either or situation for me with those two. 

Never really bought into whatever There will be Blood was trying to do, it's always nice to see DDLewis but the movie just didn't compell me so much.

Finally I'll throw Hell or Highwater out there as a brilliant modern Western, the "What don't you want" diner scene being one of my alltime classics.

I rate Ford the Coward who assassinated JesseJ above everything previously discussed at any rate, some amazeballs shyt dat!!!!

 

Eta: Yellowstone I've found to be loved by widely diverse audiences (both liberal and conservatives). There is an access issue with it as many don't have Paramount though.

[Zorral]

12 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

I'll throw Hell or Highwater out there as a brilliant modern Western, the "What don't you want" diner scene being one of my alltime classics.

I rate Ford the Coward who assassinated JesseJ above everything previously discussed at any rate, some amazeballs shyt dat!!!!

[Heartofice]

Have to say I’ve always preferred the tv show Fargo to the movie. Maybe I just missed the movie at the time, having only watched bit of it when it came out,but it felt underwhelming after watching the series.

Lots of the Coen stuff has that effect on me. Big Lebowski takes a lot of views to get to the point of enjoyment and there are some movies that just frustrate me more than anything, No Country as well as A Seriois Man spring to mind in that way. I appreciate them on some level but they make it difficult to fall into because of how they play with narrative and conclusions.

[dog-days]

I watched Fargo the film before Fargo the TV show and really enjoyed it. I predictably like that kind of black comedy. Not sure how the film would hold up now post Noah Hawley's Fargo. 

No Country for Old Men I liked but didn't love. It was certainly cinematically very beautiful (I wonder if it influenced a little of the style of Breaking Bad?); however, I don't feel inclined to return to it, whereas I might watch Fargo again on the strength of Steve Buscemi and Frances McDormand's performances. 

[Whiskeyjack]

8 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Are you sure of that? Unless Wikipedia and IMDB are both wrong, there are 3 more episodes of Station Eleven, and the last one airs on 13 January.

Ah cool.  Not sure what made me think it was 9 episodes - thought I saw that somewhere, but maybe it was a different show.  But looks like you're right and its 10, which is even better.