Cheddar J. Cheese wrote: How much you wanna bet the cover art changes to feature a "Winner of 4 Academy Awards Best Picture, Director, Supporting Actor, Adapted Screenplay" banner? Actually they put a sticker on it that says "Winner Academy Award 2007 Best Picture." remember just a sticker they put on it that says that

I know this has been said before, but the cover sucks so bad

Yeah, they're definatly going to change that cover soon.

I hate to sound generic, but this was also my pick for best film of the year.  Will probably import the UK hd-dvd once I can get it for next to nothing

Tony DeFrancisco wrote: Filligan wrote: I usually don't give a damn about floating heads, but why would you do it for this movie? Why would you not put Brolin in the middle? They obviously don't care that the names match up to the respective head. Bardem should not get the biggest focus on this... freakin' cover. It should be like the theatrical poster where he IS the background. Point is, he is the villain in this movie... you don't give him the big middle spot, putting both the heroes in half shadow. To tell you the truth, I find the other two characters much more villainous than Bardem's in all of the different reasons. While we're not supposed to be, the Coens and Cormac make it hidden within the context to where we're actually supposed to think about it.

Is Bardem villainous? Sure. Just about anyone that kills should be considered a villain.

But what about Josh Brolin? You can't go against the thought about him stealing the money. Is he any less of a villain by stealing a suitcase filled with money, compared to a guy who kills people? No, not really. Just that Spider-Man would probably find this guy quicker.

And as far as Tommy Lee Jones go, no, he's not a villain. But look throughout the movie, and he considers himself a villain the entire time. Especially within the final moments, where he knows that Bardem is in one of the rooms (and possibly the one he is in). Most cops wouldn't take a chance to capture a ruthless criminal. Plus, if anything is more symbolic than the chance that he has as to capture the criminal, he talks about in the first dream how he lost money. Think of money as something valuable, as the lives of people he was supposed to protect, or even that suitcase of money. The second dream only explains how there is really no country for old men.

I like how this film has millions of interpretations, but in this case we disagree. And not just in the terms of the film's characters, but in real life... ethics. You're saying a person who steals is just a "evil", we'll say, as someone who murders? You can say Brolin's character is wrong for stealing the money, but SOMEONE was going to come along to take it at one point. And it was THEIR story we're gonna follow. Comparing him to Bardem's character, who transcends typical human villainy, just doesn't seem right. This man is cold, calculating, and he kills innocent person after innocent person. Brolin, meanwhile, is just trying to get away with the chance of a life outside of a trailer park. As for Jones' character "thinking" he's a villain throughout the movie... well, I don't agree with that in the first place, but even so it sounds irrelevant. And I don't believe Bardem was in the hotel room at the end.

Anyway, all of this aside... Brolin is STILL the man the audience roots for, so he is still our hero (or anti-hero, if you must just because he steals). He shouldn't get pushed to the side for the sake of the man he is running from and we don't root for. It's like if they put a huge picture of Tommy Lee Jones on the cover of The Fugitive, and in the corner was a tiny little one of Harrison Ford.

By far the best film of the year, Atonement was very good as was There Will Be Blood, but to me No Country is in a league of its own. Ive seen it 3 times so far and its better and better every time. It's to me the best film since American Beauty and I cant wait to get this DVD. I definitely agree that they should have used the artwork from the poster on the cover its a brilliant movie poster I think but oh well i guess cant really complain, and I wouldn't really urge to many of you to wait for a SE it be nice but even if one does com out it won't be for a couple of years if not longer so dont hold your breath. A must buy

Same page with knightd (kind of) and JoJo:    01. There Will Be Blood    02. No Country For Old Men    03. Atonement

Bardem looks nothing like himself & Brolin looks like he's in his late 40s...

I'll definitely be grabbing this at some point. Loved it.

I just watched this and I'm afraid I don't see what all the love for it is about.

A few nice shots here or there, but the story wasn't very interesting or original and I felt like I'd seen the same film in a few other different setting over the past 80 years of cinema. As a whole very disappointed. In fact if it hadn't been for TLJones performance, I'd have probably walked out.

I just don't get the love for these kinds of films. None of the characters are believable or have a single redeeming quality what so ever and I don't see the point in glamorising them in films like this. For me it's up there with History of Violence as one of the most overated movies of the past few years.

Mine would look like: 1. There Will Be Blood 2. Atonement 3. No Country For Old Men

But I haven't read No Country, and I did read Atonement. So I was more impressed with the adaptation of that.

Great movie, not the Coen's best, but it sits somewhere around #5 on my list.
I was fine with the ending until the Tommy Lee Jones spiel in the end, which, as touching as it was, felt kind of out of place for me, and ended the movie on an unsatisfying note as far as I'm concerned.
I'll get the DVD only for Javier Bardem's performance.
As opposed to other commenters, I was actualy surprised by the amount of extra features on this DVD, considering the Coens' other releases, I was expecting Zodiac 1.0 (without 2.0) all over again.

I usually don't give a damn about floating heads, but why would you do it for this movie? Why would you not put Brolin in the middle? They obviously don't care that the names match up to the respective head. Bardem should not get the biggest focus on this... freakin' cover. It should be like the theatrical poster where he IS the background. Point is, he is the villain in this movie... you don't give him the big middle spot, putting both the heroes in half shadow.

2nd Best of 2007 to me (There Will Be Blood is 1st)

Definate purchase, love it.

Kakihara69 wrote: Actually, the Coens have done a double-dip before with The Big Lebowski so it's conceivable that they'd do one for this, arguably their best movie of their careers. Said double dip contained a Jeff Bridges Photo Gallery and a Mortimer Young intro -- not exactly jaw-dropping additions.

And again, it's the Coens themselves who are just not really all that big on the whole DVD special edition thing. Take for example the Universal Blood Simple DVD (now OOP), in which they were asked to do a commentary and instead wrote a feature-length joke commentary for fake film scholar Kenneth Loring. They're just not big on features. David Fincher and Zodiac is the opposite -- Fincher loves to commentate, and spends lots of time being very involved with the special edition process.

Kakihara69 wrote: Actually, the Coens have done a double-dip before with The Big Lebowski so it's conceivable that they'd do one for this, arguably their best movie of their careers.

I wonder if (or how much) the Coen's, or any director(s), have input on the type of DVD release their films receive? It seems more under the control of the studios and their marketing departments. The obvious bare bones releases (like this one) appear to be just for the masses and to whet the appetites of the true aficionados of the film and/or the medium. Just about everyone one on this forum knows a Special or Collector's edition is in the offing--just like what the studios did for a film like Zodiac.

Anyway, great film by the Coen's (or anybody in '07). Yes, I have strained sentiments about how it ended, but if you look at the reader reviews of Cormac's original work (at Amazon or Audible), you'll easily spot the same dichotomy of views concerning the third act. The Coen's appeared to have followed the book closely. Regardless, the film deserves the accolades coming its way. This has to be one of the favorites for Best Picture and Bardem seems a lock for Supporting Actor. But, I'm sure that discussion is for another thread ;-).

Definitely getting the Blu-Ray for this one...

Easily one of the greatest films I've ever seen!

The cover is decent though- definately floating heads done right(why don't the names of Brolin/Jones match up with their faces?), but I'll anxiously await the inevitable double-dip (After I get suckered into buying this that is)!

bollasio1313 wrote: REPLY TO KEVINNASH (*SPOILERS*): I respect how you feel, but I felt that we should have gotten a better look at Brolin's death because he was the character we had been following the whole movie and then he suddenly disappears and reappears dead. That's not fair. But then again, the movie was a bit about how evil prevails in one form or another. So who knows, you're probably right.

Brolin wasn't the main character though. His death is unimportant to the themes of the story.

I like the poster a lot more, but it's an okay cover. This is the second blu ray movie I'll buy, I said Sunshine would be the only thing I would get on blu but...

more floating heads?

GOSH FOCKING DAMMIT!

DrewPLP wrote: Obviously a bare-bones edition.  I'll wait for the special edition, which will be a definate buy because this was by far one of the best films of the year.
I agree. Will be waiting for the SE. Excellent film nontheless

Actually, the Coens have done a double-dip before with The Big Lebowski so it's conceivable that they'd do one for this, arguably their best movie of their careers.

I hate how Brolin and Lee Jones names are not under their respective floating head.  CAN WE END THIS FLOATING HEAD FAD?

i love everything about this film (particularly the ending). i might have to hold out though, because all the hype it's getting leads me to believe that there's gonna be a special edition not too far away (even though that's unusual for a coen bros movie).

*SPOILERS*




After Brolin was killed off (in a very c**ppy way), I lost complete interest because he was the only real character I cared about. I liked what happened to Bardem's character though. But the ending was just bleh.




*END SPOILERS*


No purchase for me.

so i doubt the coen brothers will double-dip this one cuz they never do.....

Squeek81, I agree with you.
Woody Harrelson must be buddies with the Coen Brothers because his character did absolutely nothing in this film. And I do appreciate films that feel  they don't have to tie up all the loose ends but the ending to this movie was just odd. The last ten minutes seemed really rushed.

Truly a good film, will most likely pick it up on Blu. Can Javier Bardem get any more uglier than that on the cover art?

This was a great film. Truly one of the best films of 2007. But I have to say the third act was definitely weak when compared to the rest of the film.

DrewPLP wrote: Obviously a bare-bones edition.  I'll wait for the special edition, which will be a definate buy because this was by far one of the best films of the year.Yeah as another poster said the Coen Brothers don't really do elaborate special editions, so I wouldn't hold my breath. Of their 11 movies they've only recorded one commentary track and rarely do their DVDs feature more than EPK material, outtakes, and deleted scenes.

Great movie, very creepy bad guy. The ending fit the movie perfectly. Especially in the context of Tommy Lee's last speech. The only problem I had with the movie was woody harrelson's character. Served no purpose except to give some background information on the bad guy and didnt advance the plot at all. SOLD!

All righty then...

Obviously a bare-bones edition.  I'll wait for the special edition, which will be a definate buy because this was by far one of the best films of the year.

Three featurettes?? That's it?