No Country for Old Men

7

davidcAug 23, 2008

Okay, the beginning of this film is fantastic, if your into action you'll love it, if your into drama you'll it, whatever genre your into you'll love it. the middle slows down and i thought a few explanation scenes should have Okay, the beginning of this film is fantastic, if your into action you'll love it, if your into drama you'll it, whatever genre your into you'll love it. the middle slows down and i thought a few explanation scenes should have been put in, but it was still acceptable. now then i accepted the middle part because i thought the end would be tremendous, but the only thing i can compare it to is winning the lottery and then going to cash the check to find out its a joke. it really is that much of a let down (i nearly cried). all in all, the acting was very good but 60% of the film was a let down.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

DenizY.Sep 13, 2008

I'm not stupid, but this is just 120 minutes of some guy going around killing people with a bolt gun. It was boring, had the worst and most awkward ending in recent memory. Seriously, why do people like this movie? I don't think I'm not stupid, but this is just 120 minutes of some guy going around killing people with a bolt gun. It was boring, had the worst and most awkward ending in recent memory. Seriously, why do people like this movie? I don't think they get it either, they just believe it looks intelligent and so they play along. Retards, the lot of you!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ErickSep 13, 2008

The only reason I'm giving this a 5 is because I watched it after "There Will Be Blood", which was even worse.. If there isn't a sequel to this then it is pointless.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

ThomasWNov 6, 2009

Sick, sad, and funny that nearly all critics are raving about this awkward, hurriedly composed, and absurd celebration of an evil guy who is never hampered by realism. e.g. no handcuffs behind back; able to reach top of office building Sick, sad, and funny that nearly all critics are raving about this awkward, hurriedly composed, and absurd celebration of an evil guy who is never hampered by realism. e.g. no handcuffs behind back; able to reach top of office building carrying a long shotgun; not stopped by severe car wreck; plus Josh Brolen snuffed out - blink and you'll miss it. Riduculous script. Move overrated film I have ever seen.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

ApocalypseBrownMay 11, 2009

Good film but can somebody explain what on earth happened at the end? It has a very poor narrative, as nobody understood the overall theme.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

ceejayJun 16, 2009

Some people say the film lacked a theme. I'd say the theme was very coherently and consistently conveyed. The theme is "It is possible to have yourself a certain set of principles that, if followed correctly, should make you will be Some people say the film lacked a theme. I'd say the theme was very coherently and consistently conveyed. The theme is "It is possible to have yourself a certain set of principles that, if followed correctly, should make you will be nearly invincible to those that follow the traditional set and beyond." But the movie doesn't glorify those principles, other than to show its terrifying effect. Javier Bardem deserves his Oscar.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

AndrewAJul 12, 2009

Great movie but the ending...i get cliffhangers but this was ridiculous.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

HerbB.wSep 29, 2009

If the ability to create intense feelings makes a movie great then this is a great movie. However, the feelings created are that human life has no value and the world is incredibly bleak. Chills one to the bone.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

PaulCNov 12, 2007

An excellent movie, Javier Bardem gives one of the creepiest performances in all the Coen brothers movies. One of the best movies of the year. Note to DWilly, the movie takes place in 1980, not in contemporary times. Both the dialogue and An excellent movie, Javier Bardem gives one of the creepiest performances in all the Coen brothers movies. One of the best movies of the year. Note to DWilly, the movie takes place in 1980, not in contemporary times. Both the dialogue and the environment make that pretty clear (old cars, phones, coins, etc.)… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

ChrisR.Nov 12, 2007

Definitely one of the best Coen films yet. I'd say it's at least equal to Raising Arizona, Fargo, and The Big Lebowski, if not better than all of them.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

ETayNov 13, 2007

I really don't see what all the hype is about? There is very little story arc and zero character development. The movie is nothing more than schlock horror dressed up as a cult film because of great casting and beautiful cinematography. I really don't see what all the hype is about? There is very little story arc and zero character development. The movie is nothing more than schlock horror dressed up as a cult film because of great casting and beautiful cinematography. Note to female viewers all but 2 of the great reviews are by men; it is hugely violent and when the movie obscurely ends you are left feeling … Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

HunterB.Nov 16, 2007

Best movie ever.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

ZacS.Nov 16, 2007

Flawless Direction, Flawless Cinematography, Great acting from Bardem...but the story was just lost...i was looking forward to giving this a 10 of 10 and i guess i was just disappointed. The plot ended too abruptly, and seemed overtly Flawless Direction, Flawless Cinematography, Great acting from Bardem...but the story was just lost...i was looking forward to giving this a 10 of 10 and i guess i was just disappointed. The plot ended too abruptly, and seemed overtly staggered to the point of annoyance.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

jaredmNov 17, 2007

excellent film. beautifully crafted. It was paced very well with enough subtlety and grit to keep me captivated throughout. Don't listen to the skeptics, it's a must see!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

JaneNov 17, 2007

This film succeeds in some areas (cinematography, fantastic performances) and fails in others (rambling monologues, a tacked-on ending, sudden and distracting switches from Dark Comedy to Thriller genre). It sure doesn't merit a 91 and This film succeeds in some areas (cinematography, fantastic performances) and fails in others (rambling monologues, a tacked-on ending, sudden and distracting switches from Dark Comedy to Thriller genre). It sure doesn't merit a 91 and to out-rank Hannah & Her Sisters, American Splendor and Gosford Park. Beware: A LOT of very graphic, gratuitous violence, despite what the apologists say.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

ToddG.Nov 19, 2007

The first 2/3 of the movie are tight and very well done. The story just dies, and falls flat by the end. Such a shame. I don't understand why the critics fell all over themselves to give the "No Country" such good ratings. It is one of The first 2/3 of the movie are tight and very well done. The story just dies, and falls flat by the end. Such a shame. I don't understand why the critics fell all over themselves to give the "No Country" such good ratings. It is one of those things where they assume that because the Coen brothers have made good movies in the past, that they must be doing something right. NOT THE CASE here.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

UGNov 21, 2007

So incredible that I can't do it justice here. Just see it!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

whatNov 21, 2007

A little bit boring.... the first movie in a long time i've seen where the audience actually 'booooos' afterward. i actually stayed but the people i went with left as soon as the popcorn was gone because they couldn't A little bit boring.... the first movie in a long time i've seen where the audience actually 'booooos' afterward. i actually stayed but the people i went with left as soon as the popcorn was gone because they couldn't take it anymore.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

AlF.Nov 22, 2007

This film is just "Fargo", set in Texas instead of Minnesota. Unfortunately, it has the violence of "Fargo" without the humorous moments or charming characters. The plot is completely implausable. The critics like it because it is different. This film is just "Fargo", set in Texas instead of Minnesota. Unfortunately, it has the violence of "Fargo" without the humorous moments or charming characters. The plot is completely implausable. The critics like it because it is different. To me, as a casual film viewer, it's just an exercise in excess from directors that are out to shock audiences with cheap violence.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

DeanNov 22, 2007

I thought the movie was an almost perfectly made adaptation, and one of the best films I've ever seen. This movie, though, is not suitable to everyone's tastes, especially a casual film viewer looking to be simply enetertained. I thought the movie was an almost perfectly made adaptation, and one of the best films I've ever seen. This movie, though, is not suitable to everyone's tastes, especially a casual film viewer looking to be simply enetertained. This is a dark, bleak movie that shows the fragility of life, and that chance can outweigh justice.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

MichaelC.Nov 23, 2007

this was the finest film i have seen all year. I will be very surprised if it is not nominated for best picture, best director, best actor and best supporting actor.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

DarrylNov 23, 2007

The best movie of this year.... I could not take my eyes off the screen, great performances throughout the movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

BertBNov 23, 2007

Powerful, but almost un-watchable for its tension and violence (my wife could not look at the bloody scenes), with acting perfect, directing and writing perfect, but the ending is almost greek in its bleak outlook and "soft" ending. The Powerful, but almost un-watchable for its tension and violence (my wife could not look at the bloody scenes), with acting perfect, directing and writing perfect, but the ending is almost greek in its bleak outlook and "soft" ending. The cinematography is equal to some of the great films of the past that took place in Texas (e.g., The Big Country). The story builds to such power and implacable, almost impersonal evil, that the resolution that is not offered by the Coens is a letdown. Until that point, you are riveted to the screen and the plot. To those critics who claim there's no plot -- they haven't seen the same movie. Go see it and form your own opinion.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

CandiceWNov 24, 2007

Another amazing Cohen brothers movie Don't expect the same black humour from Fargo but do expect some amazing acting talent and some well crafted violent scenes that rocked my socks Javier Bardem is brilliant, cool and collected through Another amazing Cohen brothers movie Don't expect the same black humour from Fargo but do expect some amazing acting talent and some well crafted violent scenes that rocked my socks Javier Bardem is brilliant, cool and collected through the entire film. Josh Brolin plays an awesome character- tough, dynamic and overall just fun to watch I went to see this with my boyfriend and he was blown away.. we're going to go see it again with some friends next week… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

SteveT.Nov 24, 2007

Best yet from the Bros. Coen! A wonder of acting, pacing, editing and photography. It doesn't get much better than this.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

DanF.Nov 24, 2007

A collaborative torrent of sensibilities, this film is a disquieting and hypnotic telling of the collapse at the heart of our time, which has been McCarthy's story all along. The Coen's have done justice to the book, the acting is A collaborative torrent of sensibilities, this film is a disquieting and hypnotic telling of the collapse at the heart of our time, which has been McCarthy's story all along. The Coen's have done justice to the book, the acting is remarkable, and it doesn't play like some variant of the American national anthem. Stunning.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

KyleNov 24, 2007

"There Will Be a Sequel"

There won't be a sequel. It's based off a book you clueless fucktard. This doesn't need a sequel either, it delivers the point across perfectly. "I hated this movie and I am a Cormac McCarthy"There Will Be a Sequel"

There won't be a sequel. It's based off a book you clueless fucktard. This doesn't need a sequel either, it delivers the point across perfectly.
"I hated this movie and I am a Cormac McCarthy fan! A better title would have been Two Weeks in the Life of a Psychopath. Great cast but extremely violent with no point that I could see. Hope to get it out of my mind soon."
-Dumb bitch

Obviously you're not a Cormac McCarthy fan because this is perhaps the best film adaptation ever. It was faithful to the book in almost every respect. No point? Dumb bitch, THINK. Stop being a passive watcher and fucking think about the dialog. What is Ed Tom saying? What does the title of the movie mean? CONNECT THE FUCKING DOTS.

"… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

BradNov 26, 2007

Sure, the Coen brothers did a skillful job conveying Cormac McCarthy's message. Hooray for them. Boo on McCarthy, though. I don't see any value in a story as hopeless and bleak as this one, a story that goes as far as making the Sure, the Coen brothers did a skillful job conveying Cormac McCarthy's message. Hooray for them. Boo on McCarthy, though. I don't see any value in a story as hopeless and bleak as this one, a story that goes as far as making the most talented, intelligent, and charming character -- the only character without a "fatal" flaw -- a sadistic psychopath.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

DannyG.Nov 26, 2007

Great movie. I feel the impulse to defend this movie from its harshest critics. First of all Rosenbaum from Chicago Reader is not a fan of thriller/psychopathic films. He even confesses this in his review by stating he was unimpressed by Great movie. I feel the impulse to defend this movie from its harshest critics. First of all Rosenbaum from Chicago Reader is not a fan of thriller/psychopathic films. He even confesses this in his review by stating he was unimpressed by Silence of the Lambs. Also, many people think that there are holes in the plot and things wouldn't happen like they do in this film. The movie takes place almost 30 years ago in po-dunk west Texas. Now, I've never been to Texas and i wasn't even alive in 1980 so i may be wrong, but from what the film portrays, a person like anton chigurh could definitely do the things he did and get away with it. Another thing, the violence. People think this is all violence with no substance. Not True, watch the film again. I'm dumbfounded by Jill E.'s review because she is a Cormac McCarthy fan. I too read the book long before the movie and thought that the book was more violent because of McCarthy's grotesque descriptions of the violence. The book was basically a screenplay for the movie, which held true to every major detail of the book from when the money is found to when Bell is ending the movie with his dream recital.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RickC.Nov 27, 2007

After reading the negative comments in the user review section I feel compelled to offer my own opinion. I believe that the Coen Brothers are the most adept filmmakers currently working. With that said this is the most dense and well-crafted After reading the negative comments in the user review section I feel compelled to offer my own opinion. I believe that the Coen Brothers are the most adept filmmakers currently working. With that said this is the most dense and well-crafted feature that they have produced. I have seen the film three times now and each viewing has been utterly fruitful in enhancing my appreciation for this masterpiece and my understanding of the filmmakers intent. Yes, the film is a bit slow-paced and it may seem to end abruptly. Yet both of these elements seem purposefully employed. The pace of this film kept me in knots, by far one of the most visceral and tense movies I've ever experienced. As for the ending, I don't know how the Coens could have ended this film better than to be true to their source. They could've wrapped everything up in a nice little package. Instead they respect their audience and McCarthy's story. They allow us to derive our own conclusions. in other words, thank god for the slow pace and ambiguous conclusion for without either he film would be rendered completely limp and meaningless.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

PaulB.Nov 29, 2007

Exceptionally well acted, well photographed and well scripted - this is a very entertaining movie and is not as violent (or gory) as some early reviews made it out to be. Definitely one of the 2 or 3 best Coen brothers' movies!!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

ElmoNov 29, 2007

It's the Coen's best film to date, which is some sort of miracle - it's hard to top what they've done already, plus No Countrys is easily McCarthy's weakest novel (albeit a damn good one). If you don't like this It's the Coen's best film to date, which is some sort of miracle - it's hard to top what they've done already, plus No Countrys is easily McCarthy's weakest novel (albeit a damn good one). If you don't like this film, go out and make your own damn movie, and then I might take your opinion seriously.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RayFDec 11, 2007

Great film. for others saying "A cacophony of horrible violence for no apparent reason.... he's just a psychopath." thats exactly what the film is about, how seemingly random violence CAN be and most of the time IS. he's is a Great film. for others saying "A cacophony of horrible violence for no apparent reason.... he's just a psychopath." thats exactly what the film is about, how seemingly random violence CAN be and most of the time IS. he's is a psychopath but see it from his perspective, he does have his own code of 'honor' and he lives by it even though its on the other side of conventional moral code. the whole monologue in the beginning pretty much sums up the whole movie. the title sums it up. the ending monologue was just brilliant. the open ending was the best way to end it. in the book there was an ending, but it felt rushed like someone said "make an ending or we wont publish your book" +1 for dialogue also! Javier Bardem is my favorite actor and in this film he really really shines, esp. in the scene with the senior gas station clerk.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

ScotS.Dec 14, 2007

If you're trying to decide whether to see this movie, I recommend reading all the reader feedback below, good and bad: they are all correct. This is the kind of movie that different people will appreciate (or not) completely If you're trying to decide whether to see this movie, I recommend reading all the reader feedback below, good and bad: they are all correct. This is the kind of movie that different people will appreciate (or not) completely differently, so find a reviewer you identify with, and trust their rating. Depending on who you are, missing this movie might be a huge mistake, or seeing this movie might be a huge mistake (the latter is not easily reversible, sadly for me).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JackR.Dec 14, 2007

In contrast to some of the more, albeit few, disparaging reviews. I fount the movie to be highly engaging, with a cast of unorthodox characters (a la Anton) weaved into an unpredictable plot that defies standard cliches. There is no sappy In contrast to some of the more, albeit few, disparaging reviews. I fount the movie to be highly engaging, with a cast of unorthodox characters (a la Anton) weaved into an unpredictable plot that defies standard cliches. There is no sappy love story or happy ending; the violence displayed in the movie is quick and unsettling. The movie clearly wants you to focus on the characters emotions, and reactions to certain events, particularly when watching scenes involving Anton and other individuals. In brilliant film that revels in the unexpected.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JohnP.Dec 15, 2007

This was the most insightful movie I have seen in a long time. It ignores convention, it ignores the needs of a mass audience approval and it ends with a climax that is more becoming than any special effect driven blockbuster. IT ENDS AS ALL This was the most insightful movie I have seen in a long time. It ignores convention, it ignores the needs of a mass audience approval and it ends with a climax that is more becoming than any special effect driven blockbuster. IT ENDS AS ALL NOVELS DO.... WITH A BLANK PAGE. The reviewers or audience members that don't get it, have obviously never understood the importance of the written word or the wonder that fills the mind as you read the last few words and are left to your own thoughts. This is brilliant film making and deserving of any and all accolades (BEST PICTURE ANYONE).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

BrianP.Dec 15, 2007

Why do American moviegoers always have to have a spoon fed ending to a film? It's a mesmerizing, violent, well acted piece of coen brothers art that I wasn't sure if I would like but fell in love with after I walked out. So are Why do American moviegoers always have to have a spoon fed ending to a film? It's a mesmerizing, violent, well acted piece of coen brothers art that I wasn't sure if I would like but fell in love with after I walked out. So are people rating it low because there is no ending and the critics love it? Or are they mad because they always want the good guy to win and the bad one to get caught? Admit it , you were engrossed by it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

MarkA.Dec 16, 2007

Great dialog. Great acting. Great cinematography. The ending might bother people who like things wrapped up in a happy little parcel but guess what, sometimes life doesn't work that way so why should films?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

JeffS.Dec 17, 2007

Genius. A brilliant dark comedy/action thriller. The heroes are as fallible and human as the arch-villain is utterly terrifying. I didn't want it to end, but the stupid credits started rolling so I figured that was it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ManuN.Dec 18, 2007

I thought the acting was great. The pace of the movie was inconsistent, and the ending was very unsatisfying.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

MarilynZ.Dec 19, 2007

Entertaining, captivating, terrifying, and I look forward to buying this one on DVD. Great acting. Tommy Lee Jones is always terrific, but Josh Brolan and Javier Badass (can't remember his last name) should be nominated for Supporting Entertaining, captivating, terrifying, and I look forward to buying this one on DVD. Great acting. Tommy Lee Jones is always terrific, but Josh Brolan and Javier Badass (can't remember his last name) should be nominated for Supporting Actors. I don't think it ended without an ending...I was just disappointed that it was even over. I was so in the moment that I forgot that there was a real world out there. It was not the way I wanted it to end. I want everyone to end up wealthy and happy, but that would be a fairy tale then. GO SEE THIS MOVIE...you will not be sorry. Be prepared for lots of violence and gore though and I don't like either one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

Rev.RikardDec 21, 2007

Initially it appears the Coens are engaged in an attempt to recreate "Natural Born Killers." However, the viewer is quickly awakened to the refreshing truth that "No Country for Old Men" offers a multi-layered look at violence. Whereas Initially it appears the Coens are engaged in an attempt to recreate "Natural Born Killers." However, the viewer is quickly awakened to the refreshing truth that "No Country for Old Men" offers a multi-layered look at violence. Whereas "Natural Born Killers" forces us to enter the confessional and admit we possess an angry dark facet of our nature, "No Country for Old Men" invites us to look at the world outside the confessional and realize that violence is not only an individual monster lurking in the human heart, but is also a powerful, relevant social phenomenon Violent actions and thoughts that once shocked 20th century America have morphed into a disease altering the landscape of a new millennium. Tommy Lee Jones portrays Sheriff Bell with touching humility and humanity. He looks worn and weary, as are his words as he attempts to make sense of senseless violence that defies being locked away in a prison. It is an infectious violence that leaves its victims lifeless, cold, inhuman; they are dead while they live. Equal to the task of playing against Jone… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JohnHoltDec 22, 2007

Left me feeling like feeling like "what's the point?"

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

AnonymousMCDec 22, 2007

This movie felt like it was striving to be realistic and artistic but for me it ultimately failed. Good amount of suspense building but you kinda grow tired and annoyed that a writer would put so much senseless violence into a film. I couldThis movie felt like it was striving to be realistic and artistic but for me it ultimately failed. Good amount of suspense building but you kinda grow tired and annoyed that a writer would put so much senseless violence into a film. I could see this movie being better if it made the point of senseless violence a climax or part of a large plot, but it felt like a writer tool pulled out and rolled in the mud the whole movie.
And don't get me started with the cliche'd car crash, I saw it happening immediately when he was driving towards the green light (that they show multiple times). Why else would you show that unless he was going to get into a spontaneous "realistic" car crash. It felt like the writer didn't know how to end this otherwise dull movie, so why not end it with a dull ending?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

AMovieCriticDec 29, 2007

Once again I have to wonder why, despite my huge interest in film-making and movies in general, I leave a movie theater for a supposed "masterpiece" being completely unmoved by it. It happened with Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, and itOnce again I have to wonder why, despite my huge interest in film-making and movies in general, I leave a movie theater for a supposed "masterpiece" being completely unmoved by it. It happened with Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, and it happened once again here. There was a great 30 minutes or so in here, as the main character travels from hotel to hotel with stolen drug money, attempting desperately to outwit a killer whose after him and the cash. This leads to a very intense shootout in a hotel room and a street. Before and after this great 30 minutes, though, there's really nothing entertaining about the movie. Characters go on and on and don't feel realistic at all. The entire movie lacks a soundtrack, which, rather than adding to the atmosphere, subtracts from it. The final act of the movie, (leading to easily one of the most anti-climactic and unsatisfying endings in recent memory,) turns into a string of long, boring conversations between Tommy Lee Jones's sheriff and a bunch of characters we don't know. This is where the movie tries to be meaningful and important, but I really just didn't get it. It felt aimless and tedious. The whole movie was a "statement" with no realism. A cop is choked to death in his prison, and the prisoner who committed the murder then escapes, traveling through the country killing people one after another. In the real world, we would have had an FBI manhunt for this guy, but in this movie's world, nobody seems to be after him except this one sheriff, who "urgently" chases him (he spends almost all his scenes having breakfast and "discussing life,") and at the end of the movie a character refuses to make a choice, ... for reason that just doesn't happen in anything other than movies that are going for that Oscar. The end of the movie completely lost me; I didn't get the point of the crash, I could have sworn I saw that guy in that hotel room and his reflection in the lock, guess not (?), and I didn't understand the apparently important conversation that took place before the credits rolled. I don't know...just didn't get much enjoyment out of this one. If the whole movie played like that great 30 minutes, THEN we would have had an entertaining movie. But then we wouldn't have an Oscar contender, I guess...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

JimmyS.Dec 21, 2008

What country is the Coen brothers, or, more accurately, Cormac McCarthy, referring to? Adapted by Joel and Ethan Coen from McCarthy

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

SylviaCDec 25, 2009

Pointless! Jones character superfulous to whatever little story line there was. No, there doesn't need to be a happy ending, evil can truimph over good and the downtrodden, but there was so much pointlessness! Why should anyone care Pointless! Jones character superfulous to whatever little story line there was. No, there doesn't need to be a happy ending, evil can truimph over good and the downtrodden, but there was so much pointlessness! Why should anyone care about Jones' dilemma? He couldn't protect or stop the evil, and so what? What was the point of the Woody Harrelson character? The Coen Brothers pulled a fast one. I can't believe that this picture was the best picture as designated by the Academy. Because I thought I was missing something, I read the professional reviews. No additional insight to the so-called genius was given. Just a lot of mumbo-jumbo, because these critics don't want to be considered "uncool". And then these same critics make fun of Ron Howard's movie, "Angels & Demons". I don't think they "got " that one. After watching NCFOM, I'll not be taking much advice from critics or the Academy.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

asylumspadezNov 24, 2011

I liked it but I thinkts its far too overrated. Javier Bardem gives an amazing, chilling performance in this film and he is really the only reason worth watching it for.