No Country for Old Men - Book vs. Movie
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 тра 2021
- Which one is better?
A review and comparison of the 2005 novel 'No Country for Old Men' by Cormac McCarthy and the 2007 film of the same name directed by Joel and Ethan Coen. #NoCountryForOldMen
SUBSCRIBE: / @adamwrightreviews
#BookReview #MovieReview
Follow me on Twitter: adam_wright89
Funny, I’ve always loved Moss’s death. It’s so eerily realistic. Death is random and is rarely ceremonious. The fact that we follow a scene with Llewelyn, it fades to black, cuts to him dead on the ground is chilling, abrupt and realistic.
To me, this movie’s most important theme is that life and death is decided, not by us, but by nature. Chigurh is the catalyst that brings about that decision, with the “coin toss”.
I also love how it’s not Chigurh that ends up killing Moss, it’s the Mexicans. It again adds to the idea that we as humans, can’t control destiny and fate. Even Chigurh succumbs to this limitation, as evident by Moss’s death and his final scene, when he gets into a car accident.
Really?? No replies to this awesome summation of the movie?? I 110% agree with this! The movie is about bad things happening to everyone! Not just in the movie, but humans. Death comes to all no matter what life you live, and it can come sooner to some than others.Good or bad. Death and the The changing of the times time waits for NO ONE!
It’s basically reality no bs movie plot armour crap it’s reality the protagonist won’t always get a good ending and can sometimes be unexpected. It’s unique
I think Moss’s death being anticlimactic is kinda the point. Death comes for everyone. At the end of the day, Moss’s is just another victim. So is his wife.
In the film it’s anticlimactic. In the book it’s pretty in debt and grotesque, I mean they even describe how his teeth were shot out and how valiant his end was. And Carla Jean’s demise is also more in depth in the novel. Her convo with Anton was very drawn out and she goes through a range of emotions before eventually finding acceptance. Nothing anticlimactic about that.
On Cormacs run on sentences, Cormac McCarthy uses his own syntax, which he has evolved over many years. He seems to treat prose(sequences) the way many poets do: he builds his sentences and paragraphs by ear, strengthening his narrative with patterns of sound. If he wants a particular long phrase to move quickly, he may leave out punctuation
This is on point.
He builds sentences like a modern Hemingway
But it’s still awful to read
And deserving of the many bad reviews this writing gets
@@dbenz16 pineapples are the worst things to have ever grace this earth, but I’m sure many will disagree, but even I know just because it’s not my cup of tea, that it is not deserving of horrible criticism, it’s just a style that’s not up your alley(probably just too complicated for you) , but to critique him for bad grammar or for a story you don’t like does not make it bad, it makes it your opinion
McCarthy never writes a run-on sentence. But, yes, exactly, like all great writers, how the prose "sounds" is crucial to him. It's what makes it such a pleasure to read him.
I love his writing, goes against what people tell you, your writing is bad if it isn’t well punctuated, but I liked his writing? He’s just so lucid and funky. It really helped my looks on philosophy, death and the ideology of a man we consider evil.
I was looking at a preview of the novel on Google Books and I thought to myself, "Well, this is weird. Google's got rid of all the quotation marks and punctuation points." I never would have guessed that's actually how the book was written.
It's quite common with literary fiction
@@TomorrowWeLive Not _that_ common, but you see it with a number of writers. And then there are writers who use m-dashes instead (more if a Russian thing?).
McCarthy forces you to pay attention. I think it is masterful.
@@t0dd000it's lazy
@@nategalvan3907 There is nothing lazy about McCarthy's writing. Heh.
@t0dd000 sure
In regards to Moss's death, I was also deeply saddened by how abrupt it and meaningless it was. However, it's exactly that which I love that about it. Similar to Unforgiven (1992), the movie tells us that we've all got it coming and never when we'd have hoped.
I really enjoyed the conversation with Sheriff Bell and Uncle Ellis at the end of the story better in the book. They could've chatted for hours and I would've listened gladly.
i see why you don’t like the book for its apathetic, cold, no fluff style, but that’s why i love it
same
I love his writing. Concise and often even poetic in its pulse and meter. He doesn't grandstand on major emotional events (which I found out reading The Crossing). His prose is sparse but says enough to convey what is happening. I totally understand all your points though and get that his writing style is not for everyone. Great video.
Thank you!
Tbf No Country for Old Men is McCarthy's most accessible book because it started as a screenplay, it's a fast read & an easy to digest neo-western thriller with some philosophical touches.
I suggest try reading his older novels like "Blood Meridian" or "Suttree" and let's see if those novels are "simple"
Judge Holden...Greatest "Villain" EVER!! Literally the "Devil".
Something I liked about the book is his conversation with Carla Jean at the end. You really get a sense of what kind of person he is.
In the movie hes a force of nature, very few words. But with his conversation with Carla Jean in the book you get a sense of his philosophy, how he almost tries to make Carla Jean not feel sad or scared about her about to die. He then decides to toss a coin after shes looks away from him and sobs.
In the book Chigurh, chilled me to the bone. I was mortified when he opened a coke can to see if anyone would come looking. same when he turned out the hallway light in the hotel. Igasped when he walked up 10 flights of stairs without losing his breath. In the movie the cattle puncher turned to his shotgun in the same the scene. subtle. Millers Crossing is my all time Cohens movie!
the interesting thing is that the book was supposed do be a screenplay for a movie in the first place, which is why I think the movie is so good, the book was made to be adapted in a film
Great video! Love both versions of the story.
You should read Blood Meridian if you have the time. I found the imagery in that book to be incredible. Such a unique cast. Such a brutal story.
Have you ever read any Stephen King? His whole career is movie vs book adaptations!
Totally agree with this comparison. The writing style was tough to get into
Thanks!
When talking about his lack of descriptors, one of people’s complaints about Blood Meridian is that he is constantly describing locations and characters almost to exhaustion. Every book of his has its own flavor
I do love cormac
However when I read his books I feel like I need a red pen to correct his writing. No quotations can get confusing. Also the run on sentences that can be a paragraph or page and a half. After a while you get used to it. I just finished blood meridian. I would love to see the Cohens adapt this book to film
What are your thoughts on this
I’ve heard Blood Meridian is his best novel. I haven’t read it yet, but plan to. If anyone could make it into a good movie, it would be the Coens!
I'm curious, have you read anything by Cormac McCarthy _other_ than "No Country For Old Men"?...because I'm not sure how accurate or fair it is to assess his entire body of work on the sole basis of this particular book, given that it was initially written as a screenplay all along and was only revised to resemble a more traditional novel at the last minute so naturally the writing differs quite a bit from his typical style.
He said this was his first McCarthy
Hard disagree on the comments about the coin flip scene. Prior to that point in the book, Chirgurh spoke rotely and without emotion, if ever speaking at all. When speaking to the man at the register, he takes on a completely different tone. He's toying with the man, getting in his head. The writing style builds suspense by completely juxtaposing how he was portrayed up to that scene, and the fact there is no narrator to break the tension or reassure the reader with an authoritative voice only adds to the exchange. It places you in the position of the man behind the register, hanging on Chigurh's every word to try and figure out just what the hell Churgurh is thinking, with no way for a third person to comment on his expression or inner monologue.
Another note on McCarthy's prose, No Country is not a great reflection on the rest of his work, as he initially wrote the story as a screenplay, only novelizing it after it didn't get picked up. His Border Trilogy and especially Blood Meridian are deliciously dense, with vivid descriptions of characters and vistas that are anything but bare bones. Definitely give his other work a chance. No Country is fairly unique and is considered by some to be a poor entry point to his work due to how different it is despite its relative approachability.
Coming from a mccarthy fan, no country is not the best place to start. The road and blood meridian are better introductions.
Noted! Thanks
What page is the gas station scene on?
Completely agree with what you said about the novel. I was a fan of the movie to begin with. To me reading the novel was kind of disappointing.
Why did they cut off Moss had conversations he had with that teenager
this guy's extremely simple style vs george 'I will describe every single detail about this feast so you know something is about to GO DOWN' martin, both at 80 miles per hour...
Glad to see a romanian fan
George RR Martin's writing is not even remotely close to McCarthy's in terms of depth, nuance and complexity.
It's like comparing a Michelin Star Chef to a typical burger flipper in some fast food joint.
There is a learning curve with Cormac’s books.
Once you get acclimated, I feel it helps you get in the mind of the characters. Better understand their motives.
I think that’s Cormac’s intent. He wants you to figure out the “puzzle”.
I could see why some find it frustrating/underwhelming.
What the book did better was Bell’s monologues.
Jesus Christ, it’s depression fuel.
How about doing a “Book vs. Film” vid about the Bonfire of the Vanities? An decent book turned into a so-so movie.
Men who grew up in the 50's and sixties parted their hair on the side and when long hair became mainstream in the 70's they just kinda incorporated the two things and it looks sorta strange. Parting down the middle looks better for long hair on men in my opinion.
The book was worse than the movie??? I didn't think that was possible.
I have watched this movie so many times that I have lost track of the number of times I have seen it.
Even still, every time I watch it I take something new from it. Such as the scene where Moss is killed off-camera. That was done very intentionally.
We are not meant to like it, which is a pretty bold move for a filmmaker. To intentionally create a part of a film for the audience to dislike, and then never really pay it off in the movie, because its payoff is only later realized when reflecting upon it.
This whole film is riddled with deeper meaning that requires time after to reflect upon. Such is Moss' death being off-camera.
Chigurh is the living embodiment of the grim reaper, he is death incarnate. He has marked Moss for death, Moss has no escape, death will find him.
We as the audience, still naively root for Moss as if he can cheat death. Because it is human nature to survive.
Had this been on-camera, we would be left to rationalize how Moss could have maybe done something different in the moment and could have survived. As if it were basic human error or poor circumstances
But being off-camera, we get none of that. We are slapped with the overarching tragedy. We only realize then how fruitless Moss' endeavor truly was.
The audience is left to face their own naivete, left feeling hopeless and blaming themselves for having had hope for Moss' survival.
Brutalist storytelling at its finest
Really well said! Glad I somehow stumbled across your comment. It’s difficult to explain to people who “don’t get it”, but the way you put it was perfect! If you haven’t done so already, check out Blood Meridian by McCarthy as well. Easily the most insane book I’ve ever read (in a good way lol)
Loved the video, and it filled a niche -- the book/movie comparison for NCFOM. (In fact I think there are a few more differences I would've liked to hear you bring out). Other comments:
- For me personally, either this or Joker is the best movie made since the year 2000.
- Agree with you emphatically about McCarthy's eschewing of quotation marks! Terrible idea. Much confusion ensues, and nothing is gained.
- Favorite Coen bros. movie? Unquestionably, No Country. But runner-up: Fargo (which is very good too).
- I'm not sure I can say this about any other film I can think of off the top of my head, but I literally love every scene. If you absolutely pressed me to pick my favorite, I think it would be Sheriff Bell's visit to his cousin Ellis. The dialogue is sheer brilliance (and McCarthy must be credited for the source material). 2nd place would probably go to the wonderful "friendo"/gas station exchange that you showed. Phenomenal. BTW, every bit character in this movie is perfect, just like the leads.
- I find the film's message spiritually profound and very moving. Somehow even edifying, despite all the unflinching violence and evil. What a film.
Thanks so much for the thoughtful comments! Glad you liked the video. What were some other differences you wish I had mentioned? It’s always tough to determine which are worth mentioning without getting too bogged down in the minutiae
The movie could be hard to follow has llewellyn's death is somewhat ambiguous however explained better in the book I hear.
The Mexican in a suit figures out what hotel to ambush by talking to Carla Jean's mother but who kills Llewellyn and who gets the money is a bit murky.
I had a similar experience with the book. Not bad, but after such a perfect film it just felt underwhelming.
For 1980 that hairstyle isn't weird. Quite common in fact. My step dad had hair nearly identical in 80'. You must be too young to remember or weren't alive yet.
“Flip a coin”
“Call it”
"I like food."
cormac's writing is some of the most refreshing and thoughtful writing out there.
I have read other books I liked that are written by him but not this one. Have to say that the comparison of the gas station scenes shocked me a little, The Coen brothers did a great job recreating this scene and I think the flavor that they added makes it work.
I think the gas station seen was equally if not more potent in the book vs the movie. More so if you consider the whole story. It sets up the last death sequence in the book with perfect foreshadowing. Using the coin toss to decide the last victim fate would seem a bit random for the main killer because all his other merders are in support of his work as a killer. With the exception of these two coins tost seans. One is an outlier two is a pattern that illustrates the psychopathic demeanor of the main killer.
Love the movie. Never read the book. Great Content
Thanks Otis, and thank you for subscribing!
You don’t need to dry off a pistol like that.
I agree with your opinion. The book was ok but the movie is very good. I have read a few of McCarthy's books. They all can be tedious but the action sequences are pretty good. He also comes up with some wierd characters like the Judge from Blood Meridian.
I am a huge McCarthy fan. Haven't read this one yet though.
His prose is rather lyrical. But it does take some adjustment. And yeah, I agree with the accolades about his stature as a writer. But I can understand how folks struggle with his writing. You can't read him casually. He forces you to pay strict attention. It's far too literary and too much of a commitment for many people.
The book is on my list. It's never listed as his best work so I haven't gotten around to it. His best would be Blood Meridian, the Border Trilogy, Suttree, and The Road.
Great video, thanks.
Miller's crossing is often overlooked...
If you ever read the sound and the fury which is a classic you have to figure out what's going on when benjy is the narrator and its very confusing. William Gaddis the recognitions no punctuation and the don't say Wyatts name after a 3rd of book. Thomas pynchon does the same as does infinite jest David Foster Wallace. so I understand people find Cormac McCarthy the same way.
Reading blood meridian and the prose is just luscious.
Was there any music in the movie? I don't recall any
The mariachi band is the only music I ever noticed
At first I didn’t like how moss died but it feels right tho
By both the book and the movie standers, going back to the exact same place where you stole money from is the stupidest thing Llewelyn Moss could’ve ever done…
I haven't read the book yet, but i should say I didn't like the way movie ended specially the way Brolin character was murdered out of the blue
you just saved my english grade
The film is great ! But the book is better. It's all in the imagination ! If things feel flat I guess one is not reading property. And as far as his Wrighting I love the simplicity of it.
Again great film ! Better book
It's my list favorite Coen's film
There both great I just finished the book and it’s my favorite movie
Am I the only one who roots for Anton the entire film?
Moss' death in both versions was so disappointing. It would have made such a great story of Moss and Chigur hunting one another and then, poof! He's dead. With very little explenation as to how. In the book it barely mentions that one of the Cartel guys was holding the girl hostage....and she and Moss both wind up, tits up. And yeah, the lack of quotation marks was a tad off putting.
Hard disagree. It was not disappointing at all. It was realistic for what the story was going for.
Opposite for me, book was better, Chigurh felt like a clown in the movie and the book leaves out a lot of his philosophy. They cut out a lot of important dialogue in the book. They completely ruined Bells character by gutting his dialogue. Brolin gave an amazing performance though.
Book dialogs are not flat, just turn on your imaginations. I loves book and Cormac style. I have read and listen book in great Czech translation which is maybe even better than original. ( there are no "and" :) ) I miss sherif monolges in movie, they have inportatnt message.
McCarthy without "and" seems like it would rob you of his style
am i gonna like or dislike this video? heads or tails. call it.
I vastly prefer the book, but McCarthy isn't for everyone.
No country for old Men does not have any music
i'll give you a like
Big Lebowski
Hardly any? It doesn't have a soundtrack...
I am quite disappointed the coin toss scene is word for word. I hard sort of given the Coens too much credit for their writing at first. Great video! It's probably my favorite movie of theirs as well.
And and and and and and and and and and and and and and and
There. You read the book
I like Fargo best but this is close
I disagree, I love this book, sorry you couldn't dig it. It's got a lot of interesting themes, meanings metaphors etc
It’s more of an antoine movie
Superficial review of book especially. If you’d like more gilded writing with “spiced up” dialogue read Suttree. His syntax is the same though.
This movie is 2nd on my most-hated list behind Leaving Las Vegas. I will never watch another Coen Bros movie.
Why do you hate it so much? It’s one of my favorites.
@@sargoon1017 the fugly bad guy won, all the heroes died. It was all so pointless.
Well maybe that was the point of the author at face value, but could have a deeper meaning looking at metaphorically .i
My psyche is already full of random madness. I don't need a pretentious piece of faux art to access it.
@@kaitykaity lmao you're just simple minded. Sorry it didn't have a fairy tale ending, real life doesn't either. In real life this kind of ending is far more common
Clown world review. Probably the best book I’ve ever read. Amazing. Nobody listen to this dude. Loved it.
Thanks!