Read the book last year and saw the movie last night.
Remarkably faithful adaptation of the novel. Not sure I’ve ever seen a better adaptation.
Loved, loved the movie. The ending will frustrate people–especially the ones that aren’t paying attention or who just want a tidy little Hollywood ending.
A lot of the actors are getting a lot of positive attention, especially Javier Bardem at the boogie man. And he’s great. And, there’s not a weak performance in the whole movie. But, to my eyes and ears, the real gem in this one is Tommy Lee Jones.
Always respected Tommy Lee Jones and when I read the book, I had Tommy Lee Jones playing the sheriff in my head. It’s the most obvious piece of casting you can imagine. But, it’s the performance of lifetime. The last few minutes of the movie contain an amazing close-up with a chunk of dialogue that’s just a killer. Had me in tears.
Haven’t had the chance to see it yet (although from the trailer it looks very similar to “Blood Simple,” still my favorite by the Brothers C.). But I read the book in no time flat a few weeks ago. It’s remarkable what a cinematic experience the book is all by itself, just crashing from scene to scene. A book I highly recommend, especially to anyone who enjoyed the original Steve McQueen version of “The Getaway.”
I saw the movie the other night. I have to admit I was zoning out for the ending speech and completely missed it. As a result, I completely missed the “ending” and probably the whole point of the film.
Not a fan of violent movies, did like this one and am waiting for the Road.
An aside: RollingStone, Special Double Issue, for December 27, 2007/January 10, 2008 has an excellent article on Cormac McCarthy (issue 1024/1043), titled: Cormac McCarthy’s Apocalypse, The acclaimed author’s dark vision - and the scientists who inspire him.
I won’t be seeing it no matter how great. My daughter saw it and told me it’s extremely violent. I have a long, long history of anger about the graphic violence in movies today. I think it says a lot about our society–what we view as “entertainment.” I don’t care how much some think it’s necessary for the story. I watch a lot of old movies in TCM and can tell you it absolutely is not necessary for a great story. In fact, I think it would say much more about the skill of a writer if she/he could tell a story of insanity, evil, cruelty, etc. without the gore.
I fully agree with Jim on this one, but Susfx is correct. You don’t have to graphically show it for it to be there. Psycho doesn’t really SHOW anything too graphic, but damned if you don’t feel it.
That said, I don’t personally object to violence in a movie, if it carries the plot. However, suggestion of violence is a lost art.