Mar 01, 2008 21:30
Why the hell did that movie win over Atonement? Why the hell did it even win over There will be blood? Michael Clayton?????
Sorry, I just came back from watching No Country for old Men and I didn't like it, AT ALL. I'm not saying it is a bad movie because I think that bad or good are a matter of tastes and perception and I still think you should go see it to have a valid opinion, BUT I just don't understand.
I'm aware the academy wants to be "modern" and all, but that doesn't mean they have to give the award to a movie just because it has an abrupt ending. I don't enjoy movies where the director feels way smarter than the audience and feels like they should just omit things because they're not "necessary" or because they're too cool for a normal story. I don't think I'm making valid points here, I'm just mad.
OR maybe it is a brilliant piece of work. Maybe, just maybe, it's one of the best films ever done, but I'm so mainstream that I don't see it. Well, call me cliché, but I like movies that have an ending that makes sense where all the plots get tied up and the bad guy gets what he/she deserves.
Now Juno is the only movie that was nominated for best picture that I haven't seen. I'm sure I'll like it better than No country for old men!!
oscars,
movies,
no country for old men