The likes and dislikes of a movie are like a dish in a restaurant. People who like the taste will be full of joy. If there is a waiter explaining that vegetables are organic, meat is sour, and the chef has won awards , the seasonings are all imported from Albania. Do you feel that this dish is much taller in an instant? Not so. The real taste is always the first feeling that does not need to be interpreted. Simply put, if you get on well with someone, it's never because of whether he or she is from the United States.
I believe that most people's first movie viewing experience is more or less incorrect, and they cannot accurately interpret the title of "No country for old man" - this is the director's problem, or the original book's problem, but It's not the audience's problem. If you haven't read the original, then this is a very obscure subject, ten people will have ten answers, and everyone will focus on a different plot. This is the so-called forced interpretation, just like the popular dark cuisine, it may lead to food poisoning.
The film can be divided into two parts, the first part is a one-man show, completed by an old police officer who is about to retire, and the other part consists of a cold-blooded and ruthless killer who accidentally stumbles into the scene of a drug deal and picks up a large box of cash. of hunters.
In the first part, the old policeman is an absolute bystander, while sighing his own powerlessness, while lamenting the impermanence of the world - there is a bug here, the last sigh of the old policeman who has worked all his life, what is the profound meaning? Therefore, the plot of the old policeman is completely separated from the process of the killer's pursuit, and has almost nothing to do with it. Another part of the plot is that the killer keeps chasing the hunter who has picked up the money. The purpose of both of them is to take the money as their own. In this way, you run after me until the end of the film. It is so simple that it is almost boring, and the meaning of existence is only Just a pity for the old cop. The director wickedly set up a few scenes in the film that were almost irrelevant to the main line, and added a few lines of dialogue that were half-understood for the audience to guess. Is it ingenious? Maybe more like an innocuous little smart.
But it is precisely these clever people who made this film, because "film critics" really like to ponder these vague and obscure little plots, plus their own speculations and long-winded discussions, leaving some people's opinions. In terms of box office, this is a failed police and gangster film, but it is not useless, at least the acting skills of the actors are remarkable. So remove these "King's New Clothes" and simply watch this film, does it really impress you?
Maybe sometimes, evaluating a movie doesn't need so many objective factors, just good and bad.
View more about No Country for Old Men reviews
