0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1 Given: 0 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 0 Given: 0 |
Only saw the trailer for this the other day. It looks really good. I may go and see it this weekend.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 0 Given: 0 |
sorry for the late reply, but this is the article.
http://www.cinematical.com/2007/12/2...r-next-wester/The Coen Brothers Want a Little Spaghetti with Their Next Western
Posted Dec 28th 2007 2:02PM by Erik Davis
Filed under: Drama, RumorMonger, Fandom, DIY/Filmmaking, Western
If you thought the Coen Brothers were done with westerns following the terrific No Country for Old Men (which was more of a modern western then a classic western), think again: The boys are apparently gearing up to give us the mother of all Spaghetti Westerns. According to CinemaBlend, Joel Coen was recently quoted as saying, "We've written a western with a lot of violence in it. There's scalping and hanging ... it's good. Indians torturing people with ants, cutting their eyelids off. It's a proper western, a real western, set in the 1870s. It's got a scene that no one will ever forget because of one particular chicken." I don't know about you, but all I needed to hear was "Indians torturing people with ants" and I was immediately sold.
Now don't go licking your lips in anticipation just yet; the brothers still have a few other films to sort through. Next up for them will be Burn After Reading, which appears to be a lighter caper comedy starring George Clooney, Brad Pitt, John Malkovich and Frances McDormand. From there, it's a little sketchy: IMDB has them in pre-production on Hail Caesar (with a description that goes "A 1920's theater troupe stages a production of Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar"), while both guys are also attached to write (but not yet direct) a film called Gambit that has Colin Firth and Ben Kingsley attached, with Lisa Bonet (of all people) in negotiations. So hopefully they'll toss one of these aside in order to give us some much-needed 1870s ant torture ... because I've been craving it for some time.
Good movie but failed in many places.
1. How could they kill one of the main characters without even showing us? They left the viewers wondering who that person on the floor was. I would have prefered a shot to the back of the head to that.
2. What happened to the money? Did he throw it over the border then what?
3. Did the wife survive the coin toss?
4. Horrible ending. I understand the whole theme that the world is changing and getting worse etc but to end the movie on the note it did felt empty.
I would believe if someone told me that the original writer died and some kid filled in the blanks
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1 Given: 0 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2 Given: 0 |
Great film, loved it.
"(Insanity) is not hubris, not pride; it is inflation of the ego to its ultimate - confusion between him who worships and that which is worshiped.
Man has not eaten God; God has eaten man." Philip K. Dick The Man in the High Castle (1962)
Thumbs Up |
Received: 0 Given: 0 |
This is probably my favorite American film, and easily the Coen brothers best movie IMO. There's a lot they left up to the viewer to figure out, and some people just would rather have things spelled out for them. The acting was spot on, the script was of course amazing, and the entire story was well-structured and suspenseful.
I thought the ending was fantastic. Watching Jones give his monologue about the **************SMALL SPOILER****************** dreams he had about his father gave me chills. I don't know why it effected me so much, I'm guessing it's because my own father is in bad health and is getting old.
Anyway, movie was definitely quality. I can not wait to see it again.