2000's Bracket, Round 1, Match 5- 5) No Country For Old Men vs. 28) American Psycho

[Papa Shango]

The Wrestlezone Movie Tournament, 2000's Bracket;
Round 1, Match 5

No Country For Old Men

vs.

American Psycho

 

[IrishCanadian25]

No Country for Old Men is fairly overrated, despite high critical acclaim. I understand that it is well shot and that the plot has continuity, but for the average movie goer, it is boring and drawn out.

American Psycho is a fantastic film. It's one of those films where the book was actually better, but the film does a measure of justice. The characters are fun, despite being amazingly quirky. This is a tremendously memorable film, and it gets my vote for the upset!

 

[Monkey_Mania]

Ahh, the time has come.

Let me say that No Country For Old Men is a great film, albeit overrated as fuck. That being said American Psycho is the better movie. Not only is Mary Harron a genius to take this to the screen in the way she did, even if she couldnt make it exactly like the book. There is a reason for that as well. The book is way too graphic. Not only was it was Christian Bales career defining performance. Bale played Patrick Bateman so well, I forgot it was a movie. Having been a big fan of the book, I can strongly say that the book is better...WAY better. But the film is so damn goood. From the gloss they used whule filming to give it that 80's feel to it, to the casting, to the performances by the actors. American Psycho is a top notch film that hopefully takes this round. It really is the superior film.

Please don't make me have to return some videotapes.

 

[My$terio_Fan]

I get that No Country for Old Men is a good movie, oscar winning film, but I found it boring as watching paint dry. It had great directing, cinematography, and Javier Bardem was creepy and very effective. But in the end it was dull. American Psycho on the other hand was so entertaining and such a good movie, that you actually wanted to watch it. Whereas Javier Bardem won an Oscar for his role, Christian Bale should have ot atleas got a nomination. This was probably Bale's best role(yes better than Batman)he acted great and has alot of substance in his performance. American Sycho takes these pretty easy.

 

[Uncle Sam]

No Country For Old Men is overrated. However, that doesn't stop it from being an utterly fantastic piece of cinema that I'd recommend to everyone... except Becca. She shouldn't be allowed to watch movies, she should be confined to a padded cell.

Where was I? Ah yes, NCFOM is a great, great film. I will go for American Psycho though. I noticed lately that nearly every role that Christian Bale plays is shit (don't get your hopes up for Terminator 4), he's actually fairly bland. In complete contrast to Patrick Bateman. I found this movie hilarious. I was supposed to... at least, I think I was. Best scene - the one on my sig. Or maybe the business card scene.

I'm into murders and executions mostly.

 

[klunderbunker]

There's not much I can say here that hasn't already been said. No Country For Old Men is overrated. How this won Best Picture is beyond me. It was decent, but Best Picture of the year? Just no.

AP on the other hand is freaking mind blowing. There is just something awesome about watching crazy people that you can't replicate. Bale might have done it as well as anyone has since Anthony Perkins. He is so insane that like Monkey said, you forget you're watching a movie. If you haven't seen it, go do it. Well worth the money you pay for the rental.

 

[jmt225]

I do not like "No Country For Old Men", at all. I've explained in much detail as to why in my 'Coen Brothers' thread on this forum.

However, I am a HUGE fan of "American Psycho". It's a fantastic fucking film. And I thought it did the best it could to stay true to the book. "American Psycho" had all the makings to be flat out fucking terrible, but Mary Harron and Christian Bale made it to be an absolutely fantastic film. The look of the film, the writing to it (I still think it’s brilliant how Harron was able to tie in Bateman’s reviews of music into the film), and the performance by Bale is what makes it so great.

 

[Bernkastel]

I find it hilarious that you guys would say that NCFOM is overrated and American Psycho is "mind blowing". While American Psycho is a good film, it isn't all that it's cut out to be, as I can name several films just like it that are better, A Beautiful Mind being one of them. American Psycho also has it share of downfalls, pointless sex and murder make the film a bit boring. The plot twist gives itself away albeit the unrealistic murder scenes.

Take the storyline of NCFOM, A sheriff who feels inadequate to the changing times, is used to consistency. A man finds a bag full of money, takes it, and is pursed by a dangerous hitman, who is in turn pursued by the sheriff. All three men in the story take turns playing the Hunter and the Hunted, as all three men expose certain weaknesses and exercise certain strengths. In the end, a poor miscommunication causes the death of one the characters, the lack of faith in one's self keeps another character from saving the day, and the bad guy gets away - but not without a price. The film explores such themes as mortality, fate, injustice, and human nature.

As a Film, NCFOM is flawless, it represents its themes beautifully. After your done watching, there is so much about the film that any normal person could compare with their own lives. I think the monologue at the end of the film by Bell just summarizes everything.

My vote goes to No Country for Old Men

To be honest, anyone that would honestly say that No Country For Men was overrated or undeserving, probably either

A) hasn't seen the movie

B) is just going along with people that said they hate it because they like an inferior film better

C) Didn't understand the movie

 

[AnthonyMango/NoFate007]

I'll leave this up to you guys to decide, cause here's my conundrum with this:

I'm a big fan of American Psycho. Its certainly not a perfect movie, though. It has its flaws. But I own the movie, I've seen it a bunch of times, I know a lot of people that can spit out more than 5 direct quotes of it on a whim, etc. Its a fun movie to watch, without a doubt. Now, here's where the problem comes in. I haven't seen No Country for Old Men. So really, I shouldn't be able to vote for AP over it.

BUT

Should it be taken into account that when I compare the two, I have a film that I was interested in seeing and did eventually see, then own and become a fan of vs. a film I was kind of interested in seeing but not enough and therefore, despite having seen positive reviews of it and having heard that it was very good, STILL hasn't pushed me enough to actually sit down and watch it? Do you think that's worth enough of a debate to warrant my vote for American Psycho, or would you rather me abstain from this one as I have with other ones that I haven't seen?

If that's good enough, then my vote goes...

American Psycho.

 

[Bernkastel]

I'll leave this up to you guys to decide, cause here's my conundrum with this:

I'm a big fan of American Psycho. Its certainly not a perfect movie, though. It has its flaws. But I own the movie, I've seen it a bunch of times, I know a lot of people that can spit out more than 5 direct quotes of it on a whim, etc. Its a fun movie to watch, without a doubt. Now, here's where the problem comes in. I haven't seen No Country for Old Men. So really, I shouldn't be able to vote for AP over it.

BUT

Should it be taken into account that when I compare the two, I have a film that I was interested in seeing and did eventually see, then own and become a fan of vs. a film I was kind of interested in seeing but not enough and therefore, despite having seen positive reviews of it and having heard that it was very good, STILL hasn't pushed me enough to actually sit down and watch it? Do you think that's worth enough of a debate to warrant my vote for American Psycho, or would you rather me abstain from this one as I have with other ones that I haven't seen?

If that's good enough, then my vote goes...

American Psycho.

Don't vote on a match up if you haven't seen one of the movies, that's what I would advise. I can't decide for you, but if you haven't seen No Country For Old Men yet, at least watch it before you vote. If you do watch NCFOM and you find that AP is still better, I have no problem with that, but at least at that point you'd at least seen both films and wouldn't be biased to one over the other.

 

[Mr. TM]

I liked No Country for Old Men. I don't know if it should have won best movie, but it was a very good movie, in a year without a big blockbuster charge for best movie. I myself would have picked I am Legend or 300 over it for best picture. That said, American Psycho was overly impressive in my mind. I love it. I think this will be the biggest upset it terms of a movie far in the standings beats a high up movie by votes. American Psycho is darkly funny, but kinda creepy. I think it will do well and get passed this round.

 

[Bernkastel]

I liked No Country for Old Men. I don't know if it should have won best movie, but it was a very good movie, in a year without a big blockbuster charge for best movie. I myself would have picked I am Legend or 300 over it for best picture. That said, American Psycho was overly impressive in my mind. I love it. I think this will be the biggest upset it terms of a movie far in the standings beats a high up movie by votes. American Psycho is darkly funny, but kinda creepy. I think it will do well and get passed this round.

NCFOM was more than deserving of the awards it won, and it was more than deserving to be called the best movie of the year. Are you kidding? Both 300 and I am Legend were far inferior to NCFOM, the storytelling, the plot, the subject matter in NCFOM was superb. 300 was predictable (as most movies based off of true events are) and I am legend was all over the place.

To be honest I don't get the love for a movie like American Psycho, but yet at the same time the blatant hate for a movie like No Country For Old Men.

 

[Mr. TM]

Well i didn't hate it at all, I liked it, it just wasn't the best movie in my opinion. I would give it a 8s, but I would give IAL, and 300 9s, and AP an 8.5. They were all better movies than NCFOM but I do love it. Put it in another bracket and it could go ver many other movies, just not in this time. Also with the fact it Halloween season, AP is on my mind to watch for the holiday.

 

[Papa Shango]

Wow, this is ridiculous. Are Ech and I the ONLY ones who get No Country For Old Men? "Boring?" How is it boring? It's riveting! "Overrated"? What other movie last year deserved to win the Best Picture Oscar? The only other viable contenders was There Will Be Blood and Michael Clayton. Now those were a little bit "boring".

I honestly don't think anyone understands either film here. I think Monkey is probably the only one who truly understands the themes of that film. Everyone else just enjoys getting their jollies out watching Christian Bale be a total tool and split Jared Leto's face open with an axe. To be honest, I think I only heard one or two people ever talk about American Psycho before this summer, and now that Christian Bale is the hottest star on the planet, everyone's hopping on the bandwagon, talking about all the smaller films he did before Batman.

To every person who called NCFOM "Overrated", explain to me why American Psycho is so much better, WITHOUT mentioning Christian Bale (this will expose those who just want to vote for Batman, and I'm betting there are a couple people who are doing just that).

 

[jmt225]

Wow, this is ridiculous. Are Ech and I the ONLY ones who get No Country For Old Men? "Boring?" How is it boring? It's riveting! "Overrated"? What other movie last year deserved to win the Best Picture Oscar? The only other viable contenders was There Will Be Blood and Michael Clayton. Now those were a little bit "boring".

I honestly don't think anyone understands either film here. I think Monkey is probably the only one who truly understands the themes of that film. Everyone else just enjoys getting their jollies out watching Christian Bale be a total tool and split Jared Leto's face open with an axe. To be honest, I think I only heard one or two people ever talk about American Psycho before this summer, and now that Christian Bale is the hottest star on the planet, everyone's hopping on the bandwagon, talking about all the smaller films he did before Batman.

To every person who called NCFOM "Overrated", explain to me why American Psycho is so much better, WITHOUT mentioning Christian Bale (this will expose those who just want to vote for Batman, and I'm betting there are a couple people who are doing just that).

I take this post a bit insulting and even though it probably wasn't, I feel like I'm one of the people who it's directed towards.

Now, I've gone into great length at this very forum for my admiration and fandom for Bret Easton Ellis. I love his books, and I've said plenty of times that "American Psycho", while a great book, is one of my least favorites from him. But I do "get it". In fact, let me dig up something real quick.

Okay, please go to the link below and look at my post.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=22480&page=2

Now, not to brag or anything like that, but reading that and the other post in that thread, I'm someone who "gets" the fucking book and movie. I've read the book on four occasions, and I've sat through the movie probably more times then I can count and yes, Christian Bale is ultimately what makes the film really good. It's not the 'story' of it or anything like that because compared to the book, the movie is a piece of shit, but like I said in my first post in this thread, that film was the best adaptation anybody who is a fan of the book could've ever hoped for (unless you wanted an X rated film). And Mary Harron and Christian Bale deserve the credit for that, no one else. So yes, when praising the film, I'm going to use those two names more then anything because they deserve all the credit.

And as far as "No Country for Old Men", again... I've already gone into great detail on why I do not like this movie. Let me just point you to that thread so you can see for yourself and I won't have to type all the shit over again.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=24996

 

[Papa Shango]

I take this post a bit insulting and even though it probably wasn't, I feel like I'm one of the people who it's directed towards.

Actually, it wasn't directed towards you. If I remember correctly, you're a big fan of The Rules of Attraction.

Now, not to brag or anything like that, but reading that and the other post in that thread, I'm someone who "gets" the fucking book and movie. I've read the book on four occasions, and I've sat through the movie probably more times then I can count and yes, Christian Bale is ultimately what makes the film really good. It's not the 'story' of it or anything like that because compared to the book, the movie is a piece of shit,

If the movie is "a piece of shit", then why in the blue hell are you voting for it? Because Christian Bale gave a good performance? You're going to laud a film that you admit is "a piece of shit" by resting all the credit on th shoulder's of the lead character? That's nonsense.

but like I said in my first post in this thread, that film was the best adaptation anybody who is a fan of the book could've ever hoped for (unless you wanted an X rated film). And Mary Harron and Christian Bale deserve the credit for that, no one else. So yes, when praising the film, I'm going to use those two names more then anything because they deserve all the credit.

And then you give props to Mary Harron for doing the best adaptation anyone could have hoped for, EVEN THOUGH in the end it was still, in your words, "a piece of shit". So right now American Psycho, according to you, is a better movie than NCFOM because of one performance, and the valiant efforts of the director. I wasn't aware that we were voting on movies that gave the most effort.

And as far as "No Country for Old Men", again... I've already gone into great detail on why I do not like this movie.

No, no you didn't. You said you've told other people that you don't like No Country For Old Men, without actually giving any details on why you dislike it so much, and then said American Psycho is fantasic. Then you mentioned Harron's adaptation and Christian Bale, and based on those two things, it is the better movie.

Let me just point you to that thread so you can see for yourself and I won't have to type all the shit over again.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=24996

And let me to point you your first post here.

I do not like "No Country For Old Men", at all. I've explained in much detail as to why in my 'Coen Brothers' thread on this forum.

However, I am a HUGE fan of "American Psycho". It's a fantastic fucking film. And I thought it did the best it could to stay true to the book. "American Psycho" had all the makings to be flat out fucking terrible, but Mary Harron and Christian Bale made it to be an absolutely fantastic film. The look of the film, the writing to it (I still think it’s brilliant how Harron was able to tie in Bateman’s reviews of music into the film), and the performance by Bale is what makes it so great.

And then from earlier in this post, regarding American Psycho:

the movie is a piece of shit,

No offense dude, but you sound like you're talking out of your ass.

Remember everyone, and this is from the mouth of a fan, a vote for American Psycho, is a vote for a piece of shit.

 

[jmt225]

If the movie is "a piece of shit", then why in the blue hell are you voting for it? Because Christian Bale gave a good performance? You're going to laud a film that you admit is "a piece of shit" by resting all the credit on th shoulder's of the lead character? That's nonsense.

And then you give props to Mary Harron for doing the best adaptation anyone could have hoped for, EVEN THOUGH in the end it was still, in your words, "a piece of shit". So right now American Psycho, according to you, is a better movie than NCFOM because of one performance, and the valiant efforts of the director. I wasn't aware that we were voting on movies that gave the most effort.

Dude, you are twisting my words around. I said COMPARED TO THE BOOK, it is a piece of shit. However, on its own, it's a great movie. MUCH better then "No Country for Old Men", which is why I voted for it. "No Country for Old Men" is a piece of shit period, while "American Psycho" is bad if you want to compare it to the book, which I'm not doing when voting for it against other movies. Get what I'm saying?

No, no you didn't. You said you've told other people that you don't like No Country For Old Men, without actually giving any details on why you dislike it so much, and then said American Psycho is fantasic. Then you mentioned Harron's adaptation and Christian Bale, and based on those two things, it is the better movie.

Again, I went into plenty of details already on this, which only Jake and Xfear seemed to want to defend up for it. The only reason I didn't do go into it again was because A) I didn't have much time on here and I wanted to post in every thread I was voting for something on and B) I really just didn’t want to spend time typing up something I already made clear not too long ago, in this very forum. So, instead, I just posted a link in my last post, which vividly describes why I dislike "No Country Old Men".

No offense dude, but you sound like you're talking out of your ass.

None taken, you just miscomprehended what I originally said. Hopefully, making it much more clear with this post, you now understand the point of what I was trying to say.

Lastly, to go back to your original post, the fact is man that I like "American Psycho" tons better then "No Country for Old Men", and you said to the people that feel that way never got the messaged for "American Psycho" or "No Country for Old Men", and Ech said if we felt different then him, we probably never watched "No Country for Old Men" to begin with. Well, if you've read my post in the past, then you will see those are very ludicrous, false accusations. And I'm sure it's not just for me, but for the others in this thread who votes for "American Psycho" over "No Country for Old Men" as well.

 

[Bernkastel]

American Psycho was very Hostel-ish with some of its plot. I tend to fast forward through pointless gore and sex scenes, especially when the movie in question has much more to offer. American Psycho has much more to offer the viewer than Hostel, Bloodrayne, or even Shoot Em Up or Hitman, because it isn't built entirely on the sex and gore. American Psycho's storyline relies heavily on the ending, and in my opinion, they give themselves away prematurely. When the viewer finally learns the secret behind the movie, they're left speculating instead of being given a decisive answer.

Ech said if we felt different then him, we probably never watched "No Country for Old Men" to begin with

Clearly your trying change the topic in an attempt to belittle me with personal attacks, but I never said that. I said that I didn't care if people agreed with me or not, and I said that people that tend to say that NCFOM is stupid or overrated probably haven't even see the movie or probably didn't understand the movie from the beginning.

 

[Papa Shango]

I just realized that I didn't add the poll this morning. My apologies, everyone. I'm adding it now. Feel free to vote for whichever movie you prefer (although if you vote for American Psycho, you'll probably go to hell and be forced to eat brussell sprouts for eternity, all while sitting next to the unreachable cookie jar.)

 

[jmt225]

Clearly your trying change the topic in an attempt to belittle me with personal attacks, but I never said that. I said that I didn't care if people agreed with me or not, and I said that people that tend to say that NCFOM is stupid or overrated probably haven't even see the movie or probably didn't understand the movie from the beginning.

Please explain to me how that is a personal attack?

And that is what you said. Read your little multiple choice thingy again. You claim that if someone doesn't like "No Country for Old Men", then that automatically means they either do not ‘understand’ it, they were just flat out lying when they say they watched the film, or that they jumped on some bandwagon. That’s actually an attack to every poster who doesn't like “No Country for Old Men”. What I said was not an attack, just mentioning your name about a sentence you had made. There was no insult to it.

But, okay, you find what I’m saying as a way to getaway from the topic, fine.. let me break it down how “American Psycho” fucking slaughters “No Country for Old Men” in every fucking way imaginable.

Let’s look at the three key features in qhat makes a great movie.

Acting – Please answer who actually acted a single role in “No Country for Old Men” well? You have James Brolin just running around like a jackass and barely saying anything the entire movie. There was no fire in him whatsoever, and his selling was absolute crap. Then you have Javier Bardem, which all he does is walk around with a cool gun, and talks with a freakishly deep voice. That’s it. Pauly fucking Shore could’ve done that. Anyone could. It took no acting ability to do what he did. He just had the right look for the part. So, that’s the main two, and the other actors hardly do anything. Woody Harrellson didn’t do anything worth noting; Brolin’s wife was alright, but I couldn’t get over how fucking young she looked; and Tommy Lee Jones didn’t do shit except bore the absolute fuck out of people. So, there’s the acting in that movie. Now let’s look at the acting in “American Psycho”, shall we?

Of course, I don’t really need to praise Christian Bale because I’m sure everyone who votes for “No Country for Old Men” will all at least admit that Bale is fantastic in “American Psycho”. With that said, I would like to know that even if you disagree with my observations of the acting in “No Country for Old Men”, can you really sit there and say there is one performance in “No Country for Old Men” that is as good as Bale’s performance in “American Psycho”? If so… . Now, lets look at the supportive roles. First, you have Reese Witherspoon as Evelyn. Small role, but I thought she did a wonderful job capturing the feel I got from Evelyn in the book as such a stuck-up, snotty bitch, who, for whatever reason, is head over heels in love with Patrick Bateman, even though she obviously has a flirtacious relationship with Tim. Then you have Chloe Sevigny, who’s great in pretty much everything I’ve seen her in, and this was no exception with her role as Jean, Patrick’s secretary. At first, I thought she wasn’t right for the role because when I read the book, I pictured someone much more beautiful then she is, but she made me a believer with her performance (plus, when you think about it, Patrick probably exaggerates the hotness of every woman in the book). You could really sense that she was into Patrick, and her shyness around him and how sweet she was, was fantastic and just like the feeling I had for the secretary in the book. And I thought Justin Theroux, Jared Leto, and Matt Ross all did extremely well in their respective roles. The only role I was dissatisfied with was William Defoe’s, who I’m actually a big fan of. I just didn’t really like the way he portrayed the detective.

Writing – I’m not going to sit here and lie and say I read the book that is based on “No Country for Old Men”, but I did see the movie twice and the writing is garbage. Maybe it’s better in the book, but there is nothing clever about this movie. Nothing. The only shit that I thought was good with the writing from this movie was the scene with the fat old bitch, and the scene with Brolin’s wife’s mother when she was continuously whining, but that was it. The rest of the dialogue, which there was hardly any of, was absolute crap, and you don’t feel anything for the characters. They’re just there, and they do nothing to make you hope they survive.

“American Psycho” is a completely different story. It actually has witty dialogue. It actually gets you caught up in a character. It makes you laugh, feel sad, get grossed out, the whole nine. It makes you feel every single emotion, like every good movie should. My only problem with the writing, like I already mentioned, was the secretary Jean finding Patrick’s notebook. That made absolutely no sense because the entire movie is suppose to be from Patrick’s perspective. But, that is its one and only flaw, if you ask me. Harron did a great job writing on this picture overall. Like I said earlier, I especially loved how she was able to fit in the music reviews into the movie by having Patrick recite them right before he kills someone. I thought that was fucking genius.

Direction : The look of “No Country for Old Men” was nothing to accomplish. The action sequences, if you can even call them that, did nothing to blow your mind. It was a basic movie to direct. I’m sure there was no trouble putting this crap together. It was a very simple movie to make. Anyone with experience could’ve pretty much pull it off.

“American Psycho”, on the other hand, was an extremely hard movie to make. First, you had to give some sort of justice to the book, while maintaining an R Rating. I feel Mary Harron accomplished that. Then, you have to capture the look of the book, which was basically very high class 1980s and she did a TREMENDOUS job with that. The wardrobe in the film, the restaurants, Patrick’s house, the clubs, his job… they all looked absolutely perfect, and Harron deserves the credit for that. What she did for this movie was a great, great accomplishment. What the Coen Brothers did with "No Country for Old Men" was nothing to brag about. There's no comparison between the job Harron did with "American Psycho" and what the Coen Brothers did with "No Country for Old Men". None whatsoever.

So, that it’s for the ‘Big 3’ when it comes to movie making. But you can also add that “American Psycho” had the much better ending, “American Psycho” had awesome music and “No Country for Old Man” didn’t have any (although I did find that aspect of the film kind of cool, but soundtracks do count for something), among other things. “American Psycho” is just the superior film. In all aspects, it really is and that’s the reason why “American Psycho” has gotten more love then “No Country for Old Men” at this forum. It’s not because people are too stupid to understand what “No Country for Old Men” is about, or that we’re all lying when we said we watched it and thought it was boring and dumb, or that we're just agreeing to agree with the normal opinion about the film. It’s because “American Psycho” is the more entertaining, well put together film… to us, anyway.