Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (687.1)
    Which did you prefer?
  2.  (687.2)
    Only one will drink your milkshake. Only one will drink it up.
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2008
    Yeah, I'm going to say There Will Be Blood. I loved both of them, but I think Daniel Planeview was a more interesting character and the film had more to say (even if only slightly) than No Country For Old Men.

    Both are fantastic films, though.
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2008
    I"m putting my vote in for No country for Old Men, nice gritty old school cohen brothers a la blood simple. Loved it.
  3.  (687.5)
    Shawn is correct.

    (Haven't actually seen "No Country For Old Men", but I understand that no-one's milkshake gets drunk in that film.)
    • CommentAuthorharchangel
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2008
    I haven't seen either yet thanks to the cultural bubble that is the winterland of Northern Michigan.

    Dying to see both. maybe while i'm out in Denver next week.
  4.  (687.7)
    There Will Be Old Men.
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2008
    I'm holding my breath for The Coen Brothers to direct an adaptation of McCarthy's 'Blood Meridian or The Evening Redness in The West' staring Daniel Day Lewis as The Judge.

    That'll beat this thread hands down.

    Holding breath starting...

    • CommentAuthormiccas75
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2008
    No Country. I have seen the film three times, and while there are flaws it is hands down the best American film this year. The scene where Llewelyn tells Chigurh he's going to make him his "personal project" is by itself better than There will be Blood. As for There will be Blood, PT Anderson shot his director ass off and deserves Best Director. Day-Lewis needs to retire again, I cannot watch him perform in a scene anymore. I get too caught up in wondering how he can do what he does so well and I lose the storyline. Little things like Plainview's cadence and stride that never stray are tiny acting miracles. But the story was not that strong, could not be saved by these things.
  5.  (687.10)
    There Will Be Blood.

    Because there is milkshake drinking.

    Which can be explored at

    Yes, that site is real.
  6.  (687.11)
    Just saw There Will Be Blood.

    The milkshake was delicious.

    It's probably impossible to be objective if i had to choose between the two for Best Film. I'm a big Cormac/Coen fan. In an attempt to do so (and probably still fail), i found No Country For Old Men is still my choice.
    Blood's unfolding story felt unsurprising and predictable to me despite being a very beautiful and striking film via the directing, acting, and cinematogrophy.
    On the other hand, No Country rightfully refuses to just hand over any outcomes or resolutions to meet the expectations of the audience. For me, a story that split the audience 3 ways (silent pondering, applause, vocal aggravation) wins over the rise and fall of an oil baron.

    "If the rule you followed brought you to this, what good is the rule?"
    • CommentAuthormiccas75
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2008
    Spot on, Steven.
  7.  (687.13)
    Saw both, loved both, close call, I'll go with my favorite of the pair being _No Country For Old Men_ but I think a reasonable person could easily hold the opposite view. I think it's the Coen Brothers' best film, excellent performances, overall brilliant. _No Country_ caused a fellow in the row behind me on opening night, after the last line and the fade to black of the credits, loudly say "Worst. Ending. Ever." That, I don't think is rational, and so I hold him up here for ridicule.

    I also thought _There Will Be Blood_ was amazing in many ways, from the striking imagery of the cinematography to Day-Lewis's performance (and, I want to add, Paul Dano's performance simply for being opposite Day-Lewis on screen and not looking incompetent by contrast - I mean nothing rude to Dano in that, I was impressed by his performance), and the sardonic nature of _There Will Be Blood_ being surprisingly literal in the promise of the film's title.
  8.  (687.14)
    No preference. Great is great and these great films are both great.


    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2008

    None of both have been relased yet.


  9.  (687.16)
    I saw There will be blood last night.

    Shot absolutely beautiful. Day-Lewis is amazing. Completely disappointing film.

    I go to see No country tomorrow.
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2008
    None of both have been relased yet.

    That is the most depressing thing I've read in a while. I'm sorry Jack. At least the weather is nice? I hear the weather is nice there.

    I think No Country was overall a stronger film. There were parts when There Will Be Blood was better but they were fewer and far between. No Country I think sustained it's greatness throughout the whole film where as There Will Be Blood spent the film wavering from good to great.
  10.  (687.18)
    I've only seen No Country... and loved it. Bardem was a force in that movie...
    Milkshake sounds good too though. But based on my one present one-sided opinion I go with No County... .
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2008 edited
    No Country, hands down, simply because There Will Be Blood was not a perfect film, whereas No Country for Old Men was perfect.

    I'd also like to point out that Daniel Day-Lewis had a year to prepare for his role, whereas Paul Dano had four days to prepare for the role of Eli Sunday, and personally for me, Dano held his own and even surpassed Day-Lewis.
    • CommentTimeJan 31st 2008
    I wouldn't say that he surpassed, but all things considered he did do an absolutely fantastic job. To have any level of presence on screen with Day-Lewis on there, you have to have some serious chops.