Sign In Now ►
or Create A New Account ►
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
One of the ultimate tough decisions.
mossop ain't kidding, though I have to call it for NCFOM
Hated No Country. Thought it was absolutely lazy filmmaking. Of course I am not a big Coen brothers fan either.
Blood, no contest. The best film of 2007, easily one of the best of the 2000's. Paul Thomas Anderson stops aping Altman, and delivers a true masterpiece.
I loved "No Country". I love the cast, I love the style, I love the Coens and Cormac McCarthy. But "There Will Be Blood" was *the* major cinematic coup of 2007. We're talking about a movie that will live forever, if only for Daniel Day-Lewis. But it's also a better film in nearly every way. I was riveted from the opening frame and was under a spell for 2.5 hours. When it was over, my first thought was to see it again ASAP. Oddly, I only loved "No Country" after repeat viewings. I think the hype led to a little bit of a backlash in my expectations. But, truly, a nearly flawless action movie (and that's ALL IT IS... AN ACTION MOVIE), but "There Will Be Blood" is a commanding work of art. Expect it to turn up on the next Sight & Sound poll.
Clearly, 'There Will Be Blood' is much better!
Two absolutely insane movies loved them both but when it comes down to it I say No Country For Old Men Javier Bardem is ruthless!!
Love them. 2007 was a brilliant year for Best Picture nominees, not a bad one in the bunch. There Will Be Blood is probably the quintissential actor's piece of our generation, and will be studied for decades. However, it is painfully slow. It is extremely hard to sit through more than once. No Country For Old Men is equally brilliant in subtlty, but requires a great deal of patience as well. However, it is the more exciting film, and if I'm being honest the complete cast of No Country was better to me than the complete cast of There Will Be Blood. It was truly every actor at their best. It's a very tough call, but I have to side with No Country on this one.
I hate to say it (who am I kidding, I LOVE to say it), but I think both of these films were lazy film making, at least as far as story is concerned. So there. I almost want to give it to There Will be Blood just because of "I drink your milkshake!" but I'll give it to No Country for Old Men because of the gorgeous cinematography and memorable characters.
I've had affairs with the cohens but i'll admit that there will be blood makes me pee in my pants !!!!!!!
From the cinematography, the score, the acting, and the directing........there will be blood is the winner. Forget the "I drink your milkshake!" stuff. There will be blood is about America.
It's not just about America - it's about humanity....screw everyone else as long as I have more than everyone else. No Country is AWESOME but in a hundred years.....they will still talk about THERE WILL BE BLOOD.
Very tough choice, but There Will Be Blood is the clear winner for me. The acting won me over.
Daniel Day Lewis and Paul Dano were awesome in There will be blood. Tough but I gotta go with the movie that left a lasting impression.
I was greatly disappointed with both of these films but No Country for Old Men was more tolerable than There Will Be Blood.
No Country has great actors doing some of their greatest work, but Daniel Day Lewis out does them all.
movies like ''there will be blood'' don't come out any more, and movies that defiy the audience like '' no country'' are hard to come by, ''there will be blood'' feels like if the spirit of kubrick had possesed P.T Anderson and delivered his last master piece.... tough call.... for now I'll go with ''no country fo old men'' since im a sucker for crime films... but I might change my mind later on.
A pair of pessimistic theses: (No Country for Old Men) - "I don't want to push my chips forward and go out and meet something I don't understand. A man would have to put his soul at hazard. He'd have to say, 'Okay...I'll be part of this world.'" (There Will Be Blood) - "I have a competition in me. I want no one else to succeed...If it's in me, it's in you...I see the worst in people. I don't need to look past seeing them to get all I need." I loved these films, and can find something new in each of them upon repeat viewings. Both are unpredictable, gut-wrenching, intelligent, merciless, odd, dark, beautiful and wildly entertaining. I think both will stand the test of time. Absolutely inspired film-making.
Two of the best films of the decade battle it out for supremacy. I prefer TWBB.
I felt that No Country worked brilliantly as a book but did not hold up so well in the literal form that is film. My vote goes to There Will Be Blood.
No Country For Old Men. Becuase I liked it more and that's what Flickchart is about.
There will be Blood but only by a slim win. If There Will be Blood was made last year it would have beaten the weak Slumdog Millionaire for best picture at the oscars and likely would have swept all other categories in the weakest year of films I can remember
"Friend-O" vs. "I Drink Your Milkshake!"
Tough call, but There Will Be Blood amazed me. The cinematography made me realize that's what I want to make a career out of. As much as I love the Cohen Bros, I admire PT Anderson's film-making despite people accusing him of stealing other's techniques.
Very tough but I'll go with no country
I enjoyed both a lot, but No Country wins in my mind, because though There Will be Blood was good, it felt like it was being carried by Daniel Day Lewis' performance. I can say easily he deserved best actor, but as a film on the whole, No Country was better, and drew me in far more than There Will Be Blood. Not saying that it is miles better, but I think it is the better film.
I agree 100% with The Movie Whore here, except I like some of the Coen Brothers films. The recent ones have just seemed to be a rewrapping of their previous storys, horribly implemented. 'There Will Be Blood' is one of those few films that I consider perfect.
At the time they were released I was on the NO COUNTRY bandwagon, but over time BLOOD became the one that has stained my memory. What an amazingly unique filmmaker PTA is to have created such an uncompromising, troubling and beautiful film.
There Will Be Blood was perfect. Daniel Day-Lewis is maybe the best actor ever born. No Country For Old Men was good, though it was too long, and had a few loose ends.
They're both fantastic movies, but No Country wins on rewatchability. Is that a word?
The real question: what's more captivating, the descent into madness from obsession, or the frightening inevitability that awaits us all with death? Of course, one theme is told with more edge-of-your-seat tension, and the other with slow, steadily increasing anxiety. I pick NCfOM, considering it the Coens' best, but that's not to put down Anderson's masterpiece.
I drink your milkshake! I drink it up!
Great movies. But I think No Country for Old Men handled the later half of the film a lot better than There Will Be Blood. Either way, a very tough choice.
i liked both of these. i actually think ..blood is better but i never want to watch it again whereas i bought no country on dvd as soon as it was released
this will be a classic contest in movie history. in one corner: Coen Brothers, the tighter film-makers, near-perfect, only Fargo trumps their second masterpiece. and in the other corner, PTAnderson, one of the most epic, stylistic film-makers of the current generation, telling uniquely unforgettable films, but more enigmatic than the Coens... i'm going Fargo, There Will Be Blood, then No Country.
I any other year, "No Country" would have been the Best Picture. But I must say... P.T. got robbed.
Interestingly enough, after seeing both of these films for the first time at the theater, I thought No Country was the best - by a hair (both brilliant though). I then saw them both again in the following weeks, and changed my vote to TWBB... I think I caught a lot more the second time around, and I was able to appreciate DDL's performance even more. Now, after owning both movies and seeing them a few times at home, my vote goes back to No Country. While they are both in my all-time favorites, No Country gets better with every viewing. I've cannot recall any other movie that has this much tension dripping from every scene... despite at least 6 viewings, I still am on the edge of my seat. I can't wait to watch No Country again... I can't say that anymore about TWBB.
Both great films, I'd say, but to me the winner would have to be TWBB. Daniel Day Lewis' performance was gripping. To this day the final scene in the bowling alley still haunts my mind. Oh and not to mention the music!! It captured the mood of the film perfectly. Such an amazing film.
They were both great movies but in the time since I've seen them, TWBB just has a grip on me that No Country doesn't.
There Will Be Blood gets my vote. For some odd reason I have not been able to get into the Coen Brother's work. I know it's all good, I can see that it's good, but it just doesn't hit me right. Maybe I'll enjoy them more with age.
These 2 movies went head-to-head at the Oscars in 08 and are now squaring off on my flickchart top 20. However, unlike the Oscars that year, my nod goes to PTA's There Will Be Blood. In addition to Daniel Day-Lewis' tour-de-force performance, Anderson displays masterful story telling and film making, highlighting not only Plainview's descent into greed, the movie also serves as a commentary on the foundations of turn of the century capitalism that exists today.
Daniel Day-Lewis in a long historical epic picture. How can you go wrong? Sorry, but the cohen brothers did'nt win me over with NCFOM...
Very tough to call this one without feeling like your letting down the movie that comes out the loser. No Country is tightly told, driven and tense throughout. The direction is impeccable and every frame is marvelously minamilist while communicating volumes (the scuff marks on the floor is a great example). The relentleness of both Daniel Plainview and the plot of There Will Be Blood is awe inspiring and well embelished by the haunting sound track. In the end the humanity of Tommy Lee Jones and the decidedly inhuman turn of Bardem as Chigurh (all time great movie bad guy) gets the Coen Bros the nod.
This film needs to be broken down into categories.
The direction (tie). Beginning TWBB with about 20 minutes without any dialogue was risky move and it paid off. PTA and the Coen Brothers are both on the short list of best working directors and both show exactly why with both of these films.
Acting (winner:there will be blood) Daniel Day Lewis is the best actor working right now.
Story (Winner: No Country for Old Men) This narrowly wins because it had the better source material to work with. Cormac McArthy is a genius.
Which FIlm stuck with me longer after I watch it (winner: TWBB) Daniel Day Lewis' performance was haunting
Which movie would i rather watch again. Winner (No Country For Old Men) Many of the Themes in TWBB made me feel incredibly uncomfortable. While this is one of its strengths, it is also a reason why I do not want to relive this film. The Coen Brothers are experts in bringing the viewer along for the ride. NCFOM is a movie I could watch everyday.
The Verdict (The Winner is...No County For Old Men) Both Are amazing films. I may actually be more of a PTA fan, but in this particular case, I enjoyed the Coen Brothers' film just a little bit more.
There Will Be Blood has one of the greatest, most inevitable yet still shocking endings ever. No Country For Old Men lacks an ending. I'll stick with PT Anderson and Daniel Day Lewis any day.
I would have to go with TWBB. It's my favorite movie of the decade. However, I really love No Country. That year was such a good year for films but I felt that TWBB got robbed at the Oscars. It should have won Best Picture. As great as No Country was there was no risk to it. It was too clean and with the lack of risk came a lack of reward. TWBB had plenty of risks from the virtually silent beginning to the insane end and all of those risks paid off. I also agree with one of the posters here, no one makes movies like TWBB anymore. It will end up being one of the timeless films of the 2000's.
their both very overrated but i would have to go with no country for old men
Someone mentioned earlier in this discussion how uncomfortable it would be to watch TWBB again. I completely agree and this is one of the major reasons I go with No Country: both movies raise such uncomfortable issues but at least TWBB gives you a traditional movie ending. The Coen's suck you in for 2 hours with a beautifully crafted film and when the plot finally reveals itself as the inevitability of death, age, and the triumph of evil, the movie ends. As a viewer you are left with no conclusion but to ponder about our own meaningless existence.
The two best movies nominated for an Oscar in I don't know how long. These are both in my Top 20, but I guess I would rate No Country a few notches higher. That may change one day. Both are endlessly entertaining.
There will be blood was good but nothing original. No country for old men brings back film noir, and it has one of the best villians on history
Oh, God! That's tough question. Actually I love both movies. I cannot decide, I just can't dammit. I have to think about that one.
Easy for me.The winner is There Will Be Blood.Its a great film, i never thought i would like this movie but i like it.
No Country for Old Men, i still dont know why it has won the Best Picture.
22 comments a piece. As the official tie-breaker I am... ah fuck it I'm on the fence.
TWBB has been such a revelation to me ! So it can't... Oh God, NCFOM has also been a revelation. PTA wins, and I just don't know why.
There Will Be Blood........I said it.
Some of the best films made in the 00s!
Have to call it...No Country for Old Men.
I don't love either of these movies as much as most people seem to, but both have good stuff. I loved the opening of There Will Be Blood, with no dialogue and just a great performance by Day-Lewis. But I have an issue with long movies that FEEL long, and TWBB did feel like it to me. No Country, meanwhile, was well on its way to being a new all-time favorite...until that non-ending came and smacked me upside the head. I have a feeling I'd like it better if I saw it again. So basically, TWBB was pretty good, but only one of these threatened to be one of the best movies I've ever seen, and that was No Country for Old Men, which hooked me for the first three quarters, then hung me out to dry.
(Insert reference to "MILKSAHKE!" here). I still think that There Will Be Blood should have won best picture over No Country For Old Men.
There Will Be Blood wins by a longshot. I have enjoyed multiple viewings for each and recently re-watched No Country and it just seems to drag on and on which is quite surprising enough. Yes, Javier Bardem is a goddamn badass but you cant top Daniel Day Lewis' performance - hell the first 10 mins he doesnt even say anything. Its just simply a extraordinarily riveting, galvanizing performance. Plus, cinematography wise...There Will Be Blood edges out past No Country For Old men - its a goddamn beautiful film
Daniel Plainview over Anton Chigurh any day....
The Reel Rumble is a joke, right? The only category they give to No Country is performances - the one it clearly doesn't deserve? Daniel Day-Lewis gives the performance of the decade in There Will Be Blood, but it's a messy masterpiece compared to No Country's polished perfection that outshines it at nearly every juncture.
NO COUNTRY has been a work in progress for the Coens. The have made road movies, gangster movies and detective movies, and No Country is the wrapped up present that they have been working on for decades, and it is awesome. But It is a genre film from genre filmmakers, original ones they may be. There Will Be Blood is completely incomparable to any modern piece of cinema, and completely unrecognizable from Paul Thomas Anderson's other work. It is such a force of nature that it is no one's wheelhouse and never will be. Creatively, both are supremely amazing and after watching True Grit I think there will be a ton more discussions over these filmmaker's work.
There Will Be Blood is the winner, one of the greatest final shots of all time.
No Country for Old Men, definitely. Has more substance, suspense, and overall more interesting characters. There Will Be Blood is great, but not as deep as everyone seems to think it is.
there will be blood doesnt even come close to No Country for Old Men. No Country for Old Men had a great cast and was suspenseful. There will be blood was a blah movie.
These two movies are tied for number 1 on my favorite movies of all time. @moviewhore - i was appalled to see you thought no country was lazy filmmaking and you weren't a coens fan, but then I saw that 5 of your top 20 were kevin smith or had something to do with him. Then it all made sense. But I'm literally having to flip a coin on this one... No Country won.
There Will Be Blood wins for me because it is the more complete film. They are neck and neck for a while, but with the death of a main character, No Country loses its way and starts to meander too much. I realize it is sticking very close to the novel in that regard, but sometimes you have to realize when you've hit your mark and wrap things up.
Both tremendous achievements, but TWBB is a flat-out masterpiece that should be ranked with many of the highly-regarded classics of yesteryear.
No Country For Old Men wins in my book. All the performances are great, the direction is impeccible, and the film is very thrilling. There Will Be Blood has a great performance by Daniel Day-Lewis, but that's all there really is to recommend it. It is long and meandering, and ultimately a bit ridiculous at the end.
Naburling, you read my mind. Only thing holding back No Country from greatness is that lame sudden ending.
No Country for Old Men will always get my pick over a ton of different films only mainly because it's flawless. Perfect acting, perfect story, and the old Coen formula blend perfectly. The only 2 things I enjoyed in There Will Be Blood were the first 20 minutes where nobody talked, and Day-Lewis's performance, that's it. It was shallow and dragged on for too long without getting anywhere. No Country is a masterpiece.
Both two outstanding movies from 2007. No Country is my all-time #1, so I'm never picking against it. Perfect movie. However, There Will Be Blood was an outstanding film, as well.
Both are EXCELLENT. First, I just have to say that I can't stand all the complaining that people do about No Country's so-called "non-ending". I find absolutely nothing wrong with it. That ending perfectly concluded the film on a ponderous note that- if the viewer allows it too- permeates the mind for hours afterward. *exhale* Ok, moving on, I must state that TWBB is a masterpiece through and through. The camerawork by Robert Elswitt, PTA's assured direction, DDL's performance (Which deserves to be put in the pantheon of greatest perfs of all-time), the brilliant script... all of this is extremely well done. It is the finest film of its year and IMO, the finest of the decade. I love, love, love NCFOM, and I have nothing but respect for it, but it cannot compare to the sheer size of the monstrous achievement that is "There Will be Blood".
I'm not gonna get into explaining which film I prefer, because I'll probably be writing for hours. So I'll just say I like No Country For Old Men more.
Let's be fair, Blood was screwed at the Oscars. The sheer ferocity of Daniel is absolutely unmatched (especially paired with Javier).
Liked both...loved neither. Bardem is just too much to overlook though...everyone fears the cattle gun...
THERE WILL BE BLOOD!!!!
Neither. Tied in mediocrity.
No Country For Old Men Is awesome, It's Nearly Flawless, Awesome Acting, Awesome Story, Awesome Everything, Anton Chigurh is One of My favorite antagonists of all time, However.. Daniel Day Lewis's Performance alone trumps all that.
When I saw there will be blood the first time I was falling asleep so I had to view it again when I was switched on. Comparing both, they are both masterpieces but blood has many moments throughout which carry a raw emotional power which I havent seen in any other film. The opposing poles of day-Lewis and dano are awesome and when they collide it's truly a sight to behold. day-Lewis' performance is one of the best in cinematic history and the fact that dano holds his own in the supporting role is nothing short of a miracle. His performance is great, the sweeping landscape is breathe taking and the music score eccentricity only adds to the films unique structure. No country is a very good movie but the end didn't deliver the punch I was after, although the ending is actually quite fitting. Bloods' last scene will go down in history and will surely be parodied a lot in the near future. Bloods' emotional core runs deeper than any film I can recall. It's gets more brilliant each time I watch it and I won't be surprised if it topples shawshank as my favorite film of all time. There will be blood all the way!!!
Hard choice but I'll go with TWBB
There will be blood!
i dont know what is wrong with me or every one else but i thought there will be blood was not even that good of a movie i did not think it was bad mind u but i did not love it like everyone else did i thought it was too slow and boring at times i was not captivated by it like most of u were and there will be blood is not a movie i plan on watching again but not country for old men is a movie i plan on watching multiple times come on be honest with ur selfs was there will be blood that great and ground breaking of a movie to all of u personaly or is that what alot of ppl tell u it is
First time I saw it I was taken aback by how different it was. After a second viewing I realized it's brilliance. Trust me happyhank25, this film rewards multiple viewings. But no country is definitely more palatable to a mainstream audience. That's why it won the Oscar, blood was the better film in most critic/ film buff eyes but mainstream audiences didnt have the patience for a slow burn film such as there will be blood. Everyone I ask who I would label 'mainstream' always say it is slow. Like 'the tree of life' this film rewards the patient viewer. But bloody hell, 2007 was a good year!
there will be blood is easily (to me) the better film. i thought no country was overrated. every aspect of there will be blood was better.
I worry about revisiting these movies. I've rated them highly in the past but I suspect that my days of tolerance are coming to an end. A year and half ago I was on th fence. Now, with my threshhold for nothingness considerably reduced, it's clear that TWBB will be far more taxing on my patience. Sad in some ways. @People up top: Isn't NCFOM's ending 'supposed' to be a non-ending? I don't remember much of the movie, but I do distinctly remember thinking that the conclusion was... 'meant to be'. @kingofpain: So, you've found two movies that are endlessly entertaining. Will you now just grab a good chair, strip to your underwear and watch it until you die? You're probably gonna need to order a lot of pizza, too. =)
You got me there. I might've succumbed to a bit of the hyperbole in my enthusiasm for these films. I'm not proud of it. Generally, I try to avoid putting all my cards on the table when it comes to my feelings about movies. (NOTE: I tried to think of a way to differentiate "infinitely" from "endlessly", but I figured I'd look like I was attempting to weasel.)
I thought There Will Be Blood was rather overrated. It's No Country for Old Men for me!
These are the two greatest films of 2007. No Country won the oscar for best picture, and I thought it was the perfect choice... untill I saw There Will Be Blood, which is an amazing 5 star masterpiece that is now in my top 10.
I have to say No Country because it didn't hinge its entire premise on one great character, it had a whole great cast behind it, w00t Coens!
There Will Be Blood. It isn't a landslide by any means. These two films, and partially Atonement, made 2007 the best year for movies in a long time and still the best year in recent history. As weird as it sounds I'm gonna compare Blood to Batman Returns. Blood is obviously better than ANY Batman movie but bear with me. Batman Returns is arguably the 4th best Bat film but it's ambitions could make it the second or third best. There Will Be Blood's ambitions due it for me. There is certainly something to be said for a tight film, Back to The Future is one of the best scripts ever for that very reason. Still everything about There Will Be Blood makes me smile every time I watch it. Also, it was with this film, PT Anderson cemented himself as one of the best filmmakers of the 2000s generation.
Agree with you totally tl8706, there will be blood has great ambition and pt. Anderson is a great director. Easily there will be blood!
There will be Blood all the way!
Both movies changed the way I watched movies forever. Daniel Day Lewis certainly out-acted everyone in No Country For Old Men but beyond that, both a special place in my heart as a movie that made me reconsider human capacity for evil. No Country, however, has a tone that will never be recreated. No Country found me puzzled as to what this man was truly motivated by, if anything. He was a monster, whereas Plainview was a man. No Country For Old Men stays with me forever.
I believe they are both perfect movies, but slight edge to No Country for Old Men
I give my edge to There will be Blood.
Though I'd lend my support to the Coens over PTA nearly every time, I give the slight nod to Blood.
Both films are the best fictional films of the 2000's.
There Will be Blood just holds up better after numerous viewings. I love them both.
Great matchup, but Im going to go with No Country For Old Men. Far more entertaining and more rewatchable than TWBB.
Two great films, but im leaning toward No Country For Old Men
Both are present in my top 20.But due to DDL's once in a lifetime kind of performance,I'm going with TWBB.
No Country For Old Men is a better movie overall.
Both are undoubtedly amazing movies, but I felt There Will Be Blood dragged in parts. No denying its brilliance, but No Country For Old Men is an overall more enjoyable movie. And that's saying a lot.
Both are fantastic. The acting is top notch in both. Both are about something much deeper than their main story. I keep going back and forth to myself, debating which movie I could see higher on my list. I just saw There Will Be Blood again today, and it may be even better revisiting it than it was the first time I saw it. Maybe I'll switch my pick later, but for now, I'm gonna go with No Country For Old Men. It's so, so close, though.
While I really enjoyed No Country, and appriciated what it had to say, There Will Be Blood is one of the most powerful, well-acted movies I've ever seen.
There Will Be Blood wins for me. Both in my top 25, insane matchup.
Seiously, just ranks away... but There Will Be Blood takes the cake for me.
I need to see There Will Be Blood a second time, but for me No Country For Old Men wins. I felt that at times There Will Be Blood was trying too hard to be obscure and quirky whereas No Country For Old Men achieved its style effortlessly.
The Oscars got it right for a change. NCFOM for me is almost a perfect film, TWBB is fantastic but just a tad bit long at some parts.
Like others, I didn't much like the third act of No Country for Old Men. It just didn't work for me. I found There Will Be Blood to be much more satisfying.
There Will Be Blood was perfect.
No Country for Old Men was a simple tour de force for me. I really haven't seen anything like it since its release. The action scenes are set up brilliantly and are paced at perfect speeds and I felt my heart pumping through all of them. I have seen it close to a dozen times and it never gets repetitive. There Will Be Blood was a pretty good film and I really liked Daniel Day-Lewis as Plainview and the 'Milkshake' scene. The only problem with it was that it just moved too damn slow for my tastes. No Country for Old Men always kept my attention no matter what the scene. This is an easy decision.
Fun fact, No Country for Old Men was actually the neighboring film production of There Will Be Blood. So no wonder the movies seem to take place in the same area. Anyway, There Will Be Blood wins. They both have a similar, haunting atmosphere, but I think TWBB is better. It's tough to say why though, maybe because I liked Daniel Day Lewis so much or because TWBB had more story. Both excellent, but TWBB is a little better.
There Will Be Blood for me.It holds up better on repeat viewings.No Country is great as well but TWBB was just a bit more special experience for me.
There Will Be Blood is simply better.
TWBB had more of an impact on me.
There Will Be Blood is a modern classic, No Country is still great but There Will Be Blood is better
Didn't like TWBB at all. No Country was spectacular and wins quite easily.
i dont know how its possible for a great film like NCFOM to lose in a matchup, but when its against the magnificent TWBB, it loses quite easily.
There WIll Be Blood for me. One of the best films ever made.
I understand the discuss but No country is way better, i watch it three times and each time i see gets better.. The Academy made a good decision, There will be blood is a great drama movie but No country is just perfect, Coen brothers best!
No country for old men for sure. Both great films, but for me the Coen brothers made the overall better movie.
No County for Old Man was good but There Will Be Blood is much better. Daniel Day Lewis showed one of the best performances ever, and Paul Thomas Anderson's direction was outstanting
No Country For Old Men is still better. There Will Be Blood is a very good movie, but it is too tedious in some parts.
Love them both, but There Will be Blood is better in my opinion.
There Will Be Blood .. because the other one is boring ..
I'd have to say that TWBB not having a spoken word in like the first half hour kind of set the tone poorly to me. NCFOM had my attention the entire time.
I don't see all the hype over There Will Be Blood, I found it so unbelievably dull. No Country for Old Men was gripping and is by far the better movie. It deserved Best Picture over TWBB and rightfully won it too.
Old Men > old man.
No Country is great, but Blood is a masterpiece
Why are more people picking No Country? Is because of the Academy Award for best picture? The Academy is a bourgeoisie organization and its awards are merely technical. They award only the technicalities of a film, not the grandeur, spectacle, or emotions of it. There Will Be Blood had the grandeur, spectacle, and emotion that a film needs to be great.
Two of the very best. Bardem and Day-Lewis are both out of this world in their roles. These are also two very groundbreaking films, with nothing quite like them coming before them. I have to give it to No Country For Old Men, but the only reason is because I have to choose to be honest. It's the more complete film, TWBB reaches its peak less regularly throughout, but not much less regularly. Basically, both of these films are to be celebrated and a comparison doesn't really mean much.
Both fantastic films, but There Will Be Blood is to No Country for Old Men as Raging Bull was to Ordinary People.
I definitely need to watch NCFOM again, but it's for sure growing on me. But for now it's definitely TWBB.
I just watched There Will Be Blood for the first time and I thought it was a great, well-made film. No Country still wins...
TWBB by a notch.
Loved them both, but No Country was better.
Both of these films are two of the greatest masterpieces of the past decade. However, I loved No Country more.
The best film of the 00-09 decade, and the 4th best of that decade
Definitely going with No Country for Old Men. There Will Be Blood was a great film, but No Country is just better. Also, I think Bardem was better than Day-Lewis.
Oh my, what a tough choice to make. Both films are tied for my favorite film back in 2007, and are tied on my favorite films of all time. If i had to pick one, as much i love No Country for Old Men, i slightly pick There Will Be Blood. I am somewhat biased to main characters who aren't exactly good people, as well as character-driven films. It also helps that said main character is "played" by one of the greatest actors of all time. With that said, No Country for Old Men is still amazing in my eyes. It never lost my attention in it's entire running time, the acting is top-notch, it is intense as hell, as well contains fascinating themes, like death, fate, and how the mind of an criminal is getting only worse, and worse with time. Also, Javier Bardem as Anton Chigurh might be one of the greatest villains i have ever seen in film history. Right up they with Darth Vader and The Joker from The Dark Knight. Simply put, this debate is a matter of preference, and mine is There Will Be Blood in the end. Still am happy that the No Country for Old Men did win Best Picture though.
To be fair, No Country is long overdue a rewatch, but that aside, this is an easy choice; TWBB wins in a landslide! I have yet to really watch a Coen brothers film which I enjoy/admire (based on an extremely limited viewing record mind), whereas TWBB has given me more incentive to watch PT's works.
This is rather easy, There Will be Blood is a masterpiece and No Country for Old Men is great up until the ending. I really did not like the ending, thought it kind of threw away the whole plot, but I still see why people like the ending. TWBB is a great character study and an amazing film, it's a shame No Country gets much weaker in the conclusion because the rest of the movie is a great thriller with a perfect villain. If No Country's ending was better, this would much harder, maybe it just needs a rematch. But for now I say There Will Be Blood.
TWBB is so much better but I need to rewatch no country for old men
There will be blood is a better film but I just love NCFOM bit more
2 of my favs....Blood by a hair
There Will Be Blood is better in every way imaginable. Not even close. This is a joke.
My gosh dude don't make me decide here hmm for now There Will Be Blood wins
Both are amazing,but I think There Will Be Blood is probably the best film of the century so far so I'm goin' with that.
For me, the best by far was There will be blood. No country just dragged. It was mediocre at best.
The two best films of 2007.
These are both amazing but I like There Will Be Blood more.
Switching to No Country.While There Will Be Blood is amazing,and one of my favorite films of all time,I really do think No Country is better.I really enjoy trying to answer some of the questions it asks,especially:how much control do we have over our own destiny? Or does it all just come down to chance,or the flip of a coin? Amazing stuff.
I'm about to lose whatever credibility I have left, but There Will be Blood is a booring movie! No Country wins
I would have said There Will Be Blood yesterday but I just rewatched NCFOM and I think it gets the edge
2 to 2 my favorite versions ever, I go for No Country..
The age old film buff question....There Will Be Blood all the way!
It's been a while since I've seen NCFOM, but TWBB was great film making. Spectacular performance from DDL.
Both movies equally dull and uneventful.
Neither is better than the other. Both are some of the best films. NCFOM is my choice by one spot on my list.
head to head. both are in my top 10 of the 20's... but
I go for THERE WILL BE BLOOOOOD
because is more artistic and a magical and more original experince. Both are, but more TWBB, intended to be classics of classics
PTA vs Coen Bros at their very best. Both are absolutely amazing. I could go back and forth on this one several times but for now it's There Will Be Blood for it's fine ass acting.
No Country for Old Men is the vastly superior film. Though There Will Be Blood is awesome.
The best films of 2007 and of the last decade. Both films are masterpieces with excellent direction, acting, cinematography, etc. Between these two films it can change anytime but for right now There Will Be Blood wins only by a slight hair.
The two greatest films of the year 2007. Both are pure cinematic masterpieces. My favorite of the two is There Will Be Blood. The acting by Day-Lewis, the cinematography by Robert Elswit, the musical score by Jonny Greenwood.. And P.T. Anderson's style of filmmaking is pure genius.
La da be da! It just happened while ranking There Will Be Blood. Anyways, I just found No Country to be so unique, and complex. There Will Be Blood was a wonderful piece of filmmaking, but I kinda like No Country better.
No Country For Old Men barely
Any matchup I comment on is almost always between two wonderful films and this is no exception. But while There Will Be Blood is one of the greatest movies I've ever seen, No Country for Old Men is among my very favorites. No knock on TWBB, No Country just fits me more.
Right now it's TWBB, but i change my mind on those two at pretty much every rewatch....
both extraordinary, but i prefer there will be blood
Wife and I watch all Best Pic noms. We split on these. She had TWBB as year's best, I liked NCFOM better (Coen style freaj(.
Wife and I watch all Best Pic noms. We split on these. She had TWBB as year's best, I liked NCFOM better (Coen style freak).
No Country for Old Men, hands down, for me. It's a masterpiece that asks really interesting questions about fate which I think about regularly. I honestly didn't care much for There Will Be Blood. I was never invested in Daniel Day Lewis's character, despite how well-acted it is, and I find the film extremely bloated. I do acknowledge TWBB's incredible film-making as well as its haunting, industrial score by Jonny Greenwood. But there's just not much in the movie that catches my interest in stark contrast to the endlessly fascinating Coen brothers opus.
There Will Be Blood is excellent for a slow burn, but No Country is every bit as good and keeps things moving. Plus, Bardem plays perhaps my favorite villain of all time. It's an easy decision for me...
Two of the best movies of all time right here, and it's still being debated on which one deserved the Oscar more. What's better; No Country's themes of our fate, guilt and the morals of the characters that subvert genre clichés and deepen the characters with no defintive ideas of good vs bad or There Will Be Blood which is about religion, commercialism and a main character of a good man going wrong. I rewatched No Country a few hours ago and once again found myself completely hooked and intrigued! To the casual man, it's a slow paced and violent game of cat and mouse. But there's so much enriched in how it plays out. Moss, who we are supposed to think is the main character, isn't even a good person. He stole the money, then had to deal with the consequences leading to his (spoiler alert but c'mon, you're reading this about a 12 year old movie. You should've seen it by now) death. And then the sheriffs 'dreams' is a metaphor for reliving his guilt that he was given a task (to protect Moss or help his father), couldn't complete it and failed. On the other hand, we have There Will Be Blood, which may be 160 minutes long and has an average shot span of 14 seconds (compared to most movies today having an average shot length of 2.5 seconds) which can slow things down slightly- but damn, that film left such an effect on me! The tragic side of Daniel was his loneliness and inability to accept whoever he saw as his competition, he turned his back on everyone in his life who could've been closer to him. Okay, I will stop analysing now and say that I preferred There Will Be Blood! It's story is more gripping, the themes are more complex and I normally prefer shorter films as I generally don't have the time anymore to watch 150+ mimutes but Blood does so much in the span of its runtime without dragging or feeling convoluted. And as great as the performances are in No Country, can any of them match Day Lewis?
Both are amazing masterpieces from 2007. I like There Will Be Blood more though.
I really love NCFOM but There Will Be Blood is already a classic
2007 was a great year for movies! No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood, Into the Wild, Zodiac, Sweeney Todd, The Assassination of Jesse James, Once, La Vie en Rose, 4 months, 3 weeks and 2 days, Walk Hard, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Transformers, Surf's Up, Ratatouille, This is England, I'm Not There, Gone Baby Gone, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, Sunshine, Disturbia, The Savages, The Darjeeling Limited, etc.
Kinda equal but No Country.
Here's my Top 5 Best Movies of 2007:
1 No Country for Old Men
2 There Will Be Blood
4 The Assassination of Jesse James
5 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
on Dec 30
NCFOM is the best Coen movie but that isn't saying much... its great, the 2nd best movie of 2007, but its not as good as PTA's masterpiece
on Jan 10
I'd say No Country for Old Men is the more entertaining and rewatchable film. I don't know which one I would call a better film though, so I'll just compare with my criteria for determining a better film.
Technical Brilliance: There Will Be Blood
Entertainment Value: No Country for Old Men
Rewatchability: No Country for Old Men
Acting: Damn! Daniel Plainview and Anton Chigurh are two fantastically written and brilliantly portrayed characters. It all comes down to what fascinates me more, Descent into Madness or Randomness of Fate? I believe Plainview to be a once good man turned psychopath and Chigurh is basically the physical personification of death. I believe Chigurh is a more interesting character but Plainview is SLIGHTLY better acted. So I'll have to give it There Will Be Blood.
Writing: I'll give this to There Will Be Blood since it is sorta of an original story though it is based on real events. No Country for Old Men has the source material from the book and is merely an on screen adaptation.
Directing: There Will Be Blood, PTA just has this authentic and realistic way of creating films when it comes to dialogue exchanges, camera angles, and plot twists. Though the Coen Brothers are absolutely amazing!
Cinematography: No Country for Old Men, it's just more beautiful to look and appreciate the beauty of.
Music: There Will Be Blood simply for that oil explosion scene, though to be fair No Country for Old Men lacks music but that works perfectly in it's execution.
Accessibility: No Country for Old Men just because it's faster paced, more engaging, and more intense.
Influence/Innovation: Tie. No Country for Old Men's lack of music creating more intense and suspenseful scenes is incredible, while There Will Be Blood's camera shots and angles can how much much you can do with just one scene.
Length: No Country for Old Men is the perfect length for me which about 2 hours, There Will Be Blood can drag out at times.
Pacing: No Country for Old Men easily, There Will Be Blood was painfully slow in the beginning.
Plot: No Country for Old Men plot is simpler to understand and easier to pay attention to.
Characters: There Will Be Blood, all characters authenticity add to the world's atmosphere.
Themes: No Country for Old Men mainly because I find the idea of how random of fate in terms of life and death can be terrifying just like Chigurh I think is the Devil himself in the film.
So No Country for Old Men wins with 8 points, while There Will Be Blood got 7 points so it barley lost. I honestly consider both of these films overall objectively equal.
on Jan 11
Both are excellent but there will be blood has daniel day lewis, so it wins
on Feb 21
Now that I look back at this, No Country for Old Men wins by quite a bit. There Will Be Blood requires a second rewatch for me to understand it better, I rewatched No Country just because of how tightly paced and suspensefully terrifying it is. Oh also Anton Chigurh, the greatest villain in cinematic history.
Ok so after rewatching There Will Be Blood I can safely and accurately say it an artistic masterpiece, but it still doesn't beat No Country for Old Men. Why? you may ask, well it simply isn't as entertaining, suspenseful, or intriguing. There Will Be Blood's pace can definitely feel slow at times and sorta boring. While No Country for Old Men is tightly and perfectly paced. Anton Chigurh and Daniel Plainview are truly and unequivocally the best parts of their respective films. But take Plainview out of TWBB then it isn't very good, take Chigurh out of NCFOM and it'll still be a great film.