Review - No Country for Old Men vs. A Simple Plan

There are spoilers here. Please stop now and watch both movies first. Acutally, just watch "A Simple Plan" and don't worry about missing "No Country...".




...




Watched it? OK, Good. Here we go. I haven't seen "A Simple Plan" in a couple of years so make comments if I get something wrong.

Setting:
ASP: Wooded back country.
NCfOM: Desert back country.

Main finder of the Money:
ASP: Poor married guy w/ no children.
NCfOM: Poor married guy w/ no children.

Money from what?
ASP: Drugs.
NCfOM: Drugs.

How they handle the money:
ASP: Sit on it for a long time until the 'heat' wears off.
NCfOM: Sit on it for a long time until the 'heat' wears off.

Is the money 'free'?
ASP: No, the owners of the money/drugs want it back, and the police are looking for it, too.
NCfOM: No, the owners of the money/drugs want it back, and the police are looking for it, too.

Do the 'good guys' get to spend the money in the end?
ASP: No. Oh, and there's a death.
NCfOM: No. Oh, and there's lots of deaths.

Collateral deaths?
ASP: No.
NCfOM: A ton of 'em.

As you can tell by my biased comparison, the movies are very similar. Same basic idea of finding drug money, keeping it for a while, then plan on spending a little at a time after the bad guys stop looking for the money.

So why do I think ASP is better? ASP spends most of the time following the main guy and his wife, his friend, and his 'special' brother, so you really start to feel for the characters. NCfOM doesn't make me care for anybody except maybe the air canister guy, and that's only out of morbid curiosity.

ASP is more of a psychological drama about how ordinary folk handle the money, along with the greed, betrayal and everything else it brings. NCfOM is a long, slow chase scene with only one exploding car.

However, the ending is what clinches it for me. NCfOM implies that all of the 'good guys' die, but it's only spelled out for one of them. Why make us WONDER if the characters died? What's the point? It's obvious they want you to leave the movie thinking they died, but there's no mental reward for thinking they survived. Usually if the movie ends ambiguously it's ripe for debate about what really happened after the movie stopped. This is not the case.

ASP gradually builds up to the finale, with a very tearful sacrifice of one of the three men, and they find out after the death that the money is marked to be instantly traceable, so anyone that spends even the first dollar will be found (not exactly sure how this would work if you buy furniture and cars with cash, no ID required, but whatever). The buildup also shows the growing tension between the husband and wife as 'do what is best' vs 'do what is best FOR US' conversations become more aggressive. Finally, you really feel for the remaining characters at the end of the movie because they have ripped their lives apart for essentially nothing--no money, death of loved ones, etc.

I just don't get why this movie is being pushed by the critics.