No Country for Old Men

[PrayforMojo]

Caught an advanced screening of this tonight. I don't think it goes on general release till next week.

I have to say, unlike some, I've never really had a massive hard-on for the Coen Bros previous work. Miller's Crossing, Blood Simple and Fargo had moments I liked, but they never blew me away. Dunno why. Maybe it's because their films tend to be populated with quirky, eccentric characters, and there's a fine line between being quirky and just plain irritating. I mean, Fargo, as good as it is, definitely pushed its luck with me with all that ya-dee-****ing-ya speak.

But this is simply brilliant. It's the first 'must see' film of 2008.

It's a sort of contemporary Western. Adapted from a novel by Cormac McCarthy, and apparently the Coens have closely adhered to the source. It's a slow paced, at times meandering film, but that shouldn't deter anybody from seeing it. It's thoroughly engrossing. Largely due to Javier Bardem's mesmerising performance. He's both funny as hell and terrifying at the same time, and just check out that haircut.

Trailer - http://www.apple.com/trailers/mirama...ntryforoldmen/

[peeveen]

I enjoyed it too, but couldn't help but be a bit annoyed by the lack of closure at the end.

[nonny]

Yeh its a great film but the ending does drag in the last 20mins after the main story arc has finished.

Definitely a must see film though.

[PrayforMojo]

I enjoyed it too, but couldn't help but be a bit annoyed by the lack of closure at the end.

The more I think about the ending the more I like it.

->Open Spoiler<-

I suppose the audience is tricked into thinking the film is about Moss. He's an agreeable enough chap, his wife's a total sweety, and it's hard not to root for him and hope he can get away and cheat death. Of course, after his unseen showdown with the Mexicans, it becomes evident that the film was never really about him. It's really Sheriff Bell's story - a good man who just gives up.

It's a risky ending, not the kind we've become accustomed to expect.

->Open Spoiler<-

Though, even if it is left ambiguous, I'd like to think Chigurh's game is up after his confrontation with the delightful Mrs Moss. Alas, she did probably come to a sticky end, but by refusing to play his game, she beat him.

[anephric]

->Open Spoiler<-

But: is it really Bell's story? - what does he actually do, other than mope about disenchanted with the world, and then proceed to do, in the final scheme of things, absolutely nothing. Couldn't the film just as much be about Anton?

[PrayforMojo]

But the film is called No Country for Old Men, not No Country for Bug Eyed Weirdos.

->Open Spoiler<-

Chigurh is exposed as a phoney. Just as vulnerable to Lady Luck, chaos, whatever you want to call it, as the rest of us are.

->Open Spoiler<-

Sheriff Bell, fearing that Chigurh is hiding behind the door of the motel, actually makes the decision to "Put his soul in hazard" . Ok, so he gets there too late, and his actions ultimately prove to be futile, but he doesn't just mope about.

And Tommy Lee does get to narrate the opening and closing monologue, so yeah, I do think it's very much Sheriff Bell's story that's being told.

[Red Hogg]

I don't know what to think about this film.

->Open Spoiler<-

It was pretty slow-going but still quite interesting for the most part . However, once Llewellyn died I don't understand a thing that happened after that point, not even sure why the film continued. Not only was it massively disappointing that The Big Showdown that had been built up over the course of 1.5 hours never happened, but it just seemed to lose all reason when L got whacked. And what was the point of Tommy Lee Jones? His character had absolutely no impact on the story whatsoever. Same with Woody - what a waste of time his involvement was.

No idea what the ending was about.

Not a bad film but well down the Coen pecking order as far as I'm concerned. Big Lebowski, Millers Crossing, Fargo, Blood Simple, and The Man Who Wasn't There were all much better imo.

[anephric]

But the film is called No Country for Old Men, not No Country for Bug Eyed Weirdos.

But:

->Open Spoiler<-

Anton isn't a "phoney", he's just labouring under the delusion of fate (as a facade for his psychopathy, true, but still). When he has the car accident at the end, I thought it was just supposed to be another illustration of randomness, not that he's somehow been charmed up to now or guided to his victims, and hence is "phoney".

And Bell does quit, after all. Fair enough, I suppose. I wouldn't want to end up shot through the left lung by Indians either. So, whilst not doubting that he does go through that door expecting to confront Anton (or is that shot of Anton illustrative of what his imagination has confected might be in there? And Anton is long gone already?) he quits straight after. He doesn't pursue him even though he kills pretty much everyone, including the wife whom Bell promised no harm would befall her man.

Bell fails on just about every level. Anton, however, succeeds. And as Wells says, he has "principles". He's not a "phoney" - he believes in his determinism (or, perhaps not after he kills Moss's wife: who knows). The film could quite as easily be about Anton as it could Bell. Moss is just an everyman distraction, whom we follow hoping for some kind of violent showdown between him and Anton but we are denied that in the most emphatic way, when he gets killed offscreen by a random gang of Mexicans.

[Ajay1986]

Absolutely loved this movie and it was definitely in my top 3 for 2007, justing reading the debate its already started on here shows how clever a move it is.

[rmoxon]

I think the film is actualy quite simple really.

->Open Spoiler<-

it IS about tommy lee jones' character, and it is about him giving up, thats why its called "no country for old men" becuase if he had ever really entered that world of violence then he would never have lived to be the age he was when the filmn ended and he retired. He could and probably would have died like everyone else did in the film, or would at least have been in a few risky random car crashes...

Fantastic film anyway.

[reektan]

I totally didn't get it - loved the first half then it just tailed off for me. I had to check IMDB comments to make sure I wasn't being incredibly stupid but since reading through there are a fair bunch who feel the same as I do about how the plot pans out. It's odd as I enjoy a lot of coen movies but this just didn't work for me.

[rmoxon]

While I did think the film was fantastic, and felt like i understood it, i can understand why people might feel annoyed by the ending.

Aparently the film stuck as close to the book as it possibley could, being word for word in most places, so maybe the story works better in book form?

[AdamJW]

I thought it was very good in parts, but there was too much suggestion and hints towards things going on that would have been great scenes in there own right. Maybe they were edited out to put down as extras on the DVDs or whatever. Not as good as 'Fargo' in any shape or form though.

[ezee ryder]

Watched this yesterday, don't see why it is getting rave reviews to be honest. It is an ok movie with a few good scenes (mostly involving Javier Bardem) but that is about it really.

[NW2013]

Saw this this afternoon. Really enjoyed it and think the pacing was spot on. I can see why people didn't like parts of it but overall, in terms of cinematography, dialogue and atmosphere I thought it was great.