Indy.com
Today:
No Country for Old Men
Posted: Nov 14, 2007 in Movies
Tags:
The Coen Brothers have come full circle with their latest film, a Western-noir thriller rich in both style and substance.
"No Country for Old Men" shares many things with the filmmaking duo's first movie, "Blood Simple." Both are set in rural Texas, where life is just as gritty and hard as in any big city.
And, like many of the brothers' other films, both are about greed and the stupid and criminal choices people make to get what they want.
Both are also very violent, frightening and darkly funny.
But, while "Blood Simple" and many of the Coen Brothers' subsequent films ("Miller's Crossing," "Barton Fink," "Fargo") rank as instant classics, "No Country for Old Men" is clearly their best.
Based on the 2005 novel by Cormac McCarthy, the Coens' latest is a wonderfully layered tale of blue-collar tough Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) who stumbles into $2.million in drug money.
All hell breaks loose when a deranged hit man -- the horror-movie scary Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) -- takes pursuit.
Instead of stopping at the tale of an underdog everyman trying to survive, they add a compelling and dramatic element by slowing things to focus on the local sheriff (Tommy Lee Jones) trying to figure out what's going on with the bloody trail through his county -- and with him as an 8aging man.
This is where the Coen Brothers really demonstrate their growth. Instead of settling for the kind of contained, story-driven purpose of "Blood Simple," they reach out for something bigger. Sure, "Miller's Crossing" and "O Brother Where Art Thou" were about big ideas. But those two took big swipes at big things.
"No Country for Old Men" works the other way. It's a small story that artfully blends high-tension action -- I put my hands in front of my eyes several times -- with wise and genuine country philosophy.
I couldn't help caring about the characters here.
The opposite of cartoonish, these people all felt like they came from our real world. And, because of this, what they do and say carries real meaning and impact.
I especially enjoyed Bardem as the ultimate hit man. Armed with a compressed-air gun, a mysterious accent and an eerily grim look, he's like nothing seen before in film. The Spanish actor, new to American films, was especially frightening to watch because he's so unfamiliar.
I just watched Millers Crossing for the first time a couple weeks ago (yay, netflicks) which turned out to be a quite a chess match. I didn't know the Coen brothers had that side to themselves.
Thanks for the review.
It really killed me to not write a review for this one, because this was a FANTASTIC movie. Jim's review is dead on.
I actually just saw "Blood Simple" a couple of weeks ago and I think tonally it's probably the closest thing the Coens have done to "No Country," though Fargo is relatively close as well (but some of it gets lost with the film's funny accents and quirks).
The Coens are the best at capturing the voice of the region their characters live in, and it makes their films so much richer. I loved Bardem as well (and he was magnificent in a small role in "Collateral" a couple years back), but Brolin was fantastic as well. Jones was too for that matter. I think each of the three are solid candidates for a best actor nom.
I thought Javier Bardem was Robert Downey Jr. when I first saw the preview for this.
I thought this was kinda over-rated(not being a giant fan of the Brothers work)I did enjoy it though and it was VERY loyal to the book..even the ending
The trailer doesn't lie....it's an "instant classic". Going to see it again tomorrow.
This movie is a must see. I enjoyed every nail biting moment of it. BRAVO Coen brothers.
I completely disagree with all the praise for this movie. I think the C bros are hit and miss anyway, and I felt like they weren't even aiming at the target when they tried to make this mess a "hit." The story is tired: bad guys loses money, average guy finds money, bad guy goes on a killing spree looking for average guy, and... scene.
The acting was all one note (with an exception being Tommy Lee Jones pulling himself out the mire of blase roles he's had for a while now) and the film was laborious. I know most critics are raving about it, but I guess I just didn't see the flick they saw.
There's a great story about Cormac McCarthy in the current issue of Rolling Stone. Which, as far as I can figure out, can only be read in print still. Wow, what a concept!
I mentioned to someone that I didn't think this movie was that bloody and graphic, they strongly disagreed. Then I remembered I covered my eyes for most of the killing via bolt gun. Regardless of my sensitivities I enjoyed this film immensely. As usual the Coen Brothers chose the right color palette for the film and the cinematography was exceptional.
This was one of the most frightening films I've ever seen because you really cared about the people and could be in their shoes -- like he old man at the gas station with the coin flip. I love it that it makes people (including me) cover my eyes. Another good but scary and violent film last year was Eastern Promises. But the violence in both of these teaches us something and it's not supposed to be fun to watch. It is supposed to hurt. And that's what violence really does. The worst kind of violence in the media is the kind that comes off as OK or normal or funny when it isn't and shouldn't ever be.