*** Official NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN Review Thread (1 Viewer)

[Jon Lidolt]

I got to see the movie at the Toronto Film Festival this week and can confirm that the Coen Brothers are definitely at the top of their game. Not to mention that Javier Bardem portrays a monster with such a sick mind that it almost makes Norman Bates in Psycho seem normal.

 

[Don Solosan]

I guess I'm one of those people who likes the comedic aspects of the Coen Bros' films rather than the crime/violence stuff. This seemed to be pretty plot heavy -- lots of people getting from point A to B to C, and a lot of seemingly random details. The ending was a snoozer for me, too.

I agree that Bardem was awesome. But it seemed that he was lifted from some supernatural flick and dropped into this fairly "realistic" movie.

 

[teapot2001]

Really great movie! It's filled with lots of brilliant stuff.

~T

 

[MikeRS]

-I'd need more viewings but it seems like their best and most accomplished work.

-There's about 3 or 4 suspense set-pieces in this flick that are pinnacle. I'm talking Psycho, Jaws, Halloween level of execution. This ain't hyperbole.

-The Deakins cinematography (first Coen feature in scope) is mesmerizing.

-The opening sequence with Moss reminded me of 2001's "Dawn Of Man". Actually alot of sequences in this film reminded me of Kubrick. It must be the big chunks of primal visual storytelling not reliant on dialogue. I know the Coens wanted to do a whole feature like this years back ("To The White Sea"). We missed out.

-While Bardem is getting alot of press, Josh Brolin and Tommy Lee Jones are just as great.

-This would make an excellent triple feature with "Blood Simple" and "Fargo".

 

[TerryRL]

As I stated in another thread, "No Country for Old Men" gets my first 5 star rating of the year. I'm in agreement with Mike that the movie is probably the best thing the Coens have ever done and that's really saying something considering their extremely impressive resume. I don't throw the word masterpiece around lightly, but 'No Country' certainly qualifies in my opinion.

What can you say about the performances of Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, Tommy Lee Jones, and Kelly Macdonald? All four deserve major kudos for their work here. I expect that Bardem will be the one who gets the most acclaim because his performance as Chigurh will probably end up going down as one of the greatest movie villains in history.

'No Country' goes wide on the 21st and I'll definitely be seeing it again. Absolutely phenomenal movie.

 

[Robert Crawford]

This thread is now the Official Review Thread for "No Country for Old Men". Please post all HTF member reviews in this thread.

Any other comments, links to other reviews, or discussion items will be deleted from this thread without warning!

If you need to discuss those type of issues then I have designated an Official Discussion Thread.



Crawdaddy

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I'm not the Coen(s) nut many are. I do agree that most of their films gain appreciation with each viewing. But I've only seen a few of their films more than once. I certainly need to rewatch Fargo and The Big Lebowski.

That said, Raising Arizona is one of the best movies I've ever seen, and I've never seen a film by them I did NOT like.

I've also never read a book by Cormac McCarthy. People I respect a lot

No Country for Old Men is a fantastic film that I didn't really like as I walked out of the theater. I tend to expect greatness immediately, and usually greatness has to linger for a while. No Country did not have to linger very long, but it did require some pieceing together of previous scenes, previous dialogue, and previous structure. Once you see the film with the end in mind, it all works out beautifully (if quite devastatingly).

Technically, the film is a swiss watch. Immaculately constructed, filmed, and acted - there is no way around that. Even as I initially walked out, a bit dumbstruck, I was still floored by the film. It contains some exceptional sequences, and I loved watching each of the scenes unfold. Deakins work should receive critical notice, even if the tone of the film hurts it's chances in other "categories".

The ending went a very specific way, foreshadowed numerous times in previous scenes, but gently...what looked like simple characterization and tone-building was actually thematic layering. As I worked out why the Coens' made the choices they did, it started to click. It's a dark movie, and not a particularly happy one. There are certainly numerous moments of grim humor (and some regular humor as well).

I agree with all of the praise the cast is getting. Bardem gets the showiest role, and just completely nails it. But as stated, every other member of the cast does a good to outstanding job. Even Milton

I don't think I love it as much as other folks do, but I do admire the hell out of it.

9.5/10,
Chuck

 

[Jose Martinez]

I finally had a chance to see this film today and I'm still trying to rate it. Walking out, I would have given it three and a half stars out of five. But now that I've had a chance to think about it more, it 's either a four or four and a half star movie. I'm going to have to give a few more days to linger. I do however, appreciate it's boldness and the directorial choices made in the third act. The performances were exceptional. Javier Bardem's character may possibly be the best screen villain since Hanibal Lecter. I really liked Josh Brolin's performance, however.


EDIT: OK, after much thinking (I can't sleep because of it), I've decided to give this film a 5 star rating. It's boldness truly elevates it above many films. I've got to see it again!

***** / *****

 

[Brett_M]

As stated previously, this could be THE Coen Bros movie. I loved the filmed as it unfolded. The performances are stellar. The cinematography is perfection. The third act left me puzzled and disappointed, though. The payoff is not Hollywood-style. I wanted a happy ending.

There are enough brilliant sequences to warrant a 5 star rating, though.

The key to the whole thing is Tommy Lee Jones.

EDIT: The more I think about it, the less I am puzzled or disppointed by the end of the film. It's phenomenal from start to finish.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I saw this film a few days ago, but needed to see it once more before I shared my thoughts on it, and it is a film that needs to be seen twice as the dialogue and visual information falls into place much more firmly upon the second viewing, and it will swirl in your head long after leaving the theater after the first viewing.

The film's final act is somewhat telegraphed in Sherrif Tom's narration that opens the film, but the ride the Coen brothers takes the viewers on is so absorbing and immersive at times, it's easy to forget the early stuff, and then when it comes back around full circle, inside your head you'll go "whoa..."

In some ways, it's a look at the escalation of violence in society (somewhat timeless, though the story is set in 1980), be it for greed, anger, meanness, or vanity as a trigger for it, and how those in law enforcement who are fortunate to have a longer view of history will eventually have to embrace the ever-evolving and raising of the stakes when it comes to violence, or step aside, because the value of human life has slowly eroded with the escalation of acceptable violence in society in service to other vices and malevolence.

The Coen brothers adapted this book by Cormac McCarthy, and in doing so, they get to imbue in the character of Moss a stubborn streak of humanity (in over his head, but given the circumstances of finding a suitcase of money connected to a drug deal gone bad, can't really elicit much help, placing himself and his wife in a catch-22) in light of being hunted by Chigurh, who is a primal force of violence (when required, never afraid to push the envelope of violence, but also accepting of the nature of chance for life's uncertainties), and is always adaptive to his surroundings, but even has a sense of honor in the midst of the mayhem he so easily creates because his propensity to use violence is so far higher than regular folks.

The cat-n-mouse portion of the film between Moss and Chigurh for 4/5 of the film is engaging and very involving as the tension levels just continue to build from scene to scene. But it's Sherrif Tom's hunt for Moss (and by default Chigurh) that concludes in the final section that lends a quiet but powerful resonance to the film's overall observation of the erosion of the value of life in service to greed, power and violence.

I give it 4 stars, or a grade of A.

 

[Chris Atkins]

10/10

I'm struck by how this film is, thematically, quite similar to The Fountain. Except this one takes the grim view of life/death, while The Fountain opted for the more optimstic view.

Cinematography is stunning. Everything else is great too.

 

[rich_d]

Darn Fine Film

 

[Dennis Castro]

This is a FILM.

It does Linger and the more I think about the more I am falling in love with it.


The people around me during the final act were getting restless and murmuring and making comments during Lee's final scene and it took me out of it a bit and then bang the film's over.

I hope to see this again while home on vaca over the Holidays. Hopefully I can get to an early Matinee were it's nice and quite and I can engross myself in it.

 

[Hollywoodaholic]

I enjoyed the film and agree with many of the posts here that this had some of the best suspense sequences seen on film in a long time. And there wasn't a note of music necessary or used to artificially build that suspense (except of course the funny moment where the Mariachi's were playing for Moss until they saw the blood). Just masterful directing and editing.

But someone please explain to me what happened to Chigurh when Tommy Lee Jones character entered the motel room he was in. He disappeared. He couldn't have gone out the bathroom window or the vent and was not behind the door anymore. Was this all to emphasis that he was indeed some sort of metaphorical ghost of violence? Did the book portray him more as some supernatural force than a flesh and blood killer? I wasn't sure what the Coen's were trying to do with that moment.

(Admin note - please followup in this discussion thread.)

But a great film, nonetheless.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I just saw this and I must say that while it was a very good film on almost all fronts, and I stress almost, I was let down by the ending, it felt like the entire third act was missing. Very unsatisfying.

While Tommy Lee Jones was great as usual in the end his character felt useless to me, he contributed very little to the hunt for Javier and then he just...retired, the rest of the film it felt like he was just, well, there with nothing left to do but make it to the credits.

Javier Bardem is another story, rarely have I gotten a more creepy vibe from a screen villain than the nutcase he portrays here, a truly souless entity that comes off more like the angel of death himself rather than a mere mortal.

It was a good thriller but I have seen better.