|
MOVIE
REVIEW: NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
11/13/07
Do you remember
those villains? The ones that impacted you to the point that
you will never forget their evil stare or their harsh words.
Well, have I got a villain for you. This picture is a
refreshing take on an overdone plot dealing with drugs, drug
money, drug dealers, drug armies, the law, innocent
bystanders, and of course, the associated hit men. It is one
particular hit man, Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem), that
takes this picture to another level. He is one of the
smartest, fiercest, coldest, most methodical and ruthless
killers to ever draw blood on the big screen. “Just how
dangerous is he?” “Compared to what? The bubonic plague?” It
will not be surprising to see Javier get an Oscar nomination
for this role. Yeah, it was that good. This story is really
simple, but the way the story is laid out both visually and
verbally is what makes this movie so special. The
performances by Tommy Lee Jones as Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, Josh
Brolin as Llewelyn Moss, and Javier were stunning.
Independent films usually rely on quality performances to
keep it afloat and this one is no exception. Heck, this
movie doesn’t even have any background music (or what I call
intensity music) to help increase the intensity of a scene
so it really relies on the acting and the camera to keep you
tuned in and it does a great job of that. Actually no, I’m
wrong, gun fire IS the intensity music.
Llewelyn Moss, a humble Texan and war veteran, is out
hunting one day near the Rio Grande. As he tries to track
down one of his victims, he stumbles upon the aftermath of a
drug deal gone way wrong. A bunch of dead bodies, pick up
trucks, and bullet shells mark the spot. As he cautiously
investigates he finds a truck load of drugs and later finds
a case full of cash . . . about $2 million actually. With no
one alive around to claim the treasure, he takes the money
for himself. Bad move. Shortly after not only does he get
the Mexican drug armies and the law after him, he is
unfortunate to have Anton on his tail as well. Struggling to
survive, Llewelyn is determined to escape with the money.
Sheriff Bell comes into the picture as the dead bodies are
popping up everywhere and there seems to be some link to
Llewelyn due to his truck being found at the original crime
scene. Sheriff Bell seems to always be one step behind, but
he continues to inch closer and closer to tracking down
Llewelyn and the mystery man, Anton.
This film is visually stimulating. The camera shots and
angles give the viewer an interesting perspective of the
action. It truly accentuates the story and the acting. There
are some appropriately gloomy brown views of the open hilly
fields in Texas that transport you. That along with the
other locations such as your rinky dinky roadside motels to
your humble trailer parks help you relate to the characters
and their circumstances. The way the camera is used around
Javier heightens Anton’s power of intimidation. Overall, the
acting is stimulating as well. Josh Brolin has given one of
his best performances ever with this role. You are right by
his side cheering him on all the way and he does put up a
good fight.
If you are the type of person that doesn’t like those funky
endings that leave you saying “huh?” or “what?” or “that’s
it?”, be warned. I heard those words from a few people in
the theater including out of my own mouth. But don’t worry,
the rest of the movie is good enough to help cover this
discrepancy. Or maybe I just missed something. I haven’t
read the book and from what I’m hearing the movie is very
true to the book so it is meant to end that way. I don’t
know, you decide and let me know. As for the Directors Coen,
Ethan and Joel (Raising Arizona, Fargo, The Big Lebowski,
Intolerable Cruelty, The Ladykillers), add this one to their
resume under highly praised works. Anton asked one of his
potential victims: “What's the most you ever lost on a coin
toss?” Well if this coin toss leads you to not see this
movie, you will lose the experience of watching a work of
art.
Review By Cine Marcos
cinemarcos@smartcine.com
MORE MOVIE REVIEWS
>>>
People Review
No Country For Old Men
Rhoda Zdeblick |
0 |
I, too, was disappointed
(and surprised) when the movie ended so
abruptly.
You said 'the movie is good enough to
help cover this discrepancy'. Maybe this
is true, but it is hard to recommend a
movie like this to friends who ask my
opinion of it, without telling people
that the movie just 'ended' without any
closure. And yet, the performances were
great and it held my interest, even
though it was extremely violent.
It has been said that this is the best
Coen Brothers movie since "Fargo". As
much as I liked it, it can't hold a
candle to "Fargo" which was a gem. I
still remember specific performances and
dialogue from it, and I especially
enjoyed all the quirky characters. I
have replayed it many times and love the
regional dialect used by the
actors...........We have relatives from
that area, and the actors really did a
good job imitating their dialect.
Javier Bardem's character was described
several times in the movie. They
used many descriptive words. The only
one they didn't use was "EVIL", which
surprised me because he was one of the
most evil villains I've ever seen in a
movie.
I haven't read the book, but maybe they
left the ending open because a sequel is
in the works?? But I don't know how much
more blood and gore the theatergoers
could stomach in a sequel, could you? |
Robert Duckworth |
100 |
I understand why viewers
are left wondering what the ending
really is ... one gentleman at the
showing I attended actually stood up and
shouted out his protest ... but I think
those viewers miss the point. There is
no "discrepency" in the ending. (I will
try to explain while not giving away
plot, etc., and ruining things for those
who haven't seen the movie yet.)
The events of the case
that starts all the mayhem are fully
resolved by the end of the movie,
although the fate of the last person
confronted by Anton is left open to
question. (The main hint: What little
movement does Anton perform as he is
leaving the house? I think the movement
speaks volumes.) But I think the final
two conversations Tommy Lee Jones'
sheriff has have to be taken in tandem.
They seem disjointed from each other and
the rest of the movie, but there are
similar themes that run through both,
and in many ways they are connected.
They relate to the main story line more
in facing a certain ongoing environment
than specific details of the original
case. (Anton -- and his ilk -- exist,
and
so do their actions and the
ramifications, for example. But other
questions come up: Just who is the
figure on horseback? What is the light?
Why the sheriff's reaction to what he
believes will happen as his dream
scenario unfolds?)
I think the open-ended
"ending" is one of the delicious aspects
to the movie. Put that with the sparse
landscape, some scenes with more
suspense than in 10 drug
chase-and-murder mysteries, great
acting, enough realistic violence to
make you slink in your theatre seat and
one of the greatest villains ever and
you have a truly great movie. At least
in my book. |
Texas |
90 |
I can think of a few endings for the
movie that would leave me satisfied.
I would have gave this movie a 100, but
the ending left me with a bad taste in
my mouth. I am going to read the
book now. |
Bram Sinclair |
90 |
It doesn't end in a cliche. It had very
view in the movie at all. In ways it
could be seen a more realistic film. The
bad guy doesn't always get caught. Or it
could be seen as the actual telling of a
cop's "THe one that got away story"
(which is usually a backstory instead).
Sequels usually are bad ideas but seeing
this villain done with the right story
could really work. |
Unknown |
none |
It Well, let me just sum up all
the previous reviews / comments into a
short statement. This film is a
beautifully filmed Spagethetti Western
.FULL STOP - the
type you saw in th 1970's, except it is
updated a bit with modern film equipment
& techinques, editing etc…. It is still
a story of the common-garden variety. A
plot about a loner killer, stolen money
etc…Nothing new here (But I am sure the
original book had a lot more going for
it).
The Coen bros set out to make a great
movie to beat their own "Brother were
art…" They spent sooo much time with the
littlest details, some were 100%
superflous to the plot Like the Chicken
truck scene), they labored hard with
detailed close ups and step-by-step
action. They sweated over the suspense
and the chose their dialogue real well……
and it was a thrilling film for the
first 3/4 parts of it. EXCEPT… and i
am sure the Brothers will agree with
this - they realized that if they were
to continue with such flowery & painful
detail with this story, the film will be
running at maybe 5-6 hours long, like
the old Russian marathon movies.
So, quick… shorten the plot, kill off
everyone, no need to explain who killed
whom, or why a badly injured & bleeding
psycho can make his way from a dusty
town to the city, gain access to the big
mob boss, kill him, and then return to
the old New Mexico border town where an
old bored sheriff can't decide if he
should do his investigative duty and
catch the homicidal mainic as it seems
he is leaving plenty of dead bodies
about, or just go fishing.
The ending is an abysmal failure - it
doesn't fit into any meaningful artistic
ending (the Sopranos ending left you
with something) This one is a mock of a
mockery - I know the coens didn't run
out of money to finish it, but i think
they ran of patience with their own
"produce".Either that, or having TWO
Directors really killed the direction of
the
plot... a tug of War type of movie. How
can anyone build up the main characters
(brolin, Harelsen) and then drop them
withhout the slightest concern to the
plot??? Why spend time with unnecessary
detail when it could have been alloted
to the main framework. If they had
bothered stitching the mini- plots
together, it would have
made a pretty cool fiml - but certaily
NOT oscar material as it is touted to
be.
As is, it is a waste of time, waste of
money and an insult to intelligence
especially since they obviuosly had paid
heavily to promote it and have had
critics raise it to "classic" level. All
the kids hated it…. and that's a good
sign. This leaves just the pompous,
self-admiring critics to try and shove
down everyone's throat.
Ether Cohen on Jan 30, 2008 |
Alastair |
80 |
I haven't read the book on which this
film was based but I thought film was
very watchable The photography and
scenery shots were outstanding and
acting by Tommy Lee Jones and Javier
Bardem(who fully deserved his British
Bafta) was exceptional Like other
reviewers I thought the funky ending was
rather bizarre. I understand that there
may be a sequel book or film but with
the finale of the film apparently
approaching a violent cliimax the ending
with T Lee Jones alluding to his dream
then the film suddenly appearing to cut
was an anticlimax.Ideally the film
could have climaxed with T Lee Jones
character Sherriff Bell pulling himself
together and chasing Chigurh and ending
with a stand off between the two with
Bell coming out on top and apprehending
Chigurh. A final shot of Chigurh
sneakily escaping from prison could have
been a more satisfactory open ending!
Nevertheless a very good film |
THUR |
100 |
The movie is about old men. More
specifically the sheriff. The movie
started with him and ended with him. The
story line was consistent through out
and ended perfectly. It is not a movie
about a hunter,a killer,drugs,another
killer,or Mexican killers. |
CHAMP DEVERE |
100 |
I was never so tense while viewing a
movie. I didn't know what was wrong with
me. At the second viewing I realized
that silence not a movie score created
the drama. Brilliant cinema photography
as well. How about the shot of the
peanut wrapper un-scrunching? |
Movie |
100 |
Wow is all I have to say.The ending kind
of dissapointed me.But other than that,
it was frighteningly fantastic! |
Basan |
90 |
Amazing cinematography - loved the
cattlegun, hose and tank (carried around
as personal equipment). Should have
showed Llewelyn Moss's demise. As for
the ending: why the t-bone accident?
Should have ended at the porch scene
checking his boots. |
Submit Your Movie Review
|
Director: Ethan Coen
Joel Coen
Writer: Ethan Coen (Screenplay)
Joel Coen
(Screenplay)
Cormac Mccarthy
(Novel)
Genre: Thriller
Duration: 2hr 2mins
Staring: Woody Harrelson
Javier Bardem
Josh Brolin
Tommy Lee Jones
Kelly Macdonald
Producer: Scott Rudin
Ethan Coen
Joel Coen
Distributor: MIRAMAX
Rating:
R for strong graphic violence and
some language
Release Date: November 9, 2007
OFFICIAL WEBSITE
VIEW TRAILER
BOOK
| |
Home |
DVD |
Advertising
|
Press Kits
submissions |
Publishing
All movie titles, pictures, etc... are
registered trademarks and/or copyrights of their respective
holders
Copyright ©2007
The Entertainment Report Group
|