Your rating & reviewRate / Review this movie
BY delarge101 superstar
The storytelling isn't exactly enthralling, but terrific performances and brutal tension bring out the best in this Coen Brother's thriller-western. The script is intelligently written, and the way the film is directed emits gut-wrenching anxiety.
This is a fascinating set of story lines but you're better off reading the book if you can't understand the movie. The Coen brothers have taken four significant shortcuts that are like stutters, stumbles, or myoclonic jerks (the Coens are so expert they can literally sleepwalk the production of a movie) in... More the flow of the film. For example, how does the killer find the killer sent to kill him - if you want to know then read the book.Hide
The film is based on the 2003 novel by Cormac McCarthy, starring Josh Brolin, Tommy Lee Jones, Woody Harrelson and Javier Bardem. ‘No Country for Old Men’ is about the violence and mayhem that result after a hunter (Brolin), comes across dead bodies, a stash of heroin... More and more than 2 million dollars cash near the Rio Grande; an obvious drug-deal gone wrong. Instead of doing the right thing, the hunter decides to pocket it all for himself and from there; things go from bad to worse. A seriously disturbed killer is on his tail and a jaded cop (Jones) who seems to always be three steps behind.
The film has an eclectic mix of peaks and troughs that leave you transfixed throughout. The Coen brothers haven’t made a film this gripping since Fargo and with their quintessential structural trademark of breaking conventional story, this film will rattle the most settled viewer. They have achieved an unpredictable and disturbing film that is coated in paramount originality that stays true to the original story.
However, the loyalty to the viewer is tarnished and compromised in favour for a stronger and grittier story and characters. There is no real sense of pay-off for the audience. Justice is not apparent in this film and may leave many patient, mainstream viewers angry and annoyed. The story doesn't gratify the viewers need for good to overcome evil. But it delivers everything else and has done well at the Oscars.
Moreover, the Coens are not the type of film-makers to cave into studio bosses or viewer demands. And the result is a film that has kept true to the author’s vision, their need for originality, critical acclaim and Oscar awards.Hide
Left in fits of laughter that we'd sat through it and it never got any good. wondered who we would send to it as punishment.
Will be more careful in future.
BY Brian1 superstar
"Flicks" review indicates an infatuation with the Coen Bros.
I cannot find the merit suggested by their review, but suggest you read it and then go see for yourself.
The first half had me on the edge of my seat and here I was looking for another half of thrilling suspense and it flopped. It lost all direction and looked like somebad patch up job. Did they run out of ideas? run out of money? Nothing flowed, nothing worked.
save your money for a movie where the directors don't sell out, and the wannabe artistic types don't hype it up. Shame on them.
The characterisation of the two leads (and a half if you count Tommy Lee's sheriff) is done brilliantly and the movie takes next to no time to drag you in with an intensely watchable first half. I'd go as far as to say that the first two-thirds of the movie set a new standard for the thriller genre, as rarely... More have I been so drawn into a story as I have this manhunt.
It plays out like one of those bad dreams where you can't shake a baddie, and in Javier Bardem's Anton Chigurh the silver screen has been given one of its most absolutely terrifying baddies yet. Goodbye Hannibal Lecter, by rights Chigurh should replace you in the lexicon as a name associated with psychopaths.
So why did they mess up the last third? I'll try to avoid spoilers here, but they could have given us the plot twist in a less mind-boggling way and still adequately put across the film's ultimate meaning. Instead we get David-Lynched with a was-he-in-the-room was-he-not-in-the-room psychological shambles.
Unlike a few reviewers who seemed to think the movie ran a bit slowly, I was left wanting more. A movie that's so well paced for two thirds shouldn't just have a "beers lead to more beers" moment and drunkenly shift tack the way it did. Million Dollar Baby did that and I'd list it as the worst Best Picture winner I've ever seen. No Country for Old Men survives being ruined, but leaving out the movie's pivotal action scene, and a couple of other linking scenes which would have drawn us towards the conclusion better, left me asking questions for the last week.
Suppose it's a good sign that film can still make us think so hard.Hide
I actually fell asleep in this movie it is so tedious - it is certainly violent but the story stutters along jumping from murder to murder. Lay down and avoid it. Oh - it probably won an best film because it looks arty, but this doesn't save it from being the worst film I've seen in years.
BY Bernie-Harfleet nobody
This was not the case with ‘No Country For Old Men’, this could well be the best American film we see this year. Sadly part of its greatness being accentuated by the by the numbers filmmaking we see coming out of the great USA. ... More This film was so foreign to their current filmmaking trends it could have been subtitled.
This film had so many glowing reviews its hard not to be repetitive. What stood out for me (apart from script, direction, acting, and photography) was the sound mix. There was little music to suggest how we should feel, but from the sound of the desert to the unfolding of a screwed up lolly wrapper, the use of accentuated natural sound was brilliant.
As for acting, many have noted Javier and Tommy Lee as stand out performances, yes they were great but I’d like to put my hand up for Josh Brolin. He was the centre to the film, an ordinary man, whose unordinary choices created the films narrative.Hide