Every once in a while a movie will grab you by the throat with its excellence. No Country for Old Men is one of those movies. It grabs hold and digs into your brain, daring you not to watch. I have not quite worked out all of the details, but there is no denying the film's greatness. With their latest outing, the Coen brothers may just have crafted the finest film of their career (I say may because there are a couple I still need to see).
On its surface it is a thriller about who has the money, but beyond the mechanics and all of the surface thrills is a film filled with fascinating characters who have to make dire decisions. This is a movie that you will not be able to take your eyes off of until the final moment, a moment which will likely leave you with more questions than you'd think, considering where it all started.
Llewellyn Moss (Josh Brolin) is out hunting one evening when he comes across a circled group of trucks, not unlike a wagon train brought together for the protection of its passengers. What would normally be seen as a sign of protection is anything but in the hands of the Coens (working from a novel by Cormac McCarthy). A closer look reveals numerous dead bodies. "They even shot the dog," a character remarks later on. A curious Llewellyn makes a closer inspection of the scene, uncovering a stash of neatly stacked packages of drugs (cocaine? heroin? does it really matter?) and one badly injured, yet still alive Mexican.
Realizing that where there are drugs and dead bodies there must be money, Llewellyn heads off deeper into the desert terrain, discovering a man, dead, beneath a shade tree in the possession of a satchel filled with money. Inside the case is two million dollars, money that Llewellyn has decided to claim as his own. What he did not count on was Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem), a psychopathic killer intent on reclaiming the money. It is never made clear just what his connection to the money is, but one could safely assume that he was involved in setting up the deal that went bad.
Article comments
1 - Triniman
Possibly the best film that I have seen this year with the worst ending.
2 - Kuldeep
Are you interested in writing movie reviews? Check-out this opportunity at MoviePress.
3 - DJ
CAUTION: SPOILERS
I have to agree with Triniman. Great movie; horrible ending. What irritates me the most is the attitude of the intellectuals who claim those who didn't like it are "stupid." They claim we all want a typical Hollywood blockbuster happy ending.
Not so.
I want and ending that ties the story together. The whole movie had me on the edge of my seat, watching incredible acting performances. Then it was if the movie reel broke down and the lights came on.
The more I think and read about it the more I realize it wasn't about the drug money and the chase, but the character played by Tommy Lee Jones. If that's the case, the viewer needs more of him, and more than just a blabbering dissertation about a dream he had; which was supposed to be the point of the movie (or so they say).
If the bad guy walks away and justice is not served, then fine. But there needs to be a point. Apparently that rested in TLJ's decision that he decided catching the crook is nowhere near important as saving his own life and sanity. If that's the case, we need more of this theme interjected throughout the film; not in random appearances with dialogue that leads nowhere.
First 110 minutes: A
Last 10 minutes: F. I'm sorry, but I can't accept a lack of ending as "brilliant."
4 - JD
DJ writes:
Last 10 minutes: F. I'm sorry, but I can't accept a lack of ending as "brilliant."
That's OK DJ. On the behalf of everyone who liked the film, I accept your apology. You are forgiven for not being capable of recognizing an incredible film when you see it.
5 - RC
"Incredible?" It had the makings for an "incredible" film. The rising action was built up beautifully for what could have been the most powerful scene of any film in recent memory. But the scene never happens. And the key question is left unanswered: Where is the money? And the answer to the question is not important because "the money" is the point. Rather, the answer to the question is crucial because it is the tie that binds it all together and answers the questions related to the other characters: Why does TLJ hang it up? Where does Javier go from there? What happens to the Mexicans? Aside from those unanswered questions, though, there's never one face-to-face encounter between any of these fantastically crafted characters. No face-to-face exchange of dialogue. It's a shame, and I think a cop-out by the writer from what would have been a formidable task, yet a brilliant accomplishment. In closing, these "want-to-be industry" simpletons applauding "brilliant" sound about as cinematically sophisticated as the Guinness commercial characters shouting the same thing. It's a toss-up between this film and the Sopranos finale for worst cinematic ending.
6 - Roderick Jaynes
Dude -- seriously. You don't get it. I'm not just coping out and saying you are dumb. You keep looking and asking for all this closure and all the ways it all ties together. You want nice clear, clean answers to all these questions.... and yet, this film does not give them to you.
(wait for it)
THAT'S THE POINT.
This is a work of art. (All good films are). Art is about (amongst other things) what it does to its viewer. YES, this film leaves you with nagging questions... and... YES, that's the point. Try to sum up what the Coen bros are trying to do with this film (if you can) and then ask yourself, "Does not having all the questions answered fit into that?" If you get the first part anywhere nearly right, you'll see how perfect the ending (and the whole film) is.
This film is one of the best ever made.
7 - J
can someone tell me who took the heroin?