A cloaked, gutsy masterpiece, No Country for Old Men is a reflection on unfathomable evil shrouded in a ‘found money’ storyline. This could have been the type of throwaway film from that genre that Money for Nothing, the forgotten mid-90s John Cusack film was. Instead, the Coen Brothers have the pluck to make the hunt for the money next-to-irrelevant. They have the single most distinctive and haunting villain in decades and make the story ultimately about a crusty old sheriff pondering retirement. Not only that, but they turn a blind eye to the resolution! And I don’t recall a single song for the soundtrack, but the film is drowning in silences… elongated silences that seem to stretch on forever and only amplify the thrilling nature of these scenes.
It’s good vs. evil. And there is no winner.
Then there’s the cinematography. Roger Deakins found museum-worthy images in the cracks and the dirt of New Mexico and Texas. His ability to transform a beaten-down house or a dust-covered field into pure works of art is uncanny. This is pristine, perfect filmmaking with everyone doing their job to the best of their ability.
The acting included. Javier Bardem and Tommy Lee Jones, two exceptional actors with exceptional careers, have never been better. And where did Josh Brolin come from as Llewelyn Moss? He’s turning in one of the better performances of the year. No doubt about it.
Some people have issues with the ending, but I’m not one of them. The good guys don’t always win, no one walks away unaffected, evil isn’t vanquished and for some it’s hard to make heads or tails of a world where that happens.
It’s flawless, just like the film.
Monday, November 26, 2007
No Country for Old Men (Joel & Ethan Coen, 2007)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I just had to say that I think this is one of my Mulligan's best reviews. Even a person who had no interest in seeing this at first, including myself, would most likely have some curiosity after reading such a positive and eloquent response that praises and acknowledges this grave, yet spellbinding film. I am one proud fiance. :)
So I've seen it twice now so I think I can firmly discuss this film.
It is a masterpiece, but I do think it is flawed, but I'll get to that later. For now lets discuss the positive, and there is a lot.
The cast is perfect. Everyone here brings there A game, and the three leads deserve nominations. But only Javier Bardem should win. He has created the single most disturbing unrelentless villian perhaps ever as Anton Chigurr. He is like a demented Pepe le Pew who keeps coming and coming, but never runs. He has absolutely no qualms about dealing death amongst his chosen, just as long as fate deems it such. The masterful dialogue between him and the clerk is one for the books. We know the stakes, and the clerk knows it too without being told, it is a tense scene that really evokes a response from you, the viewer. We sit there in utter suspense as his fate is revealed. Anton Chigurr has principles that he stands by, which leads to a very depressing ending, and you best believe he will uphold them.
Roger Deakins cinematography shows all the dirt and grim that clouds the screen in such visually arresting glory. He manages to find beauty among the dead vast plains. He use of reflections was on par with Hitchcock's Stangers on a Train. Best one was Sheriff Bell and Anton, each on one side of the door, looking at each others slight figure in the now removed lock. The imagery is so subtle that you are never overwhelmed, but are completely immersed in it. I lived in Texas. It never looked so desolate, yet so majestic at the same time. This is hell, and the playground for the Reaper to play coin tricks.
This films, much like most Coen films, also has a wicked sense of humor. The lines uttered here got such a big laugh from the audience that I was proud of them for actually getting the humor. But for all the humor here, it is still a thriller, and it is so damn suspenseful. Scene after scene of silence as Anton chases Brolin's Llewelyn from motel to motel. They really are works of art, that don't go overboard, but only cement to reality they are portraying.
My one complaint is with the ending. I know most reviewers have commented on it and for me it has nothing to do with it not being all nice and tidy, it hasn't nothing to do with it not being a happy ending, I like a movie that has balls to end on a sad note (see The Mist for that). No, for me it was anti climatic. That is all. Once a key character is gone, the rest of the film suffers on a very basic thriller level. The rest of the film is acted wonderfully, I never found any of it to be excessive or boring, I thought it was just not riveting in the same way it had been throughout. Fargo ended on perhaps its most memorable scene as its climax with a denouement to follow. Here the climax perhaps never came or if it did it happened 20 minutes before the film was over. I think the Bros. knew this and tried to end it with a thrilling car crash that has me scratching my head over its meaning and purpose. That is the one moment that I can't wrap my head around. Why end it like that? Was it karma? Was it fate? I just don't really get it. It is done well and I like Anton's response to the situation, but it felt somewhat unnecessary to me. But I know there is more to it, but I can't really grasp it myself, so I would be interested to hear some other people thoughts on it.
Overall still among the top five of the year easily. Maybe the best if I just analyze the ending a bit more. The rest is pitch perfect.
Okay let me try to explain the ending, at least as far as I can make of it...
The last 15 minutes of No Country for Old Men are there for one major purpose. To reinvent this film as something other than a just your straightforward 'found money' film, like I said in my original post.
By practically ignoring the resolution of Josh Brolin's character and shifting the entire attention towards Chigurh and Tommy Lee Jones' sheriff characters we see a different aspect of the story. Something more than your typical chase film, we are watching how good never really vanquishes evil. How evil persists and good men question their ability to face what they know is out there.
Now, if you're referring simply to the car accident at the end of the film... you can call that fate - because it is - Chigurh himself made the point earlier in that extended speech with the clerk that that quarter and that clerk had to come together at just that moment to make that life-or-death decision of heads or tails... the car is no different.
I also look at it as Cormac McCarthy's toying with comeuppance (yes, this is taken directly from the book and is not a Coen's addition). Similar to how he's playing around with the constructs of the 'found money' storyline, he's messing around with the idea of a happy ending. The evil character is supposed to be eliminated. He's suppose to die. The car crash I felt was what was supposed to happen to restore the balance in the world... and McCarthy is just saying 'that isn't gonna happen here' and you won't get any easy resolutions. Chigurh lives.
And evil persists.
I completely agree that it spins the genre on its head, but from strictly a thriller standpoint it is anti-climatic. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate it or find it through-provoking because I do, but the movie doesn't end with quite an impact as say Gone Baby Gone did. It left me satisfied and mesmerized, but I don't find myself putting myself in the shoes of the characters quite like I did during Gone Baby Gone.
I liked Ted's thought (and I hope I'm paraphrasing this properly) that the crash is used merely not as a act of fate, but to show that (as you mentioned) evil lives. That crash still didn't stop Anton, and he lives to see another day just as evil lives to see another day. Clearly he acts like Death here, much like in Seventh Seal. Perhaps he has a bit more of a supernatural context to him than the Coens will show.
Still the movie haunts you and it is easily among the best of the year.
To me, the end is the entire point of the whole story. Sheriff Bell's dream sums up the movie beautifully and is the very theme which the movie is based around. You can't control fate....you simply wander through the darkness of life with a torch, only ever seeing a few feet ahead. His father was sheriff just like he was, and he's past his prime and out of his league...trying to make sense of a society he can't understand. But there is also comfort in knowing that Bell is walking in his father's footsteps, that he is not the first, as it is literally described in the dream with his father leading the way through the darkness.
The car accident and Moss' death are just there to accent the idea of fate and how inescapable it is. In my opinion, the conversation between Bell and Ellis, and Bell and Loretta are by far, bar none, the best scenes in the whole film, and the reason that this is my favorite film I've seen to date.
Post a Comment