Pages Navigation Menu


no_country_for_old_menNO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
Written and Directed by Joel & Ethan Coen

Starring Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem and Kelly McDonald

Llewelyn Moss: Can’t help but compare yourself to the ol’ timers. Can’t help but wonder how’d they do in these times.

The Coen Brothers have been making movies for over 20 years now. NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is their twelfth feature together. While they were once considered princely collaborators held at the highest esteem by film enthusiasts the world over, they have recently been the victims of their own identity crisis. Caught between their signature exploration of all things quirky and abnormal found in the parts of America thought to be forgotten, and the demanding pressures of delivering bankable Hollywood fare, the Coens finished by delivering sub-par work that tarnished their lustrous reputation. The film enthusiasts thought they might have lost great talents to Hollywood while Hollywood wasn’t even sure they wanted them. What were these “aging” filmmakers to do? They could have polished off another Tom Hanks picture and crossed their fingers. They could have appealed to their fans and told another tale of the idiosyncrasies of those living in the middle of nowhere. They could have tried appeasing both parties by attempting THE BIG LEBOWSKI 2. Instead, they did none of these things. No, instead, the Coen Brothers crafted a film that is unlike any film they have ever made and is also perhaps the best film they’ve ever made.


Translating Cormac McCarthy’s novel about the relationship between the hunter and the hunted to the screen may be the smoothest decision these boys have made in years. Not only does it allow for the brothers to explore the grim sides of characters consumed by money and an unnerving peace derived from killing, but NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN also leaves the door open for an interpretive commentary on the Coens career itself. Allow me to explain by painting a picture from the film. Llewellyn Moss (Josh Brolin) aims his rifle at an unsuspecting animal grazing alongside the herd. He is right now in charge, in control, the hunter. He fires and misses, thus beginning his steady descent into ruin. He moves toward the spot where his prey once stood only to find the site of a drug deal massacre. Here, he innocently stumbles upon an enormous amount of money. He picks it up and goes without realizing the hell that is about to be brought upon him. He inadvertently becomes the hunted. He spends the remainder of the film calculating and executing different attempts to regain the superior position he once held. The comparisons are subtle and come about naturally rather than existing as the initial basis for the film to grow out of, reinforcing their genuine nature. I could explain my logic behind this analogy but that would be very un-Coen like.


Another consistency throughout the Coen Brothers’ careers is the elevated caliber of talent they attract to their diverse projects. With their writing at the top of its game, performances by Brolin, Javier Bardem and Tommy Lee Jones are pushed to the heights of their potential. Moss is a quiet man, focused and constantly thinking about what his next play will be. He has no time for ego, only function, and though most of his motivation is to avoid drawing attention to himself, Brolin’s interpretation cannot help but capture our notice. For the second time this year (in conjunction with his slimy crooked cop turn in AMERICAN GANGSTER), Brolin reinvigorates his skills by inhabiting Moss fully as an instinctual and reactionary being. While Jones is also impressive as a police officer resigned to following the action without any possibility of curbing the outcome, it is Bardem’s performance as Anton Chigurh that will leave audiences with a haunting chill after experiencing it. His portrayal of a psychopathic hunter is both disturbing and riveting. This is a man who enjoys torturing his victims mentally by asking them questions meant to expose the inconsistencies in the way they live their lives before ushering them out of this world. He abides by some form of ethical code that only makes sense in his own mind and fully justifies his killings. His adherence to this code is what sends him to an internal state of ecstasy as he chokes a man and stares intently at the ceiling. The hunter is always frightening but Bardem is worse; he’s wholly unsettling.


NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN is entirely disconcerting but is somehow still a tranquil experience. There is a normality amidst the unrest that thrives in the plain, natural manner in which the story unfolds. The chase is constantly surprising without ever seeming forced. Each move made makes perfect sense but is not seen coming. On this level, even their formal execution of this film speaks to the trajectory of their career. Who knew that leaving quirk behind for harrowing humour and a story that serves itself instead of as a platform for character, would invigorate the Coens method and assert their place as two of the greatest American filmmakers operating in a country thought not to have any place for them? I like to think they did. In doing so, they have also made a movie for a sharp adult audience in a country bent on catering to all things youthful and disposable.


Your turn!

How many sheep would you give No Country for Old Men?



  1. Excellent review. Very well-written and in a clean style which I admire.

    I had the pleasure of seeing No Country two times so far and I was quite impressed. Most notably, the performance of Bardem as the psychotic and indestructible serial killer. He will definitely receive an Oscar nomination. The rest of the cast may not be at Oscar level but they are very good.

    It’s just refreshing that we still have filmmakers in America who are willing to produce films that don’t cater to mainstream, commercial America.

  2. This movie is good but could have been great. The ending was alittle shady and i wish they did something more. As for lachlan saying “America has fallen deeply in to what is now a very spoiled country. We can never look at a film for it’s artistic and cinematic value, but we wait to be entertained.” I think some people don’t see the artistc and cinematic value but all in all, it is a movie and i should feel entertained. Otherwise I would be doing something else to blow my time. I do like the Javier Bardem as the hit man. Both the gun and that stun bolt gun were some great weapons that he used. The movie for me was great until the shocking ending of no ending. But still allowing me to use my creative mind……..i guess……..

  3. Review off the mark…
    Lets start with a couple of mistakes in the review first.
    Sheriff Ed Tom Bell made the comment, “Can’t help but compare yourself to the ol’ timers. Can’t help but wonder how’d they do in these times”….not Lewellyn Moss.

    Second, Lewellyn Moss did not fire and miss. He hit his target, the game simply ran off and he began to track it, a common occurence during hunting. However in this occurrence he was side tracked by the wounded dog when he got to the game tracks.

    Now for the analogies…
    I would not describe Anton Chigurh as a man who enoys torturing his victims. He simply sees it as a neccessary part of his job as a result of chance or neccesity as he goes through life. If he enjoyed torturing them he most likely would have taken more of the opportunies presented.

    As far as Jones portraying a police officer folloing the action resigned to the fact of not being able to curb the outcome is premature. It is through the length of the story oes Jones finally realize this and not from the very outset. It is one of the primary reasons the country has become no place for old men and he moves on to the pasture in the end without any real conclusion.

  4. We watched it on TMN last weekend.


    I guess we were expecting more.

  5. Interesting you don’t see this film as a character study. To me it is their most comprehensive and formal one. The fate of the money seems entirely secondary to how the characters react to each other. If they had wrapped up the story at the end the whole thing would have felt contrived to me.
    I also agree with Anonymous when she/he says they feel that Chigurh doesn’t get off on torturing people. I think he sizes people up immediately and decided right then and there is they need to die. If he’s not sure he’ll do the coin toss.

Leave a Reply to Chris Cancel reply