NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN

Cole's Rating: ★★★ ½

Director: Joel & Ethan Coen
Year: 2007
Cast: Josh Brolin, Javier Bardem, Tommy Lee Jones
Genre: Crime/Drama/Thriller
MPAA Rating: R

        Title’s are important. They’re not as important as the film itself, but I couldn’t tell you how many times I surpassed a movie I didn’t know much about because of its mere title. When you hear the title No Country For Old Men, it paints an image of a brutal town. It’s no country for old men, and we are taught that by the opening scene of Tommy Lee Jones’ voiceover. He talks about the gruesome people around in the world, and later goes on to admit that he is outmatched in this type of violent atmosphere. Before I begin talking more about this movie, I’ll say that it’s incredibly deserving of its Best Picture award, it’s the Coen Brothers’ best film by far, and its ending is a contender with Mean Streets. Enough said?

        I’d say so. Josh Brolin plays a poor hunter that lives near the Rio Grande, who stumbles along over two million in cash. But he’s not the only one after the money, Javier Bardem plays the psychotic killer after the cash who will stop at nothing (though we’re never sure why he’s so determined); Jones plays the cop in charge of the case and what’s going on. Fargo is a good film; but this is better. At times, it seems as if the Coen’s thought about what they did with Fargo, and decided to improve upon it. The police officer, the good guy, the bad guy, the money, and an offbeat setting are all things that both films possess. However, this adds the factor of suspense, enthrallment, and a greater matter of severity. There were few times when my heart stopped racing, and less room for laughter, which created a more dramatic atmosphere very suited to the plot line and the time/setting (to my liking).

        Originally (about half a year ago), I didn’t like this movie. I watched about twenty or thirty minutes of it, and turned it off distastefully. I thought the characters were cliched; I thought the plot line was minimalistic; and I thought the movie was, in essence, a waste of time. I think that was before I saw A Good Day To Die Hard. To be quite honest, I’ve come a long way as a film fanatic since then, and I’m not ashamed to admit that I didn't know enough to write No Country For Old Men up as a bad film. I'm glad I saw it again, because I realize that I was purely entertained by this movie. It's very well done, and that's why. I now see the plot line as simplistic, yet brilliant. I see the characters while relatively textbook, still important and backboned. And I see the movie as an overall thrilling experience. Before I saw the film this time, I turned it over and saw the Roger Ebert had said, “Flawless”. I don’t know if I’d go that far, but I’d definitely say that it’s a work of brilliance: a masterpiece. I don’t use that term loosely, so when I say it, I mean it. If you do end up thinking the things I thought about it the first time I saw it, please stay for the duration of the film. The ending is a knockout that will haunt you forever, and improve your opinion of the extremely talented people that contributed to this film’s making, whether it be actors or producers.

-Written by Cole Pollyea