Enthralling film by the Coen Brothers. Their incredible taste in storytelling is amazing. Loved the performances by all three principals. Their best work since the incredible Fargo, in my opinion.

Terrific movie - found my self laughing at inappropriate moments - the dialogue is sparse, economic and right thru the heart. Bardem IS a bad-ass fab actor!!

Brilliant film. Outstanding casting, great characters. The direction is superb. A fabulous film that has something to say! NOT FOR THE AVERAGE MOVIE GOER WHO LIKES THE formula films that the studios pass off as filmaking.

No Country for Old Men is absolutely brilliant. All the performances were mesmerizing and had me looking at their every movement, face, gesture. This is about as flawless of an adaptation as it gets. The best part of the movie was its suspense making every scene so strong. The movie manages to draw the viewer in and keep him/her glued to their seat eyes fixated on the movie screen. This is most likely the best American movie of 2007.… Expand

The film "No country for Old Men" was recommended by the metacritic as a great movie. I'm sorry but it was a completely gratuitous blood porn giving a pass to gross police incompetence of the "lone wolf" sheriff and his "country wisdom". The affect of this genre on our society is to view this casual brutality as the norm and sensible.

With all respect, your judgement is flawed. Please, I encourage you to come back to earth, read some real literature, listen to Bach, pay attention to a string of good films to get your judgement back. But it's not just you.

Obviously the US film industry has sunk to this very low standard and is blindly stoking anxiety so high that we can barely recognize it for what it is; it's become so integral to our society.

Rolling Stone, Variety, Village Voice, Roger Ebert, Christian Science Monitor, the Onion, Premiere, USA Today, SF Chronicle, Boston Globe, LA Times, NY Times, Wall Street Journal, Time, Miami Herald, Baltimore Sun, Seattle Post-Intelligencer all gave it a maximum rating of 100 in metacritic.com like it was Shakespeare or Tolstoy. This is how warped we are as a society. This is how deep our numbness to wholesale death goes.

What should be called a low budget horror film is called "the most ambitious and impressive ... in at least a decade" by Salon and "for formalists ... it's pure heaven" NY Times. "I haven't seen a stronger or better American movie all year" Christian Science Monitor. "An indisputably great movie, at this point the year's very best" Rolling Stone.

When we use these words for this kind of film, small wonder the world thinks we're killers without remorse.… Expand

I'll admit I got suckered into this movie because of all the positive critic reviews. After watching the movie, I was left feeling disappointed and felt that the movie was highly over-rated. The acting was solid, especially from Javier Bardem and Josh Brolin. I was literally scared of Bardem's portrayal of the Anton character. The dialogue and the characters were quite good. However the pacing was very uneven though, tense and suspenseful one moment followed by long drawn out scenes which added nothing to the main storyline. For most of it, the movie just dragged on and on. Running at more than 2 hours, I felt that the script could've bit tightened up a bit more, which would've made it more watchable. Also the abruptly ending, the disjointed storylines, and the suspense that resulted in no pay off, left me and a few others in the theatre disappointed. The Coen bros have made classic movies that have reached cult status, like Fargo, Miller's Crossing and Big Lebowski. Then there are the movies they've made which aren't so great, like as Intolerable Cruelty and The Ladykillers. I'm afraid No Country For Old Men fits into the latter category. It's not that bad, but it's certainly not as good as critics have made it out to be, definitely not the best of 2007, not by a long shot.… Expand

A near perfect movie. Do not go expecting a typically told formulaic story. This is an exploration on a theme. And it was a pleasure to go on the journey. Great performances and direction. This movie pulls you in a way none other has since American Beauty. Best film of the year - hands down.

Every great piece of art has its detractors, hence the few downer votes here. The Coen brothers serve up their most serious film in a decade -- a slow burn look at violence in America. Bardem is a psycho who is violence; Brolin is a guy who thinks he can only play with violence; Jones is the veteran of violence, submitted by its power. Don't go in expecting a Leathal Weapon film or Fargo; this is a slow methodical character study. The last scene is a stunner, and demands that Jones win a second Oscar. Not the best of the year, but close.… Expand

I've never seen a movie come so close to being a 9 or 10 when, in the last 20 minutes, loses the audience on a dime. What an exciting premise. The beginning is spectacular and it just gets more dramatic from there. But, the movie takes a nose-dive when the principal character is nonchalantly killed (they don't even show the scene) and we are left with a cast of actors that were more or less very minor to the interesting part of the plot. It was great entertainment and it certainly holds up to almost anything made lately, but it was butchered at the end needlessly.… Expand

I love the Coen Brothers and looked forward to this movie, especially because of the trailers and the critics' reviews. I had faith that all of the stuff that I was watching throughout the movie would turn into a spectacular ending. It did not. I cannot believe that anyone would give this movie anything more than a 7. It had its witty moments, but the ending ruined it for me. I haved watched O Brother Where Art Thou, Millers Crossing, Fargo, and Raising Arizona many times. When I see one of them on as I'm channel surfing, I almost always stop. I will never watch a single scene of No Country again.… Expand

The Coens love movies, love to recreate them and making loving homages to them, but it's always been American films and now they have decided to take an "art" novel and give it their best Bergman take. Note the suddenly still camera, the spectre of Death, ala Seventh Seal, the final "dream" ripped right out of that film. This movie is about a "plague" and it fits in perfectly with the boys deciding to focus on Bergman for their story telling inspiration.… Expand

It's not surprising that people who complain about this movie have no idea what they're talking about. Anyone that has ever watched a Coen Bros' movie should know there's much more going on than what you see. The movie is a contemplative masterpiece about the universal good vs. evil, and how-as the title states-each generation thinks the next will bring an end to everything good they've ever known(note: the scene where Jones talks to the old sheriff in the wheelchair, and asks him about how it was when he ran things). It truly has become no country for old men... And, finally, if you've read the book, you'll realize the movie is almost identical; hence the abrupt ending. One more thing: ever notice the Coens always have a theme related to money? their characters look for the quick fix and all hell ensues...(lebowski, arizona, fargo, no country...).… Expand

Tense and taut. But with plot holes you could drive a truck through. Everyone in the movie (especially bad guys) has sonar/radar and are bloodhounds. The first half of the movie, it makes sense and is explained... the second half, everyone mystically can track everyone else and it is crap. The ending is so-so trying to make a simple point about Tommy Lee Jone's character and pretending it is "artistic." Over-rated. Hyped. Pretentious. I can see why a lot of the critics liked it.… Expand

The most violent, pointless movie I have ever suffered through. I guess they must pay you for the rating? I'll never trust meta-critic by itself again. I've liked other Coen Bros. movies.

This movie represents nothing more that gratuitous violence and nihilistic nonsense masquerading as high art. I can't believe the critics were so taken in. This doesn't come even close to Fargo which was fantastic. It's only the Coen brothers superstar status that allows them to market this crap. It's like Picasso doodling on a napkin and calling it art.

Inspired acting and cinematography, but in the end, I felt as simply a voyeur in a West Texas drug culture slaughterhouse. Not up to Fargo.

Based on all the glowing reviews of this film I was a bit disappointed with it. There are some great performances, the story is engaging and very thought provoking but the ending is a BIG letdown. This would have been a much better film for me had the ending been better. So, do not expect a satisfying ending. I realize the movie is based on a novel and the ending may be faithful to the book but it doesn't work for me. You have been fore warned!… Expand

Very well acted and written, with great Cinematography. My only problem with the film, is that I feel that it glorifies violence. It is a good film, by all standards. I do hope that "Atonement" beats this for Best Picture.

I do not give out 10's on a regular basis, so trust me when I tell you that if you want a movie that is perfectly paced, gripping, and contains the BEST dialogue in any movie this year or last, you want to see No Country for Old Men.

A stunning movie that takes an in depth look at the true nature of violence. Do not go see this movie expecting to see superb fight scenes or leave the theater feeling good. In fact it is quite possible that when you leave the theater hating it, just as I did. But as one thinks about the movie and its statement about the nature of violence, one recognizes the genius of the movie and realizes that the ending is not lacking but is in reality the only proper way to conclude the story.… Expand

Magnificently executed and imagined with humor and brilliant pacing. Performances were terrific. I hated it. At least they didn't kill and children or animals. But the blood and violence were depressing and disgusting. At the end, the only catharsis for me was a glorious re-acquaintance with the fact that even the worst experiences are finite. I left the theatre angry and needing both a shower and a keyboard with which to warn others.… Expand

This movie is a good example of how an idea deteriorates through the creative process. It's worse still in this case as the screenplay is adapted from a novel. As much as I appreciate the ideas and themes, be they McCarthy's or the Coens', the movie does not convey them well enough to warrant the fawning of most reviewers. It's commendable in terms of filmmaking craft insofar as the cinematography, dialogue, and acting are skillfully executed. As a whole, however, it doesn't work. It's not enough to rely on ideas to hold these elements together because the whole thing ends up being an intellectual excercise. It requires an emotive line of action as well, which isn't completely absent but poorly drawn this movie. That's why viewers can be bewildered at the end. It's an abrupt end because you don't feel as though anything has led you to it. We can call it clever and subversive because it means something beyond the film itself. It's not good enough, especially as it's by the same guys that made The Big Lebowski, which is almost flawless in all respects. The rave reviews aren't warranted; there's a hysteria around movies like these (abstract humour, unconventional, nihilistic, well shot) that's really frustrating, especially when we rely on critics for insightful judgements. And I agree with Larry T.: the pretentious laughter was the worst part.… Expand

What I liked about NCOM Javier Bardem could be the greatest villain of all time. He stole every scene and basically redefined evil. Acting performances and cinematography was outstanding. First half of the movie was intense and just seemed to keep building up. Now the bad stuff So many flaws that I don't know where to start. The film leaves so many questions unanswered. No character development whatsoever. There are scenes and characters in the film that just lead us astray and have no business being in the final cut. The lead is actually killed off screen after following his every move for 2/3 of the film. WTF? More plotholes than swiss cheese. Now its considered the greatest film of the decade. Greatest thing since sliced bread since the critics don't understand it. Could be the most overrated movie of all time. It stands at #23 of all time on the IMDB list as I write this. I'd like to add that its the only film on this incredible list that lacks an ending. Believe me, I wanted to love this movie. Mislead once again by the critics. They are all in together to rob us of our hard earned cash.… Expand

Anytime the antagonist walks away after killing everyone that has any decency about them, it makes me wonder why it made it to the screen in the first place. Oh wait a minute, we live it America and this is what real life really is all about. Bad people killing good, honest decent, hard working people. Let's glorify the villians so they can sleep well at night knowing they have put another notch in their gun. The only reason I went to see the movie is because of TLJ. I feel like this was a bait and switch. He was useless in his character and his tremendous talents wasted in this movie.… Expand

The movie was engaging, but every movie needs a beginning, middle and end. This movie had no ending. This may be a critics dream, but it left me and several others who went, wondering what was the point of this movie and why did we waste time and money to leave frustrated.

This is probably the most technically perfect exercise in filmaking since 12 Monkeys. It isn't overstating it to say that the character of Anton Chigurh is one of the most memorable ever to haunt the silver screen. He isn't "evil" in the sense that terms like "good" and "evil" don't apply to him. He embodies the Nietzschean superman and, as such, regards humanity in much the same way we regard livestock. He is, at once, a magnificent symbol and a memorably drawn character, and the Coen brothers deserve enormous praise for bringing such an enormously complicated creature to the screen so brilliantly.… Expand

In response to Jonathan Rosenbaum's poor review: One star? It seems you must be grading on a rather steep curve. Jonathan, how can it be a "well-made genre exercise" with admirable "creativity and storytelling" that has the "primal impact of silent pictures" and is "gorgeously shot" and yet earn one star from the reviewer? The very fact that a film that you describe as such has provoked you to give it one star is evidence of its peculiar power. I hadn… Expand

I have to admit I was excited to see this movie, however that only hightened my disappointment. This was an unengaging story of no signifigance that will not be enjoyed by anyone hoping to be entertained. yeah it was different, but I could not care less.

The Coen Brothers are what's great about America and they have hit the jackpot with this one.

I can not believe anyone likes No Country for Old Men. It is so unbelievably hailed as some kind of great movie that it makes me wonder who is paying off the reviewers or if the reviewers are real people. I bet this review will be burried big time! The plot goes no where but to a dead end! If you go, I will bet that you will regret having spent your good money on this violent junk while there are so many better movies you could have gone to see. Believe me, I am a real person not on the take. I give this kone a big ZERO.… Expand

The acting was great by everyone. the story was good until the end way to many holes that were not filled in it reminded me of the soprano's ending not giving you the closer the movie deserve.

Those who are looking for the satisfaction of a normal movie are missing the point. This movie is a parable. All of its characters are symbolic. Watch it again and ask yourself what each character represents, and you will get a lot more out of it. And you will better understand how masterful it is.

In actuality, I give this film a 9.7 out of 10. It was a nearly perfect film that was so well captured. The film moves very fluidly and is very engaging. Javier Bardhem was brilliant, as was Josh Brolin and Tommy Lee Jones. I would have liked Woody Harrellson's character to have been developed more and a little work with the editing knife would have been welcome, but in the end, this film was spectacular. Easily the best film of 2007.… Expand

A masterpiece. Extraordinary meditation on chance, choices, ethics and evil, that dares to play with the audiences' expectations in a way that resembles the randomness and brutality of life itself. The performances are great. Bardem and Kelly Macdonald are the standouts.

Quite an impressive film. I found that the absence of nondiagetic sound creates a wonderfully raw effect, leaving us feeling a bit naked, and unprotected. Best use of that technique I've seen in a while.

Most UN-satisfying movie experience. Have seem something like this done better in Fargo. It leaves a lot of loose ends, does not follow through with the characters (lead character dies unexpectedly with no followup on that). Don't know what happened to his wife. Bad guy walks away. And the last hope, the Sherif, quits his job and ends the movie while talking about his dream.... Yawwwn. Please what's with all these high rating for this movie ??… Expand

I thought it was really bad. The shots of the desert were boring after the first 3, though the DP is tops. If you are going to do tough guy dialogue about flipping a coin for your life, it better be wittier than that. The plot made no sense -- the guy wouldn't get water for the shot guy, but then brings it hours later--weak. The lines between the couple were pathetic--completely cliched. Bardun was so busy acting like he wasn't acting. Tommy Lee Jones totally milked the sad old sheriff thing. What a waste of $11.00. What's wrong with all those critics?… Expand

Very Coen. Like a darker version of Fargo - less humour, more violence (honestly portrayed). Morally complex and satisfying.

Brilliant. Up there with Fargo and Pulp Fiction.

Stunningly good acting - flawless dialogue - hauntingly real

Fantastic. Don't read the reader reviews- there's spoilers galore, and they're all too stupid to mention it.

What I liked about NCOM Javier Bardem could be the greatest villain of all time. He stole every scene and basically redefined evil. Acting performances and cinematography was outstanding. First half of the movie was intense and just seemed to keep building up. Now the bad stuff So many flaws that I don't know where to start. The film leaves so many questions unanswered. No character development whatsoever. There are scenes and characters in the film that just lead us astray and have no business being in the final cut. The lead is actually killed off screen after following his every move for 2/3 of the film. WTF? More plotholes than swiss cheese. Now its considered the greatest film of the decade. Greatest thing since sliced bread since the critics don't understand it. Could be the most overrated movie of all time. It stands at #23 of all time on the IMDB list as I write this. I'd like to add that its the only film on this incredible list that lacks an ending. Believe me, I wanted to love this movie. Mislead once again by the critics. They are all in together to rob us of our hard earned cash.… Expand

Reasonably good drama and acting, but relatively pointless plot and story-line. The ending leaves viewers stunned - not sure whether to leave the theatre -- or wait for the movie to continue playing through to the end AFTER the credits.

Wonderful film. It was very dark, and I can see where some people may not be satisfied with the ending. The mistake these people make is that they confuse who the main character really is. This is a story about old men. Men who live until they are old. Get that and you'll have a different perspective of the film's ending.

What a mess. The metaphors obliterate any chance of a coherent story. Can't comment on the significance of the final speech: I'd lost the will to listen to all the cliches by that point.

Amazing, I hope Bardem gets an Oscar, he was terribly perfect with his character. I think this film is one of the surprises of the year, perhaps one of the best in the 20's, i went out of the cinema containing my feelings, incredibly exciting!!! I think I'll get the DVD.

Slow and boring. Too much of editing.

Yeah, I know everyone says this is a thinker, and let me tell you I

Tommy Lee Jone's character was well thought out, you could actually feel the struggles he was going through. The rest of the characters though were very weak...the entire movie you are asking yourself WHY?! Too much violence for violence's sake, especially given the ending. The ending did give you pause, and is perhaps worth discussion, but fell short in the context of the entire move.… Expand

The Anthony Lane review in the New Yorker is remarkably accurate and insightful in my opinion. He actually does not give a score but I think 6 is closer to the 7 that metacritic ascribed him.

Yes, film criticism is a subjective thing but I would argue to the ends of the earth that this is not a 10/10 film.. In fact I would say that 7 is as far as anyone who values originality and passion in their filmmaking could possibly give it!

**Spoiler Alert**

I think the worst moment of the film is the car crash. I felt that we were meant to be taken by surprise but the clumsy editing back and forth to the green light took away any surprise value..

Also the death of Woody Harrelson's character seemed unbelievable and redundant.. He know's who he is dealing with yet he was killed like a nobody civilian.. It's like the film deals with cliches but want's to make serious points about violence, greed etc.. Chigurh was a caricature and cliche of a serial killer.. and I would argue that most of the film was also cliche..

I did enjoy the dog chasing moss down the river.. The dog had more character development than Chigurh..… Expand

Perfectly paced, written, filmed, acted, directed and conceived. There is more emotion in one frame here than in most other entire movies. I have always loved the Coen brothers stuff, but this is the best one yet. I felt just as uncomfortable (that's a compliment, because that's how I'm supposed to feel) throughout the entire film as Woody did in his last scene. This has to win the Best Picture award, hands down.… Expand

This is the worst ending to a good movie that I've ever seen in my life. It started to fall apart when it showed the main character was dead, after that the movie sucked. But the movies was building greatly at first. Too bad any one would think this ending is artsy.

I think one of the problems is that for 90 minutes the movie trades brilliantly on being a fantastically tense action thriller and then apparently decides that it doesn't care about being that at all for the last 20 minutes. Surely it's understandable that some people might feel cheated by a movie full of charismatic fantasy psychos and resilient everyday supermen slaying people and having gunfights and car crashes that never attract attention but which then tries to claim 'this is how the real world is' at its bleak end? Not that the movie does not present some interesting ideas to chew on at the conclusion. Still, a fantastically riveting film overall.… Expand

An absolutely brilliant film. Every cast member is outstanding, especially Javier Bardem. The pace is perfect, it grabs your attention from the first frame right to the last. Outstanding cinematography and editing. Tense and suspenseful, thoroughly engrossing. The Coen Brothers have made a remarkable movie, well deserving of it's four Oscars.

The least surprising movie the Cohen bothers have made. It

The film is a masterpiece from the Coen Brothers.

I am completely surprised at how many people simply don't understand the movie and hence lambast it with tripe like "it's pointless and too violent." First of all, as if to scream at the audience that the film is not solely about violence, the Coens decide to tone down many of the book's murder scenes and don't even show (physically) the fates of Chigurh's last victims. It is consistently well directed, shot, and acted throughout, resulting in a completely in-depth environment and characters. By no means is it ever boring or choppy, as long as you understand the motives and developments of the characters throughout the whole movie. Chad would have you believe that the first third is nothing but slow and boring nonsense, but it is in actuality the whole basis for the characters. The first part establishes Moss's motivation (which is not simply greed for those of you who think 300 is the best film of 2007), Bell's contempt for the modern state of man, and Chigurh's inhuman nature that propels each man to his own distinct fate. Aside from the constant intensity, I believe one of the film's greatest strengths is its dialogue. Not much is changed from the book, but some is to fit a different scene in the movie better. Each time a character speaks the viewer can see straight into his head and view his motivation, his worldview, his disillusionment, or, in Chigurh's case, his nonchalant disregard for humanity. Finally, the ending of the movie, while much reviled by incompetent viewers, is absolutely perfect. That's not just my opinion, it's a fact. (Spoilers) Yes, every good person except Bell dies and the villain gets away with the money, and the last line is a seemingly disconnected reflection on Bell's dream. However, one of the most prevalent themes of the movie is how evil has come to envelope society, harming the innocent (i.e. Carla Jean) while evil itself often gets away and further spreads its venom. Thus, the ending may be depressing, but it is necessary. With that in mind, there really weren't any loose ends that needed to be tied up, there were only certain characters' uncertain futures. As to Bell's last line, in which he describes his dream, reflects how Bell is second guessing his whole existence because he earnestly feels that it is futile to try to ward off the encompassing evil that Chigurh represents and he has wasted his whole life in a vain attempt to do so. All in all, the direction, acting, cinematography, editing, and even the sounds of the movie serve to bring McCarthy's chilling novel of profound insight into haunting reality. Don't listen to the morons who give it anything less than an 8. Anyone who is able to actually interpret and apply the film beyond its outer surface would see just how incredible a job the Coens did in writing and directing the film. It's even better than Fargo, and that's saying something.… Expand

I thought the movie was great. People complain about the ending, but I don't understand what they want. Is anything short of the bad guy dying or killing everyone else a non-ending? Great acting, interesting characters, suspenseful. Was pretty violent, but if that doesn't bother you, then I highly recommend it.

Dark and nihilistic? Yes. Not your typical feel-good, tie-everything-up-in-a-nice-ribbon, hollywood ending? Check. Not everyone's 'cup of tea'? Yes, most definitely. But to suggest that this is a bad movie, or that it didn't deserve its Oscars... Well, that's just flat out wrong-headed. This film, based on the excellent story by Cormac McCarthy, is *exceedingly* well written, well acted, well paced, beautifully photographed, well edited and well directed. The three leads - Bardem, Jones and Brolin - are outstanding. This film does not -- as some suggest -- glorify violence or nihilism. It absolutely does NOT glorify or condone the cold-blooded actions of the killer (actually, killers plural). Dig just a little deeper, all you nay-sayers, and you may understand the central point of McCarthy's book and of this excellent film. Then again, maybe this is just a bit too profound and clear-headed a morality tale (and character study) for many viewers. There are one or two scenes alone that are worth the price of admission ... e.g., the pit bull chasing Brolin's character down the turbulent river, closing on him as relentlessly as Death. Amazing stuff.… Expand

Or they really liked the movie Mike. Movies here aren't rated on originality but enjoyment. Its okay though because dismissing other peoples opinions is a good way to get yours dismissed. It is easy to hate the movie if you go in with unreasonable expectations.

This movie is engrossing, with an emphasis on violence that is so strong that one loses track of some of the fine acting. A much more elemental performance by Tommy Lee Jones can be seen in the nearly altogether ignored film In the Valley of Elah, which has a tragic plot rivaling anything by Sophocles and which shocks, mesmerizes and horrifies the audience with its powerful dramatic irony. No Country for Old Men is an OK movie but In the Valley of Elah is one of the best pieces of writing and acting (almost solely carried by Jones) in a decade.… Expand

The first 3/4 of the movie - an amazing picture that hauntingly pulls you in -- the last 1/4: one of the biggest disappointments in cinematic history. I feel sorry for anyone who who actually says they like the finale - they obviousluy have no idea what true cinema is. I am severely upset at the Coens for turning a possible masterpiece into worthless dogs#!t in the space of about 20 minutes. They should be forced to rewrite the ending, or at least let someone with some intelligence do so.… Expand

At the start it had you going. But like another said same old movie just different angle. Where is the uniqueness Ok A compressed air can gun WooHoo!! The ending is suppose to be original why change something that works?

Are you kidding? this is one of the best out of hollywood? truely sucked, what's the sequel gonna be called? no country for old women? can't remember the last movie i hated so much.

Love it or hate it, cause the only way to leave the theatre feeling different is if you have vegetable brains. And anyone who hates it must have lived their whole life in colorado city or behind padded walls. It doesn't mean their crazy or stupid, just that whatever goes on in the world isn't their reality. No Country For Old Men portrays drugs, money, greed and the fate that comes with it in a very eery and extreme, yet completely realistic way. Any one of us could be Llewelyn and in this world we live in, his fate could be ours as well. What a raw display of how powerful and unforgiving the nature of men can be.… Expand

I didn't get it, I guess. A mildly exciting movie at parts, but mostly it was deadly boring and without any real ending.

why did I think it was a stupid movie full of stupid people who went through a series of events that made them look stupider? Was that the point? I could not suspend my disbelief because I just didn't think Brolin would be dumb enough to keep the money in its original case, not look for a trace, et cetera. I just kept going "why are they so stupid?" I thought the acting was great, but believable? No Way Even For Old Men.… Expand

I wouldn't say 30+million people is nobody, would you? Is that your definition of nobody? If so, you might want to find a dictionary. Regardless, at this point, is there such a thing as an original story? No, there isn't. But what makes No Country for Old Men a great film is its terrific sense of pace, understated, powerful performances from everyone involved (especially Tommy Lee Jones and Kelly MacDonald, who deserved a nomination), a script that's both darkly funny and fearsome and of course, the sure-handed direction of the Coens. As for its conclusion, it underscores the point and theme of the film perfectly: that life is ambiguous, that fate and chance both have their roles to play and that life, no matter how hard we try to impose some sort of meaning and narrative upon it, just is a series of randomly connected events.… Expand

The Coen Bros should be brought in front of a congressional panel and be forced to give our money back for any movies or dvd purchase. Maybe Anton Shugar was on HGH or steroids with Roger Clemmons. That would explain the violence on Anton's part in the movie and heck, they were both in Texas right...? I believe the same screenplay writers for " The Grifters" wrote the ending for this piece of trash. Hollywood and the Coen Bros. goosed the movie public in the foulest way and are laughing all the way to the bank! I feel so used.… Expand

It's so amusing to watch people frequently try to disparage this movie because it doesn't cater to what they perceive the average movie as being. The movie is thrilling, well written, imaginative and purposefully unique. It doesn't possess the cliched "we got the back guy!!" ending that everyone is accustomed to. No, it reflects the real world, where things cannot be anticipated. If you crave eccentric films, that follow no set path, then this movie is for you. Oh, and it deserved Best Movie of the Year, and no amount of petty 1 out of 10 ratings is going to change that.… Expand

An understated, post-modern masterpiece. It is the way it is told that makes this film so wonderful. Yes, it disconcertingly prises your hands from their obedient grasp on reality but the payoff is worth it. The running time is a little over two hours but I challenge anyone to refute that this film did not stick with them for far longer. Love it or hate it Anton Chigurh's pageboy hair, hallow eyes and hateful tongue; and the romantic ramblings of Sherrif Ed Tom Bell were part of our conscious and subconscious thought for days after this one. Phantasmagorical. Poetic. Brilliant.… Expand

Wow. The people that give low ratings on this movie seem to not be able to understand ....anything about life. Useless filler? Building suspense without using music is incredible enough in itself. You have to try to interpret what happens in the movie. Apparently, some of you are typical Americans and fail to be able to watch a movie that is not completely straightforwad. Congrats on the lack of progression in being a normal functioning human adult. This movie is one of the best that you could ever hope for.… Expand

I think those who doesnt "GET" are the ones who gave HIGH rating to this movie. They get what ? The violence or the stupid dialogs? There is nothing to get.and they just try to look intellectual by waving to a politically oscar winning film.To not to look stupdi, they say they understood something.What they undesrtood is nothing..

Overrated! If you can stomach the violence the first half of this movie is interesting. The second half is extremely boring. The acting is excellent throughout but the story goes nowhere. Best Picture? - give me a break.

The only movie I have seen in my long, mostly pointless life, that had a worse ending than this was Gone Baby Gone. The Casey Affleck character should have been shot for ratting out that wonderful couple who were going to give that little girl a beautiful, loving upbringing. Instead he all but sealed her fate by giving her back to that lowlife, alcoholic, drug addicted slut of a mother who in the final scene was going out to get high and herpes without a second thought for her daughter. But I digress. The ending of ncfom was not even an ending. You just have to hope that that bone sticking out of Anton's elbow might have given him some discomfort before killing another dozen or so people.… Expand

Flawless!

I don't understand why this show got such rave reviews. The plot line had all sorts of holes: Why was everyone walking or riding horses to the crime scene in the desert? There were five vehicles at the scene so there was obviously a road there. You would think locals and the sheriff would know their territory. Why was an experienced hunter walking in the desert with no water? If he gives water to the guy in the truck, he doesn't return later and would avoid all the other problems. Why did he suddenly get a conscience and have to go back to the crime scene in the middle of the night? Again, if he stays home, there is no plot. In addition to the numerous plot problems, the ending was incomprehensible. A Simple Plan had the same basic plot and was a much better show. No Country does not come close to Fargo.… Expand

Where is the rest of this movie? I feel gypped. I have read almost all of Cormac McCarthy's great work. I am a fan but I find the film adaptation to be claustrophobic and badly timed. It has the look of a three hour plus film that was chopped to two for release. I found it hard to follow the story... and I knew the story. Great acting by Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, Woody Harrelson, Kelly Macdonald and the rest of the cast. A shame... there may have been a great film before the overdone editing.… Expand

Since the movie was so slooow and the plot somewhat confusing, at least we deserved a satisfying ending. But no, we are left with the key situation unresolved, our heads shaking with the disappointment of wasting two hours for what -- a lot of violence (between the slow parts) and a new way to kill people, which some idiot will now probably try to duplicate. It's not that the lack of resolution by itself was the downfall: as others have said, the rest of the movie just wasn't that interesting (primariy because it drags), so we need a good ending to save this movie. Don't waste your time or money.… Expand

Real life characters rather than movie characters. Real life result rather than movie result where everyone lives happily ever after. Two contemporary scenes which struck me as insightful occurred when Moss was shot and when Anton was involved in a car crash. Both situations revealed more emphasis on money than health by one of the parties. The young men on the bridge were more inquisitive than helpful and Anton felt compelled to pay for the kid's shirt when his immediate need was healthcare . The modern priorities are held up to the light for inspection here. Tommie Lee Jones as sherrif skulks into retirement rather than confronting the criminal.Much food for thought in this movie. Those who rate it shamefully low were probably expecting a more commonly seen conclusion where the bad guys are vanquished in some way.… Expand

The only reason I'm giving this movie a 1 is because the last 30 minutes is so confusing and then the movie just ends. You don't know what happened to the the hero or the villian. The first hour in a half are some of the best film making I've seen. Too bad it has no ending.

This movie was absolutely magnificent. I loved this movie everything about it made it wonderful experience. The plot, the characters, and the dialogue was great. I'm not sure what the other people rating it 1's are talking about they obviously have no taste.

"Apart from using Josh Brolin, who just isn't up to the task, nevermind being repeatedly referred to in this contemporary setting as a Viet Nam vet, which would have put him in combat at around age five" - DWilly. Err DWilly you obviously weren't paying close attention to the funeral scene near the end! The the birth to death date clearly indicated that the year was 1980 NOT 2007/8 as you seem to have surmised!… Expand

Amazing movie!! Going in, I though it would be kind of boring and that maybe it was also overrated. I was definitely wrong. This movie is going on my top ten greatest movies of all time!! You have to see it!!

Does anyone remember "Barton Fink" ? The Coen Brothers are heartless masters of style, and even when I like one of their films I wish I didn't. In the case of the critically acclaimed but audience-detested "Barton Fink" I faced no internal conflict--my heart and my head were in perfect agreement. And so it is with "No Country". It's a nasty film with nothing to say and an ugly way of saying it.… Expand

Wow! What a disappointment this turned out to be! Pointless, unreal, boring, and a terrible ending!

I may be "that guy," but I just don't get this movie. The first hour and a half are spent following what the audience suspects is the main character, Lewelyn Moss, until he just ups and dies at the hands of Mexican drug dealers (a scene shot in my hometown of Albuquerque by the way) at suddenly the movie just pulls the parking brake and and turns right around, focusing on Bell. Why waste the first hour and a half of the movie by shaking the left hand, saying hey look at this look at this, moving said hand to punch you the face, then kicking you in the shin and spit on you. It made me feel stupid, thinking that the movie might follow the character that had been the focus of the film: you start to build up emotions and feelings for Moss, then they are shooed away with out any thought for the audience, only to stroke the Coens ego. I'm usually a fan of the Coens, Fargo rocks, and the Big Lebowski is the funniest movie ever, but NCFOM is just cheap. It "subverts" film genres by not really following one certain one, but it cheats the audience out of any real satisfaction. I get the whole evil is coming, we are all doomed, don't even try to be a good human being because your actions will just go for naught and you will die lonely with a big Hispanic Mary Lou Renton standing over you, but god, how snooty.… Expand

One of the worst movies I've seen. You can talk about all the 'hidden' meaning all you want. It was not interesting, was very simple, just a simple double cross ... big deal. It's worth a 2 only because Tommy Lee was in it. Don't try to build up some idiotic intrigue ... there was none.

The well matched Brolin and Bardem are great as the anti-hero and psycho killer exchanging wits and bullets. This, plus a few entertaining set pieces make for an interesting first half and set this film well on its way to being one of the year's best. Unfortunately, this is overshadowed by the Coens' shameless bid for academy awards by attempting to turn what has been up until the last 25 minutes a fairly linear and slow moving chase thriller into something more meaningful than it really is. An attempt that falls flat on its face as the film twists and turns horribly in a pathetic undertaking of audience 'shock and awe', which promptly flings the films two most engaging characters out of the picture. While Brolin's premature death can be taken on the chin, after all we've seen this before, you can't help wondering, as Bardem's mophead f**ks off unchallenged into the suburban sunset, why Tommy Lee Jones' two-dimensional, wise-cracking sheriff has suddenly become the centre piece of a film you were just starting to like and now you're not so sure. After all, you'd thought this film was about a Vietnam vet, a psycho and a big bag of money, but you were wrong. Actually, it's about an old fart in a tool shed, a bad dream and five Oscars, stupid. It's not about failing to comprehend or appreciate what the Coens are trying to do, but instead admitting that firstly, this just doesn't work for me and secondly, the disappointing realisation that this film's ending is equivalent to shitting a nice, new pair of pants.… Collapse

seems to me every criticism of this wonderful film stems from the fact that it does not follow generic convention and structure- so what? do you people really find it so insulting to be challenged a bit by filmmakers, or have we all got so boring and safe that we just want visceral thrills, we just want what we expect? we don't like being invited to think for ourselves? also all the Coens really did with the structure was stay faithful to the novel, so I don't get the criticism of them as being arrogant or trying to be clever- to all who say that- go and read the book.… Expand

I absolutely LOVE this movie, it has some of the greatest acting I've seen, they either make you love them, or hate them, theres no in between. The intensity is so great, keeps you on the edge of your seat the entire time. The ending is the only part that I don't like, there are so many questions and loose end that need to answered, it makes me so mad.

very very good film, best l've seen in months.on par with Shawshank Redemption.a film were you don't want to get out of your seat.

This movie had such promise for the first half, but derails somewhere along the way. If you enjoy movies that focus on quirky characters and symbolism far more than a good storyline and plot, than this might be for you. Extremely disappointing.

Very intense thriller that kept me on the edge of my seat the whole time. BIG LEBOWSKI baby.

Never heard of Javier Bardem, but truly impressed...

Violent & nihilist, beautifully done but ultimately pointless.

An excellent first half gives way to an abysmal end to both the main character and the movie itself. The movie begins as an excellent thriller and dissolves into a confused and unlikeable discussion of good and evil. Brilliant performances and dismal set pieces can't save this movie from ultimately coming off as something that succeeds extremely well at first and then lapses into thoughtful territory that should have been left out.… Expand

Slow? Confusing? Oh my.... When people rave that a film is great like, say, Schindler's List (and it is, it's a five star film, don't get me wrong), it always gets straight 9s and 10s.... No one gets thrown by it and it is well-acted and moving and y-a-w-n..... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. But the real greats, the true greats, do not pander to everyone (euphemism). Great art never does. And then it consequently takes the risks that occasionally, as is so true here, make it better. Firstly, NCFOM has one of the all-time greatest bad guys in cinematic history. Complex in his simplicity, driven and scary as hell. In a metaphorical sense he has to represent a force and evil that cannot be quantified or understood and it only works because he gives the single-most scariest and most intoxicating performance I have ever seen along with Hopkins in SOTL. Like the Reaper himself, there is a lure and dread that accompany him and it is an achievement in selfless acting and craft that cannot be cheapened by words. It simply must be watched to be believed. God Bless you Javier. Secondly, it is not an oxygen tank per se, and it pains me that people do not watch movies more attentively. The devil is in the detail, as they say. The remark at the beginning is a MacGuffin, yet, instead of going on in that vein to rival Hitchcock's best films scenes and moments, this film outdoes them. Tommy says explicitly what it is, but, it's worth repeat viewings and I can't wait to see it again anyway, so, no biggie..... thirdly, the ending is so good, so perfect, that I am happy to admit that I wept for its brilliance. I said out loud, 'please end' and it cut to black and the credits began and I just dropped my head and in that moment I have to say, it was like a strong narcotic, that moment of knowing I had watched a perfect film. It was perfect folks. Perhaps better than perfect and, as Ron Burgundy would say, "That makes no sense." But then, it plays against a backlog of accepted movie 'traditions' that were always formulaic and trite, and instead the Coens, like the book (I imagine) make the brave choices true to the story, or most importantly, the ALLEGORY. See, people who are confused, or who don't spot the allegory and its bleak and moral undertones, will be 'gunning' for the hero, the old cop come good, the blah blah blah... they will be disappointed for reasons I will not go into and, well, sorry, but it's all bollocks. Grow up. It's a world of grey, not black and white. Santa's not real. Get over it. What you wanted is far less than what you got, but you can't see the wood for the trees. Please, open your eyes. It always was bollocks. The Coens knew this and they rise above over a hundred years of film-making tripe to deliver, regardless of some people's and even critics' (as indicated from the 30 - yes, 30 - above...what an idiot) inability to recognize it due to it placing an IQ-pre-requisite on the audience, the greatest and most perfectly shot and intensely-realized motion picture since the likes of Citizen Kane and The Godfather. Fargo!? Blood Simple (which I saw two weeks ago)!? You MUST be joking. Only someone who is afraid to enter the ghost world (if you will), the darkness itself and delve DEEP, as this film does, could say that those films come close to this film. This is indisputably the Coen brothers finest work and I say that as someone who LOVES them. Miller's Crossing is one of my all-time favs. But it can't match NCFOM.... Not remotely. It makes me want to reassess every perfect mark I have ever given! **SPOILERS** The Hotel Scene, the tracking device, the dog, the coin toss, the thematic and allegorical perfection...... as a film buff I recall somewhere along the way I had to pause the dvd, have a sip of tea and permit myself the audible admission that I was close to shitting myself for the amount of tension... and that I was in the midst of some bizarre cinematic orgasm (emotional/spiritual) as a result - and I say that as someone who has yawned through a thousand horror films. In fact if you are a horror fan, it is worth mentioning that this is also the best horror film I have seen in sometime. For you see, it is so thrilling and tense, it is horrific. And I loved it! Oh and the sound.... oh the sound is SOOOOOOO good. Watch this thing on 5.1, seriously. When it ended I simply was unable to move, but then, I got it. And bravo Coens, bravo.... Don't stress that some are like, "Oh, but ___," this and that.... you compromised nothing and you made my favourite film of all time. Thank you. I mean shit guys, this is easily the best film of this millenium even from an objective point of view..... Easily. Am I being a little elitist in saying this when some people clearly don't seem to 'like' (get) it? Um, I don't care. That's not how you go beyond the expected and create masterpieces. So the answer is, yes, the people who don't like it ARE wrong. Sorry, but it's that simple. They might not like NCFOM, that's fine, but it IS a great movie nonetheless. It just went over your head. You may lack a bit of dimension and/or be naive.... Don't sweat it. Even now, two days after seeing NCFOM, and just the one time, I ache. The best film I have seen this millenium. But by no means for everyone. Oh HELL NO.... if you'll excuse the pun..... And shoot me with a cattle-gun for saying it, but thank God for that. 11/10… Expand