User Score
7.3 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1004 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this movie

  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. DylanM
    May 3, 2008
    10
    I thought it was a great movie. Mainly due to its intelligence, if that makes sense. Its great action and story, but it could be real. Its not a movie that has dazzling special effects but really something that could have happened. Now the ending left me puzzled at first then i realized that that's just how it is in real life. Sometimes nobody wins, villains get away, and innocent people die. Not every movie can have a happy ending. Not every movie should. Its basically a commentary on how we as a society are today. We kill for pleasure (drugs) and those who stick to their morals often die or go crazy (pro and antagonist) Really makes you step back and look at your life and the people that surround you. Expand
  2. JamieL.
    Jun 12, 2008
    4
    This film had an abrupt ending that left many loose ends and frayed edges. The violence was mindless and not tasteful. There were many moments I was just completely confused. Although the film was extremely well-filmed and well-created, it was just not very good.
  3. JackZ.
    Jun 30, 2008
    0
    The acting is perfect, the camera work excellent, but unfortunately the source material is so diabolically terrible there was little chance of this film being any good, unless some major reworking was done. An abysmal movie which seems intent on mocking and insulting the viewer, promising closure but then ripping it away like some kind of failed orgasm. The main character is killed half-way through, and the last ten minutes of film seem totally absent. Did the makers have any grasp of how to tell a story? This film is an insult to anyone with the mental faculties to understand what a story is, and the fact it has garnered so much praise shocks and disappoints me. Ignore the hype, you'd find more satisfaction from viewing spasmodically undulating pictures of winos flashed on screen in time the noise made from industrial machinery. This film is the equivalent of if halfway through Star Wars, Luke decided he wanted to become a gardener, and then for the next sixty minutes you watched as he built a shed on a grassy lawn. Out of context, ridiculous, stupid, pointless, lacking any kind of sense, and hopelessly disappointing. Why would anyone make half a film and then decide to derail it in such an indescribably idiotic fashion?! WHY?! Expand
  4. AdamC
    Jul 27, 2008
    9
    Wow, great movie. I can't believe so many people voted it low. To all of those who did: not everything is spoon fed to you, I realize it is kind of difficult, but use your mind. Although the background on Bell could have been better, coming from someone who hadn't read the book, just thinking about what happened in the movie, and the point the movie gets across is pretty amazing. I know it won't fit everyone's viewing style, but seeing it knowing that the outcome isn't just good over evil, will make the movie so much better to you. Overall, excellent movie. Very well done. Expand
  5. JuneK.
    Jul 30, 2008
    8
    Looking forward to the sequel. Too many unanswered questions. Such as where is the money? How did the anti-hero die? Did he really die or did the sheriff let him go away with his wife?
  6. Kenny
    Jul 8, 2008
    10
    Superb film, almost flawless.
  7. LoccusD.
    Aug 14, 2008
    5
    This is the movie all the critics are having a fit about? Solid performances, but one of the slowest paced and boring movies I've seen in recent memory.
  8. SimonB
    Aug 29, 2008
    4
    Being left out on the loop. This is what this movie is all about. You watch a movie and for some reason, it feels like it's been going on for hours already. Some dude starts killing people just because he feels like it, never seems to be found by the police... Okay, I can dig it. Lots of movies have psychotic murderers never being caught by the police. Now another guy finds a bunch of bodies, is pursued by unknown assailants... Then a sheriff comes up, asking stupid questions with his assistant... Then the killer dude called SHEEGURR kills some more people... Money's being tossed about. People are being fooled in to take money, then some Mexican guys show up and seduce this girl's ma... What the fuck?! This movie doesn't make any sense. It's kind of like watching a depressing version of American Psycho, with no music, no fun catch-phrases. Just a stoic antagonist which the movie seems to root for all the way. The only character that you want to attach yourself with gets killed before the end in the most degrading fashion... Then the sheriff becomes the main protagonist and all he has to do is go retire and talk about his dreams? Total. Rip. Off. Expand
  9. gcash
    Jan 3, 2009
    1
    This was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. There was pointless killing with no sense of direction of the movie plot. I will never rent or buy a coen brothers film again!!!!
  10. Sam
    Oct 4, 2009
    0
    I saw this movie because of all the hype surrounding it and needless to say i was disappointed. It was too long, violent and slow in its execution and left me puzzled and disappointed.
  11. DanP
    Feb 2, 2009
    10
    Awesome.
  12. KM
    Mar 19, 2009
    9
    I can watch this movie a thousand times and still not get the significance of it, but I still liked it.
  13. LeviH
    May 21, 2009
    10
    Action films are, by definition, hot medium. The design is for the audience to be given all the information they desire and to be taken on a pretty ride. No Country For Old Men defies this by answering nothing. Who is Chigurh? What kind of man is he? Is he even a man at all? The Coen Brother's seem to have a distinct interpretation of the character, yet in keeping with their style they aren't exactly going to spell it out for the audience. This film, for days afterward, will make you think. This film, during it's screen time, will engross you in top notch cinematography, acting, editing, writing, and directing. Coming from a novel I considered largely unfilmable, the Coen's have created something special and unique, as only they could. Expand
  14. RommelA
    May 9, 2009
    10
    The movie provides great thrills and awesome acting. The actors know how to play their parts and they play them really well. I really recommend this game anyone!
  15. saran
    Jul 17, 2009
    10
    No country for old men is arguably one of the finest ever thriller movies made in hollywood.James Bardem is simply awesome with a stunning performance.
  16. MikeR.
    Aug 2, 2009
    10
    This movie will go down as one of the top films ever. Its sad that so many people cant shut there rambling gum chewing, instant judgment, minds off and just be zen with the movie. If they did they would be amazed by the atmosphere and pathos. I loved the ending. Poetic and true to his character.God how people just piss at genius like they know what these artist.
  17. JarekD.
    Aug 24, 2009
    0
    One of the worst movies I've ever seen.
  18. JohnH
    Aug 5, 2009
    2
    Weak film. Begins well and peters out. The central performances are laughable. I guess it was their year for the Oscar, but they've made much better.
  19. DanP
    Sep 5, 2009
    10
    Awesome.
  20. SteveH
    Nov 11, 2007
    7
    My biggest problem with this movie, is that it is not at the Fargo level. The critics are over hyping this movie. The acting is great but I got tired of Kelly Maconald's character, Your southern, naive and not too smart, ok, I get it. Where Fargo tied up most of the loose ends, this movie leaves you wondering.
  21. JonathanF.
    Nov 11, 2007
    9
    great, really great. tense. the ending kind of caught me off guard so i missed what was said.. it kind of had a bit of a lag before the great conclusion. other than that it was great.
  22. DMil
    Nov 11, 2007
    8
    The film making here is flawless. The performances, spot on! The locations were textured and retrospectively American. The film had a subversively liberal subtext which is a little cliche'. 2 problems for me were in it's general relevance and the (sorry) contrived story. By the end, I knew where it was headed and couldn't wait for it to be there. It will grow on me. Not the subtext, but its wonderful ability to create tension through memorable images and twisted air blasts. Expand
  23. JoshB
    Nov 10, 2007
    5
    Be warned: this is the kind of film that most professional critics go nuts for. It's well-made, but in the end, not very satisfying (and not even close to the best work of Cohen Brothers, which I love). I agree with the the reviews from the Washington Post and The Hollywood Reporter. The rest are just happy to see something that's better than the crap Hollywood usually churns out.
  24. JackF.
    Nov 12, 2007
    10
    Wow! Mesmerizing! Brilliant from the opening scene to the poignant and bleak conclusion. Unfortunately, a certain core of movie fans will stay home. This is a very violent film! There will be others that will leave the theater disappointed or bewildered with the conclusion. The Coen's were faithful to the Cormac McCarthy book. Any other ending ruins the basic premise: it's about the way life was and the way life is. If I hadn't read the book I may feel like many of you. Collapse
  25. NathanT.
    Nov 12, 2007
    10
    A masterpiece that is every bit on the same level as the Coen Brother's "Fargo." It's a thrilling moral and ethical lesson disguised as a chase movie. Javier Berdam is mesmerizing as the villain, while Tommy Lee Jones and Josh Brolin are riveting as the good guy and the harder to define character, respectively. This is one of the few perfect movies I've ever seen and it already stands as one of the great theater-going experiences of my life. Expand
  26. JesseL
    Nov 12, 2007
    10
    DWilly, the movie doesn't take place now, it takes place a little over twenty years ago. Pay closer attention. Awesome movie. Brilliant. People who say that the ending is unsatisfactory may have missed the point. It isn't about Moss, the money, or any of the other characters. It is about Tommy Lee Jones losing his faith in humanity and his belief in their being a point. Hence the name and the ending. Expand
  27. MarcusF.
    Nov 12, 2007
    10
    Great movie, loved it, wonderful plot and well done story.
  28. Erak
    Nov 12, 2007
    10
    It's basically Fargo in Texas, only infinately darker and containing one of the most frightening villains in film history. It's great to see the Coens back in form after years of lackluster output. Note to DWilly--though not stated in the film, the story takes place in 1980. It helps explain how Brolin and Harrelson are 'Nam vets and appear so young.
  29. nateb
    Nov 12, 2007
    9
    DWilly, you are an idiot. Neither the film, nor the book on which it was based, is "contemporary." NCFOM is set in 1980. The references to Nam, along with countless other lines of dialogue and set pieces, are meant to clue you in to this. It's too bad you missed this, since it may have helped you to understand the entire fantastic film a bit better.
  30. nic-
    Nov 13, 2007
    10
    best of all the coen's serious films
  31. JaredC.
    Nov 13, 2007
    9
    No Country for Old Men is excitingly absorbing and grabs your attention with the main focus of this film played by the mysterious and frightening character being acted out by Javier Bardem as Anton Chigurh. It's also a very stunning visual with sustainable balanced violence and mild language, as well with its spine tingling paced length. Its 2 hrs of pure western-world acting, escpecially played by Tommy Lee Jones. Although, it got kind of wonky when it shows scenes in the city but not in the wild west. The first time ever a film actually focuses on desperado crime. The Coen Brothers brings us something new to the big screen. Its something so extraordinary. Its the western masterpiece of 2007: No Country for Old Men. Hang on, its going to be an experience of your life. Just don't eat too much popcorn. It might ruin your appetite, and ruin the whole film. Expand
  32. LarryT.
    Nov 13, 2007
    0
    The pretentious laughter in the audience was the worst part of this film.
  33. JayK.
    Nov 13, 2007
    10
    Just saw an advance screeing last night and all I can say is...well there aren't any words to say except what an incredible piece of film making. Javier Bardem is chilling (enough said!), Josh Brolin gives a great performance as a man trying to compete with forces beyond his control and Tommy Lee Jones gives humanity to a character that tries to do what is right against a scoiety that has changed significantly. This could be the Coen's finest. Expand
  34. JoeW.
    Nov 16, 2007
    0
    Boo!
  35. KaseyS.
    Nov 17, 2007
    10
    Brilliant. Deftly points out that death is secondary to a life lived knowing one's futility.
  36. RE
    Nov 17, 2007
    6
    I was enjoying the hell out of this movie until the Coens apparently deemed me, and every other audience member, unworthy of seeing it. I "get it" and everything, but when the film ended and the lights came up, I felt cheated. It's a shame.
  37. BrendanM.
    Nov 18, 2007
    10
    As the comments below indicate, this movie challenges the intelligence of its audience. Gainsayers don't realize how this movie doubles as a very localized cat-n-mouse thriller and as a universalizable morality tale, straight out of a tradition that dates to Chaucer and beyond. The allegorical nature of the tale helps to explain the confusion about dating, because of course the Vietnam references are also veiled allusions to Iraq. The movie succeeds at enriching its sparsity with maximum complexity, yet also resists easy interpretation and judgment about the depravity of our society and the capacity to fight evil. With its gestures towards an older morality tale tradition, its pos-vietnam placement, and its hints of contemporary life, the film critiques both human depravity and our tendency to see our society's decline as a merely contemporary problem. Expand
  38. BabakP.
    Nov 18, 2007
    7
    I give the first 4/5 of the movie, a big10 and the last 1/5 a big 0. Also, It would've been better if tommy Lee jones's character didn't exist at all.
  39. AramisG.
    Nov 18, 2007
    9
    I seldomly love the Coen brothers movies. I mean, they are good, but I didn't crave seeing them again. This one is different and I'm sorry, the ending is pretty good.
  40. JamesB.
    Nov 18, 2007
    5
    Extremely disappointing! The first two thirds have a slow, tense build up, but the final act is a complete let down. At the end of the movie, I felt like I wasted 2 hours of my life. Unfortunately for the typically very tight Coen brothers, they let this film be dragged down by the pretentious boredom of literary windbag like Cormac McCarthy.
  41. NeilK.
    Nov 18, 2007
    2
    What a pretentious and pointless movie. Yes, yes, the camera angles and acting were all fine, but it completely lacked any sense of direction or purpose as well as any surprises or twists. The only message the movie seemed to have was, "We're the Coen brothers, look how great we are." Don't waste your money.
  42. AndyS.
    Nov 18, 2007
    9
    One of the Cohen bros. best yet. The pace and action in the movie keeps you on your toes and the out there visuals can make you laugh at the most graphic violence you will witness in years. The ending is a bit of a cop out.
  43. Angela
    Nov 19, 2007
    0
    Boring, slow and graphic, gory pointless scenes. Don't waste your time.
  44. NickAnno
    Nov 19, 2007
    10
    Joel and Ethan Coen created one of American cinema
  45. MikeA.
    Nov 21, 2007
    10
    A devasting film. Taut and intense
  46. JamesL.
    Nov 20, 2007
    3
    The second most disappointing and over rated film of the year after "Eastern Promises". This film is simply bloody carnage scenes, one ater another, disguised as a morality tale. "Natural Born Killers" was this graphically violent but at least it had a message. The only message I received was that the Coen brothers can stage a brutal murder scene numerous times without any real plot, suspense or character development. Tommy Lee Jones looked and acted as if he was embarrassed to be in this soory spectable. The critics who are lavishing the extraordinary praise should be embarrassed as well. Expand
  47. RobG
    Nov 22, 2007
    10
    This movie is excellent for those who aren't retarded and are able to listen to the dialogue. It's as if the best scene of a movie is stretched out for two hours--there's not one boring moment! And uh, it's not even that violent; that is, the violence is realistic and not over the top as in a Tarantino film.
  48. LydiaF.
    Nov 22, 2007
    8
    Confusing beginning but very suspenseful and well acted.
  49. Paul
    Nov 23, 2007
    1
    This movie was one of the worst I had ever seen. It is bloody and gory and sadistic. I gave it at least one point for a little of the dialogue.
  50. JoeL.
    Nov 24, 2007
    5
    For the first hour this movie showed promise. After that it slowly went downhill until the end. I use the term "end" loosely. Because there was no end. The movie just stops. To call what was on the screen an ending does an injustice to writers all over this planet. Everyone, and I mean everyone, in the theater where I watched this debacle was murmuring and scratching their heads as they left. Perhaps if I had not read so many glowing reviews before I entered the theater I would not have been so disappointed when I left. But I doubt it. If not for the acting by the 3 main characters I wouldn't have rated this dud a 5 it would have been 0. Too bad they didn't let one of those three write the script. Or at least the last page. Expand
  51. KevinB
    Nov 24, 2007
    7
    Yeah, it's basically "Fargo 2" without the humor but MUCH MORE suspenseful. Unfortunately it falls completely apart in the last 20 minutes. At the end you sit wondering what was the point of everything before. But that's Cormac McCarthy for you: write something in a specific genre, then make it not make sense and then it's not genre, "It's art!" The shocking part is that the Coens fell for it. And don't get me started on some of the unintelligible Texas accents. Some scenes were incomprehensible because the actors talked like they had marbles in their mouths. Still it was extremely suspenseful, which makes it worthwhile. Expand
  52. JoeBlow
    Nov 24, 2007
    3
    Great acting. Great cinematography. Horribly pretentcious and self important false advertising. Teases with the promise of greatness but in the end only pees in your cornflakes. I got the point, the message, whatever. Who cares. I want to some sort of payoff or sense of satisfaction. A very skillfully executed dissapointment.
  53. AmandaM.
    Nov 25, 2007
    6
    After seeing this one, I realized yet again that I'm just not that big a fan of the Coen Bros. more serious movies - "MIllers Crossing" (which people love), "Man Who Wasn't There" and now "No Country..." just leave me cold. Bone cold. While I admire their restraint and ability to generate incredible tension, it's just not an enjoyable or stimulating experience. The film is so awash in nihilism, that when you get to the end, it's impossible not to wonder what the point was. The film is expertly executed - clearly the made the film they wanted to make. It just doesn't happen to be a film I wanted to see. Expand
  54. BTBerry
    Nov 25, 2007
    3
    This movie is so violent it made me sick. Moviegoers in general are somewhat inured to all the violence in movies these days but this film's realism was over the top for me. The last 15 minutes of the film were horrible and people shouted and boo'd at the abrupt ending. The only reason I gave it 3 points was that the characters were interesting enough to watch to the end. The movie really never made it's point (at least to me) though when you got to the finish. Expand
  55. BucklyS.
    Nov 25, 2007
    4
    Most overrated film I've ever seen. Well made with great performances, but after an excellent first half it descends into miserable on a great train of boredom. What a disappointment.
  56. JackP
    Nov 25, 2007
    5
    Highly overrated. It begins with an interesting plot, but it all just goes downhill and leaves too many things hanging in the end.
  57. jasperdelarge
    Nov 25, 2007
    9
    waaaah! this movie makes me think! waaahhh! this movie has no 'ending'! waaaaahhh! why do i have to draw my own conclusions! waaaahhh! why don't they spell the point out for me in the epilogue?

    this is the best ****ing movie of 2007.
    no country for old men > eastern promises > american gangster > 3:10 to yuma
  58. MattS.
    Nov 25, 2007
    3
    This movie punches you in the face with how horrible it is, mostly because of the praise it has received from the tongues of many critics. Does this movie have a moral? Sure it does. But this no a rant, or a sermon - it is a movie, and it has to function as one. That is where No Country stumbles. I have no sympathy for Moss; I could care less if he is injured or killed. The pacing is slow to the point absurdity, and it gives the movie a suffocatingly heavy feel. Which would be fine, if the moral complex, or a big emotional pay-off ever arrived. But it never does. Save your time - Instead of going to see No Country for Old Men, go listen to your grandmother talk about when that pretty high-school student was brutally murdered in 1920. You'd get the same point. Expand
  59. BenG
    Nov 25, 2007
    8
    First of all, the film is set in the early 1980s. There is nothing inconsistent about Moss being a Vietnam vet and so young, and there are no cell phones in the book or movie. You people aren't paying attention. Second, the book is meant to be a sober and somewhat defeated meditation on the violence of our society. I agree the ending deflates a bit from the hectic pace of the better part of the movie, but I appreciate what the Coen Bros and McCarthy are trying to do with their ending, which is mountains beyond what less talented writers - and Hollywood in general - might attempt. This movie is one of the strictest adaptations of a novel I have seen, which shows the reverence the Coen Bros have for McCarthy. Expand
  60. JackR
    Nov 25, 2007
    10
    If you like classic gangster movies, such as Pulp Fiction, you're home.
  61. ChrisS.
    Nov 26, 2007
    10
    One of the best movies I have seen in years. Unbelievably intense and violent . Also, it is sometimes funny and thoughtful. Classic scene after classic scene will stay with you long after you leave the theatre.
  62. RJM.
    Nov 26, 2007
    1
    It's really quite incredible the nut-busting the critics did over this one. it's just a silly movie. I agree with the guys before me who call it a really bad version of Fargo. the movie is entertaining, but really only in the sense that you're waiting for something entertaining to happen. even the would-be entertaining moments, like the dude's escape from his motel room onto the street, are just drug out and emasculated of all their intensity. that's what this movie is, come to think of it: a limp penis. a limp penis trying pathetically to get hard. Expand
  63. BenJ.
    Nov 26, 2007
    10
    The film opens with Tommy Lee Jones' been-around-the-block Sheriff Ed Tom Bell doing nothing less than explaining exactly what the film is about. Once the voice over story finishes, the movie gets going and never really lets up. What is surprising is how the Coens took what could have been adapted into a mess of a cat-and-mouse serial killer chase film and make it not only one of the best movies of the year, but one of the best in recent memory. How do they do this? Simply by treating the audience like adults. This taut, tense, genre-bending film lays out the story expertly defying as many traditional narrative structures as possible along the way. Every shot, every line of dialogue, every grunt and every sigh are packed with information. Each and every performance is wonderful, from Jones to Brolin to Bardem and everyone they encounter along the way. This is the Coen's masterpiece. Expand
  64. heflys
    Nov 26, 2007
    9
    THis is an excellent fim that defies what one expects from general cinematography. Needles to say, it is a memorbable fim with excellent dialogue, detail, and general logic to the characters actions. To those calling it "A 2nd Fargo!", this movie is almost entirely based off a novel; adheres to said novel faithfuly.

    Just go see these film.
  65. Peter
    Nov 26, 2007
    8
    I live in West Texas and I thought it captured the peculiar atmosphere perfect. Tommy Lee Jones was great and the movie definitely had some real humour. All in all a great film. Jill E saying she was a Cormac McCarthy fan but doesn't like violence with no point - have you ever read Blood Meridian? Which is also being filmed by Ridley Scott.
  66. KellerD.
    Nov 27, 2007
    6
    I live out in that part of the world, Far West Texas they call it. I love BLOOD SIMPLE (to me one of the finest movies ever made). I went to see it with great excitement and anticipation and . . . I have to agree with Stephen Hunter of the Washington Post, I just didn't like it very much. But I'm going back tomorrow for another try.
  67. C.B.
    Nov 27, 2007
    9
    Bardem deserves the Oscar
  68. BillyS.
    Nov 27, 2007
    9
    No Country For Old Men is a dark, emotionless, without-a-soul movie thats also one of the most gut-wrenching experiences I've ever had in a darkened theatre. The Coen's have cut all the quircky, funny characters and odd humor and go straight for the narrative jugular and made helplessness a way of life for anyone who even sees Anton Chigurh, the most ruthless cinema villian since Hannibal Lector. Javier Bardem now has his signature role. In playing evil incarnate, he will probably win an Oscar. Tommy Lee Jones and Josh Brolin are excellent but its Bardem that you can't get out of your head. No Country for Old Men is a major accomplishment for the already accomplished Coen Brothers, who both take a directors credit this time, and rightly so, they'll both deserve the Best Director Oscar for this one. Just one bit of advice- wear a warm heavy coat to see this one, it'll chill you to the bone! Expand
  69. KurtL.
    Nov 28, 2007
    10
    Not since last years Babel and The Departed, have I been as entertained and mesmerized by film craft.
  70. batasablind
    Nov 29, 2007
    5
    ... All style and no substance.
    A rather overrated film ... sure the technique is good ... but the story is absolutely idiotic. It is a western adapted for the 21st century ... horses have been replaced by trucks and cars ... otherwise everything is same ... sharp shooters who never miss ... big hats ... smart one liners ... same unintelligible dialogue.

    A guy who goes around with big
    guns and air cylinders ... and no one seems to notice him ... in and out without any problem ... knows where everyone is going to be ... kills and leaves and comes and kills ... and no one can catch him ... even though this guy can barely walk ... only in Texas.

    ... well if you have not seen a western in a long time then may be you should see it ... but leave your brain at home.
    Expand
  71. SusanG.
    Nov 7, 2007
    10
    Run when you see Javier coming!!! This film had me on my seat almost the whole time. No second guessing the outcome either. Just a well developed morality and mortality tale.
  72. THATMOVIEGUY
    Nov 9, 2007
    9
    Great movie! I don't have anything else to say on this one.
  73. ColeM
    Dec 1, 2007
    4
    I have no idea what sort of hallucinogenic drugs the critics were using when they viewed this movie, but after this, I really have to rethink the merit of such reviews when deciding on a movie see and pay a large sum of money to do so. I expected a masterpiece of visual/auditory storytelling, but what I got was a mediocore movie at best. Sure it was suspensful, sure it got a reaction out of me, but the movie was so full of holes, so full of pointless scenes that did nothing to advance the plot, so full of issues left unresolved, I was angry with the abrupt cut to the credits. A absolutely pathetic disappointment. Expand
  74. BozoR.
    Dec 1, 2007
    4
    I don't go through my day & at the end ask what was meant by that. Same thing should be said about movies. I want a movie to entertain me, not confuse me. Was the hero a man portrayed as almost the devil himself who walks away at he end. Up until the end of the movie I was totally into the story and wanting it to continue, then off a cliff it went, I've got a bald spot from scratching my head. That was 'No way to end a movie'. Expand
  75. JasonM.
    Dec 10, 2007
    9
    An absolute masterpiece. Probably both the most entertaining and the most captivating movie I've seen this year. Extremely heavy, very dramatic. There is no true score; the movie is all but bereft of music, and that serves to only further engage the audience. I had popcorn and a soda, and forgot that I even had them during the movie, so entranced was I.
  76. DanceE.
    Dec 10, 2007
    9
    Ignore trying to put this plot together. Let it take you to a deeper fear than any movie I can remember. Scary from the start all the way to it's unsatisfying conclusion.
  77. ToddB
    Dec 11, 2007
    9
    For all you who say the the ending was a let down, you're immature and have never ,EVER had to make a real life decision and are incapable of an insightful cognitive thought process. think outside of yourself and how the events affect some one in those positions. How would you deal with the events. you wouldn't have to because you'd be stupid enough to become one of Antoine's victims. Expand
  78. GauravS.
    Dec 1, 2007
    10
    If you are a fan of the Cohen Brothers, and you've enjoyed such films as Raising Arizona, The Hudsucker Proxy, The Big Lebowski, then you're going to absolutely fall in love with this film. This is a black comedy murder mystery in the same vein as that of Fargo. I'm at a loss for words and a lack of vocabulary to describe how brilliant this film truly is. In its most reductive form, the summary of the film is as follows: A man stumbles upon some drug money and attempts to run away with it, only to realize that he is being followed by a lunatic murder of epic proportions, all of this happening under the watchful eyes of the local sheriff who is trying to piece together the whole story. This movie is very quiet, and this adds a level of unsettling disturbance that highlights the scenes of violence that are thrown into the mix. The epic landscape of West Texas, the brilliant acting of Tommy Lee Jones, who deserves an Oscar, along with this film, if it doesn't win Best picture this year I might weep. It is the subtleties of this film, and of the Cohen Brothers style, that truly makes this film magnificent. Their philosophy, show...don't tell. If you have any respect for me, or consider me a good friend, go see this film while it's in the theatres.I just watched it this afternoon and when the credits started to roll, my friend and I sat still for a good five minutes in silence and just soaked in the beauty of this film. Expand
  79. DanielW
    Dec 12, 2007
    6
    Can't understand the critical consensus here. Where is the unbridled fun of Lebowski or the brilliant character portrayals of Fargo? I found Miller's Crossing and Blood Simple much more menacing than this. The violence proceeded in this movie with a leaden inevitability and predictability that made me want to flee the theater.
  80. DanielB.
    Dec 15, 2007
    9
    Entertained me. Was funny and horrible and I am not sure about the ending--not because I didn't like it but because it made me want to see it a second time so I can hear what is said again. Which is another reason why this gets a 9--because how often do you want to see something *again*? Also--who knew Texas looked so barren but beautiful? I didn't. I kind of want to drive through Texas, now. Lastly, Javier Bardem is awesome. Expand
  81. JamesChirayath
    Dec 15, 2007
    5
    Like most people, I go to the movies to be entertained. This means that no matter how good a movie is it must have an ending! This movie does not have one (Ala Matrix II). Everyone in the movie theater was disappointed with the ending. Don't waste your money on this one. Thanks.
  82. PJBos
    Dec 15, 2007
    9
    How we are haunted by what think we should do and the temptations of greed and pride.
  83. GG
    Dec 16, 2007
    10
    This movie is going to be famous. Many posts here remind me a lot of the sorts of complaints my students have after I assign "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place." You have to think about this movie afterward, and the ride is great too. ("shall I ride [into the sunset]"?) It is the opposite of pointless. Susan said it well: it's "a well developed morality and mortality tale."
  84. MarkH.
    Dec 17, 2007
    10
    A true classic. Best movie in years. It is true to the Cormac MacCarthy book and philosophy. It does not make compromises to the status quo. The choices that are presented are real. People need to watch this carefully and they will obtain important lessons and insight into evil and the human condition.
  85. JimE.
    Dec 19, 2007
    10
    Shot by shot, cut by cut, sequence by sequence, no movie this year (or any other year) was more grippingly, cinematically exhilarating than "No Country for Old Men." Joel and Ethan Coen's first literary adaptation (from Cormac McCarthy's novel), crackles with an intensity that sharpens and stimulates your senses and reminds you of how little most other films do with the essential expressive properties of the medium: light, color, sound, movement, language. Movies are as much about the orchestration as the composition, and the Coens have orchestrated and composed a masterpiece -- one that embodies what most movies only describe. A Western, a crime picture, a chase thriller, a ghost story (though not in the supernatural sense), "No Country" is the story of Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin), a man chasing a dream ($2 million in drug money he's found in a satchel); Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem), a messenger of death who's tracking down Moss for the money; and Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), who's trailing both of them. Tension builds as the film progresses, even as the violence recedes. This isn't a movie about murder; it's about the awareness of inevitable death that stalks us all. Expand
  86. DD
    Dec 2, 2007
    2
    A cacophony of horrible violence for no apparent reason. It's simply a poor cross b/t Fargo and the bounty hunting element of Raising Arizona. The main killer is not sympathetic, he's just a psychopath. I love Fargo, Raising Arizona, and Miller's Crossing. I dislike this film. Please see another one. It's dull. It doesn't have a climax. People are killed needlessly. I feel like i need a shower to wash off the blood from the movie. The only redeeming quality is how it teaches one how to survive multiple injuries. It's a bit of a survivalist video. Expand
  87. Karma
    Dec 20, 2007
    10
    Bozo: Your comment was the most stupid one i could find, and there were lots.. "I don't go through my day & at the end ask what was meant by that." ..That's strange. It's called dreaming, your brain sums up the day and connects it with old information so that maybe you learn something. "Same thing should be said about movies." And to everyone who didn't like the ending: Maybe you would have liked it better with a lord of the rings-voice who sums up everything in the end.. And they could play the song Lonesom Cowboy in the background. A movie does not need a hero to be a movie. In real life the good side does not allways win. Great movie. Love how the humor is not dark even when it's such a dark movie. Amazing how even the greatest evil seems human. Not often one gets treaten like an adult by the industry. Thank you Coen's Expand
  88. RY
    Dec 20, 2007
    10
    One word....super good..i like the no score in the movie...it sets the moods in the movie more..
  89. AnonymousMC
    Dec 22, 2007
    8
    Although I have never seen any other Coen brothers movie, I found this movie to be an interesting experience. There is a lot of hidden meaning here and you can talk about the ending for weeks. The movie is a bit slow paced but well worth it if you have patience. If you are into instant gratification, stay away.
  90. GregS.
    Dec 22, 2007
    7
    javier bardem is a good actor but the entire movie lacks a certain type of karmic energy this world so often holds.
  91. AnonymousMC
    Dec 22, 2007
    10
    This is the best movie I've seen all year...it is definitly the most culturally important in my mind, in analyzing the different generations. My dad read the book and said it wasn't completely faithful, but I think the way the Coens did it was amazing and honestly, just stop bein stupid and actually pay attention and you'll figure out the ending. Much better than Fargo and Blood Simple as the Coen Brothers' best film, and much better than Atonement (basically Titannic in England-stupid). Best film of the year. Expand
  92. brianbarnhart
    Dec 27, 2007
    10
    To say, as many have, that it's the Cohen's best since Fargo isn't doing it justice. It's a viscous funny thrill ride from beginning to end. Throw in a crackling script, killer pace/editing, perfect performances from ALL the actors (and I mean every one), and beautifully shot by the always amazing Roger Deakins and you have the recipe for a truly amazing and wonderful film. One of the best films all year(s). Expand
  93. TeresaTuttle
    Dec 27, 2007
    3
    Just because something is different does not mean it's good. In the beginning I thought I would enjoy this movie, but by the end I realized this was 2.5 hours of my life I will never get back. The plot had moments of complete derailment and it had no end. Sorry, but I hated it.
  94. GetaClue
    Dec 3, 2007
    10
    Perfect movie!! Oh, and please ignore any comment from anyone who alludes to Josh Brolin not being old enough to be a Vietnam vet. If they missed the fact that the movie is set in the past, then they probably missed a whole lot more!
  95. JeffreyAnonquerin
    Dec 30, 2007
    2
    If this movie had been entitled "This Movie Is A Metaphor For The Presidency Of George W. Bush" I might have forced myself to sign on. Indeed, if there had been any point ot the movie at all. It is, undoubtedly, very precise edge-of-your-seat filmmaking. But to what end? Do we simply glorify violence? Is relentless amoral violence the essence of our civilization? Or even if it is, is it enough to simply SHOW it without comment, smirking on the sidelines? This film is over-rated by sycophantic critics who need to have above-it-all heroes of cynicism to fill in the empty foreground of their own nihilistic lives. Unfortunately, maybe they themselves are more like the dregs of society portrayed than they realize. Being so jaded is how they accomplish such a pompous feat. Films like Juno or The Great Debaters deserve much more attention than this empty intensity. Expand
  96. DavidMarx
    Dec 31, 2007
    0
    I will come out and say it, this is the worst movie I have ever seen. And I'm being completely honest about this. I will also come out and say that this is the scariest movie I have ever seen. And it is not like the kind of scary where you scream and then laugh with your friends. This is the kind of scary where you literally are considering leaving the theatre.

    And I'm not sa
    ying that this movie was poorly made, don't get me wrong. The imagry and sense of emotion is paramount! But it had no climax and the plot was only visited every once and a while. You would think that the movie would end when ****SPOILERS**** Moss was killed by the Mexicans, but no, it continues with boring and seeminly irrelevent talking sequences with the police chief. I came out of it dissapointed and releived it ended.

    Also, the ending sucked. ****SPOILERS***** After Moss died, the psychopath broke into Moss's wife's house and KILLS HER. Then as he's driving away he gets hit by another car, and guess what, HE WALKS AWAY. It's like giving a middle finger to everyone who managed to watch the whole thing.
    Expand
  97. KeithHildebrand
    Dec 31, 2007
    2
    Very disipointing esspecially the ending. Started out very good with stong characters until all were killed off with sensless violence. Ending with evil winning and a stupid ending which left you empty. It has been a long time sense I have been in the theator where the patrons showed there dissapointment at the end.
  98. Susan
    Dec 3, 2007
    0
    I can't believe I wasted 2 plus hours on this movie. It was pointless violence and there was no ending whatsoever. I could not believe my eyes when the opening credits rolled. I wish I could have my time and money back.
  99. WillT.
    Dec 5, 2007
    2
    A sadistic, ridiculously violent and pretentious waste of time. It has no relationship to real life and no meaning.
  100. JoshS
    Dec 6, 2007
    1
    This is probably the worst movie I have ever seen. It started out with good promise, but got worse and worse as time went on. There is no story development and no ending.
Metascore

Universal acclaim - based on 37 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 35 out of 37
  2. Negative: 1 out of 37
  1. It’s a near masterpiece.
  2. 100
    Joel and Ethan Coen's adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's 2005 novel is an indisputably great movie, at this point the year's very best.
  3. 90
    It's the most ambitious and impressive Coen film in at least a decade, featuring the flat, sun-blasted landscapes of west Texas -- spectacularly shot by cinematographer Roger Deakins -- and an eerily memorable performance by Javier Bardem, in a Ringo Starr haircut.