- Studio: Miramax Films
- Release Date: Nov 9, 2007
User Score
7.3
out of 10
Generally favorable reviews- based on 995 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 744 out of 995
-
Mixed: 83 out of 995
-
Negative: 168 out of 995
Review this movie
-
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
- User score
- Most active
- By date
- Most helpful
- Most Clicked
-
Mar 31, 20124No country for old man is the Cohen brothers weakest film. You see i need a score in a movie to help it move along, when this movie did not incorporate music it made it very boring in a lot of parts. pretty good acting with a few a good scenes though.
-
May 19, 20132
-
Aug 24, 20110This film is a steaming pile of **** and one of the worst movies I have ever scene 0 out of 10
-
Oct 7, 20120This movie sucked. There's a reason why it lost money at the box office, and was winner at the least-watched Academy Awards of all time. That reason is this: it's boring, pretentious, and shoddily made.
-
ewenm.Mar 8, 20083Way over-rated. pointless, characters void of any interest; been done better many times before.
-
-
TinoR.May 3, 20081Rented the video for a dollar at a vending machine in the local drug store. It wasn't even worth the dollar.
-
-
JeffB.Jul 20, 20090Although the actors did a great job ... the plot had no substance or meaning due to a poorly written ending. I don't even think the Director could tell you what it meant. All i can figure out is they reached thier target budget and said "Alright ... let's end it here".
-
-
RichJan 28, 20082
-
-
blueenigma-blackgirlFeb 10, 20082
-
-
AnonymousMCFeb 3, 20081
-
-
DavidS.Mar 13, 20081Overrated, over-hyped, couldn't wait until it was over. Enough said.
-
-
MaggieMar 15, 20080Soooo stupid, soooo lame, soooo boring. Give me my 2 hours back. Soooo hollywood crap.
-
-
MikeSt.Mar 4, 20081Anyone who rated this movie higher than five must be unaware that it has been made dozens of times before. Guy takes drug dealers money and drug dealer chases him - the only difference is the other movies actually had an ending. The Coen brothers borrowed a tired plot and the ending of "The Sopranos" and get an academy award? No wonder nobody watches that joke of an awards ceremony anymore.
-
-
JacoboN.Apr 20, 20083Overrated movie, a not so good FARGO .
-
-
SKApr 20, 20080A VERY VERY bad movie. I have no idea how this movie won an Oscar. I contemplated multiple times during the movie of walking out, but I endured till the end in the hope that the end would salvage the movie. No such thing, the end leaves you with an even worse feeling. Horrible, horrible movie.
-
-
KrisKelleyApr 6, 20083Unsatisfying ending.
-
-
LaurenceE.Jul 6, 20084I saw this movie on dvd at home on a big screen projector.Maybe it was a different version to the one at the cinema.. I thought it was a predictable story with no twists of any great substance. I was not on the edge of my seat nor was it a thriller or heart stopping. Some of the acting was ok but I was disappointed overall. I would not recommend this movie to anyone.
-
-
Stung47000Jan 20, 20090Who told Hollywood that in order to make an original movie nowadays you have to make it suck at the end? The movie was a 10 until the last act, but then it ended so god-awful it actually deserves a negative score for failing so hard!
-
-
DCApr 30, 20093
-
-
HughBApr 18, 20100
-
-
KyleB.Nov 30, 20070Good movie, but the ranking needs to go down because of the ending, no way it should be 8.0 more like 5 or 6.
-
-
DWillyNov 9, 20073
-
-
MattBDec 14, 20073
-
-
JoelJan 20, 20081I'm with Steve and M B on this one its like the Coen bros. are paying the review crew to suck their cocks; the only reason I give this Boring ass movie a 1 is for the cool ass Air gun and thats IT.
-
-
DavidFosterJan 3, 20081
-
-
AnonymousMCJan 3, 20084
-
-
FrankMonteleoneJan 7, 20082
-
-
TomTFeb 24, 20082A waste of a couple of hours. Sure the critics say it is great film didn't see the whole movie. It starts with a reasonably interesting overly violent movie and turns into mush. It seems it takes until the end of the movie for the director to learn that it is possible to explain a murder without showing it on screen.
-
-
MaureenFFeb 3, 20081
-
-
TrickyHFeb 3, 20084
-
-
chadFeb 4, 20083
-
-
CoryGMar 14, 20081There were some good parts... SOME, but the rest of it was just a let down. I really dont understand why this movie won so many awards.
-
-
AaaB.Mar 16, 20083Uhggg... I'd like my 2 hours back. Waaaaay over rated. I don't see what all the critics were raving about! This is an average movie AT BEST. There were maybe two tense scenes and the rest was useless filler. Unbelievable that this would get an Oscar. Hollywood is smokin' crack if this is the best film of the year!!
-
-
elenakarpovaMar 18, 20084
-
-
MarkusMar 2, 20081
-
-
JackBMar 2, 20084The first 90 minutes of this film had me on the edge of my seat. Then within 5 minutes and two scenes, everything that had been building up was ruined by an incredibly poor and ill constructed twist. After watching Broken Flowers, which also had no ending, i must say im becoming somewhat disillusioned by the film industry at this moment in time.
-
-
TheBestMar 30, 20080The movie was probably the worst i've seen, there was too little information on everything. There were times when some scenes they really didn't even need. The ending was horrible and the main guys death wasn't shown in the movie. You don't get to see what happened to the characters in the end.
-
-
LeeC.Mar 30, 20080This movie was one of the worst movies I have ever seen - I hated the ending and hated the multitude of "why's" left hanging at the end = why anybody would watch such abysmal drival is beyond me.
-
-
AudreyC.Mar 3, 20081When I spend my time watching cinema, I at best expect to see a complete and thought provoking piece of art. This work failed on both counts. The violence was for the most part pointless. Holes in the narrative dangled like nagging prepositions. The nonending simply confirmed my firm conviction that I had wasted valuable time that could have been better spent EVEN IN A LAUNDROMAT!!!
-
-
aaronMar 7, 20081
-
-
TedT.Apr 13, 20083What was all the hype about???? You must be kidding me. This was shot like something from the 70's. If thats what turned you on..then watch something from the 70's. I'm still scratching my head over why I heard so many people say "best movie I've seen" are you serious? This was nothing more than...nothing.
-
-
LeoM.Apr 13, 20083Plodding display of meaningless violence. No redeeming qualities at all.
-
-
JonathanK.Apr 18, 20081This movie was terrible. It was nothing more than an anti-climatic clusterf*ck that does nothing more than waste 2 hours of your time to feed you some message that the world is a terrible place.
-
-
LWeeksApr 25, 20081I agree with Joseph S. and SK, how on earth did this movie get such rave reviews. It started out very entertaining, but by the end of the movie, I was ready to go to sleep. It seems as though they did not know how to end such a great beginning, so they just killed everyone off and said the heck with it. YUCK
-
-
MichelleApr 26, 20082
-
-
LindaW.Apr 26, 20081The ending ruined the whole movie.
-
-
TedK.Jun 20, 20084
-
-
KNobSep 9, 20081This movie started with an improbable story line that led no where. This was a total waste of time.
-
-
GARYA.Feb 21, 20093Obscure, but without depth.
-
-
AnonymousMCFeb 3, 20094
-
-
SteveJun 30, 20092
-
-
DallinPJul 13, 20090A movie with no real characters, no closure, and just a little plot. The only thing that separates this fil from other dumb action films like shoot 'em up is shoot 'em up has enough action to keep you entertained solidly for two hours.
-
-
MSJul 2, 20093
-
-
DougR.Nov 19, 20074would have scored it much higher, but for the ending... i won't spoil it here, but thought it was ridiculous in the extreme... a really terrific movie, right up to the point where it chooses to become a truly lousy one.
-
-
JillE.Nov 22, 20071I hated this movie and I am a Cormac McCarthy fan! A better title would have been Two Weeks in the Life of a Psychopath. Great cast but extremely violent with no point that I could see. Hope to get it out of my mind soon.
-
-
MicheleC.Nov 22, 20070This was the most boring movie I have ever viewed -- a total waste of money -- which is saying a lot, because I have seen some really bad flicks. I started to walk out -- I noticed four people did just that -- but felt I should give the film a chance. It started flat; it ended flat. I couldn't wait to get home and express my disappointment here.
-
-
MG.Nov 24, 20071
-
-
JamesC.Nov 20, 20072
-
-
toosinbeymenDec 26, 20070
-
-
MikeF.Dec 4, 20074
-
-
BruceT.Dec 5, 20070The 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.
-
-
TimH.Dec 5, 20072This 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.
-
-
DenisM.Dec 7, 20072Inspired acting and cinematography, but in the end, I felt as simply a voyeur in a West Texas drug culture slaughterhouse. Not up to Fargo.
-
-
BillW.Dec 9, 20073
-
-
LevJan 11, 20083
-
-
RKJan 12, 20083
-
-
LloydM.Jan 12, 20084The 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.
-
-
MBJan 15, 20083I 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.
-
-
SteveJan 18, 20080
-
-
sedw.Jan 23, 20081
-
-
SibylPJan 23, 20081
-
-
JeffAJan 26, 20083
-
-
JohnH.Jan 26, 20083Reasonably 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.
-
-
TrevorA.Jan 29, 20081What 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.
-
-
PriyanthT.Jan 31, 20083Slow and boring. Too much of editing.
-
-
AnonymousMCJan 3, 20082Yeah, I know everyone says this is a thinker, and let me tell you I
-
-
BruceW.Feb 10, 20082This 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.
-
-
DD.Feb 27, 20082The least surprising movie the Cohen bothers have made. It
-
-
KirkPMar 13, 20082At 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?
-
-
lindaMar 14, 20080Are 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.
-
-
AdamK.Mar 15, 20083I didn't get it, I guess. A mildly exciting movie at parts, but mostly it was deadly boring and without any real ending.
-
-
SharynMar 15, 20083
-
-
MiltG.Mar 16, 20081
-
-
DianaChertovaMar 19, 20082I 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..
-
-
JohnJMar 2, 20082
-
-
RMB.Mar 20, 20083
-
-
FredB.Mar 23, 20083
-
-
SeanA.Mar 27, 20081The 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.
-
-
ArmondA.Apr 10, 20080
-
-
MiKEApr 10, 20080Wow! What a disappointment this turned out to be! Pointless, unreal, boring, and a terrible ending!
-
-
Dr.WayneApr 14, 20082One 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.
-
-
JosephS.Apr 22, 20083This 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.
-
-
JPApr 4, 20083Violent & nihilist, beautifully done but ultimately pointless.
-
-
JamieL.Jun 12, 20084This 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.
-
-
JackZ.Jun 30, 20080
-
-
SimonBAug 29, 20084
-
-
gcashJan 3, 20091This 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!!!!
-
-
SamOct 4, 20090I 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.
-
-
JarekD.Aug 24, 20090One of the worst movies I've ever seen.
-
-
JohnHAug 5, 20092Weak 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.
-
-
90It’s a near masterpiece.
-
100Joel and Ethan Coen's adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's 2005 novel is an indisputably great movie, at this point the year's very best.
-
90It'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.