No Country for Old Men

User Score
7.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1399 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. JalexDiamond
    Mar 30, 2008
    6
    Definitely not a terrible film, but it seems like a hodgepodge of good ideas which are executed well in and of themselves. Unfortunately, it is ONLY in and of themselves that they are so well executed. The film does not connect well on any level by the final scenes. And, many things are simply not explained. Now, I don't desire to simply be spoon-fed answers by a film, but i watched Definitely not a terrible film, but it seems like a hodgepodge of good ideas which are executed well in and of themselves. Unfortunately, it is ONLY in and of themselves that they are so well executed. The film does not connect well on any level by the final scenes. And, many things are simply not explained. Now, I don't desire to simply be spoon-fed answers by a film, but i watched this film 4 times in a row and looked it up on the internet so I might understand. But, alas, the answers needed to complete this riveting-until-the-end film are simply not there. Also, something of note is Javier Bardem's performance. It has been raved about, but it is not a truly great performance. Chigurh is an interesting character, a different character, but the performance is rather simple overall. His dialogue proves that he is a madman, but not a chilling one. Just a murderer who kills people because he is a madman. His psyche seems too cyclical and bland to make this as good a performance as it should be. Overall, it's an interesting watch, but nothing close to the best film of 2007. Expand
  2. TomB.
    Feb 20, 2008
    10
    Awesome film, a great re-visit of the Coens first naive masterpiece (Blood Simple) combined with all their work since. The scenery and cinematography are magnificent, and the character development is pitch-perfect. Thosee characters that demand development get it, and those that must remain a mystery are haunting. I did not read the book so I have no idea what the story was "supposed" to Awesome film, a great re-visit of the Coens first naive masterpiece (Blood Simple) combined with all their work since. The scenery and cinematography are magnificent, and the character development is pitch-perfect. Thosee characters that demand development get it, and those that must remain a mystery are haunting. I did not read the book so I have no idea what the story was "supposed" to be, but the screenplay stands by itself as a complex, absorbing, mysterious, and ultimately satisfying tale. Not satisfying in the sense that all the circles were closed, by any means, by satisfying in that it made you think and enjoy doing your thinking. The actors' performances were spot on, and everything techincal about the movie was near-perfect. Expand
  3. NebojsaN.
    Mar 4, 2008
    10
    Reading the reviews, there seems to be a clear divide between those who require their movie experience to be one where they can turn off their brains, go on autopilot and be spoonfed a neat little predictable package, and those who are bored by this approach and instead appreciate something with more depth and theme. The poor reviews, almost without exception, complain about gratuitous Reading the reviews, there seems to be a clear divide between those who require their movie experience to be one where they can turn off their brains, go on autopilot and be spoonfed a neat little predictable package, and those who are bored by this approach and instead appreciate something with more depth and theme. The poor reviews, almost without exception, complain about gratuitous violence, the early demise of the protagonist and especially the ending, which they perceive as a non-ending. In my opinion, the ending was perfect and brought home the whole point of the movie. Any other "neat" ending that some folks seem to crave would have made this a completely different kind of movie - a movie of cheap, gratuitous violence - and I'm sure they would have loved it. Basically, if you need everything spelled out for you in obvious, simplistic terms - you will hate this movie. Most everyone else will love it. Expand
  4. ewenm.
    Mar 8, 2008
    3
    Way over-rated. pointless, characters void of any interest; been done better many times before.
  5. JasonJ
    Apr 8, 2008
    10
    The review from the Onion gets it right in its tag-line above: ''NCFOM reminds us that civilization is the aberration'; ugliness and evil are the norm in our world. That said: What if the film had a conventional ending, a shootout between Brolin and Chigurgh; and one of them got the money-- or perhaps neither of them? The film would likely have resolved with a formulaicThe review from the Onion gets it right in its tag-line above: ''NCFOM reminds us that civilization is the aberration'; ugliness and evil are the norm in our world. That said: What if the film had a conventional ending, a shootout between Brolin and Chigurgh; and one of them got the money-- or perhaps neither of them? The film would likely have resolved with a formulaic 'what is good?, what is evi? 'motif, probably thinking enough for most filmgoers. But that doesn't happen, and we are left with something much more difficult (or impossible) to digest. Jones will endure, like his father leading the way through the cold mountain pass, bearing the struggling, sputtering light into the unknown, into nothingness. And when our time comes, like Brolin's does (and Jones's will soon), none of us will see it coming. And the result? The world, with its default setting for ugliness, will continue to turn, unconcerned with us, or with our notions of good or evil and our struggles to define or contain either. And that's the message-- and it's bleak, no doubt. The film's draw for critics and other thinkers is this message, however; and it is precisely because it is far more sophisticated than a freshman philosophy resolution that would have left us questioning the nature of good and evil;or, heaven forbid, an ending that would have entailed the death of Chigurgh, the credits rolling on a final shot of a millionaire Brolin and his wife sipping Margaritas on a Mexican beach. The film's message is indeed nihilist, perhaps beyond nihilist; and it's great in the way that Macbeth is great, and for many of the same reasons. Expand
  6. TonyB.
    May 1, 2008
    10
    Great film. Acting was incredible the story line was superb. I hate people commenting on the ending, the ending was extremly well done, it was how the story was supposed to end.
  7. TinoR.
    May 3, 2008
    1
    Rented the video for a dollar at a vending machine in the local drug store. It wasn't even worth the dollar.
  8. JeffB.
    Jul 20, 2009
    0
    Although 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".
  9. ChristosM
    Sep 4, 2009
    10
    There's a fragile allegory lurking behind the scenes of this so called,alternative western and it's that of a human world loosing it's humanity,drifting away from values and ideals,surrendering to the fascinating corruption of money,violence and lust of power.In this pitch-dark universe of vulgarity,killers like Anton Chigurh rule supreme and the few humane existences There's a fragile allegory lurking behind the scenes of this so called,alternative western and it's that of a human world loosing it's humanity,drifting away from values and ideals,surrendering to the fascinating corruption of money,violence and lust of power.In this pitch-dark universe of vulgarity,killers like Anton Chigurh rule supreme and the few humane existences left,like Sheriff Llewelyn Moss,struggle to proove humanity's evil urges are not native and spontaneous,though facts tend to proove them wrong.Hollywood endings have no space in such films! Expand
  10. DevinN.
    Dec 2, 2007
    10
    Isn't it great that when people complain about this movie, it usually involves disdain at how well its rated? Excellent theme, excellent execution, brilliant film.
  11. AndrewJohnmeyer
    Dec 7, 2007
    10
    Unsatisfactory resolution? Unclear plot and character motivations? Only if you are incapable of thinking for yourself. This is not a movie that everyone will like (obviously) but it is a fantastic movie for those who are willing to think about what they've just seen. One of the strongest points of this film is the sound/music editing, notably the strong role of silence in Unsatisfactory resolution? Unclear plot and character motivations? Only if you are incapable of thinking for yourself. This is not a movie that everyone will like (obviously) but it is a fantastic movie for those who are willing to think about what they've just seen. One of the strongest points of this film is the sound/music editing, notably the strong role of silence in sound//music editing in the film. In the absence of the usual barrage of sound, every click, scuff, and shuffle take on an unrivaled immediacy. Expand
  12. Davidd
    Dec 7, 2007
    5
    I am not going to speak for the movie so much because everything good and bad that has already been said about it. I just what to just say how just ridiculous some people are to blame Metacritic for a rating a movie has. "i am not going to trust metacritic again". What?!! You dopes do realize that metacritic just basically accumulates all the scores from the real critics, don't you? I am not going to speak for the movie so much because everything good and bad that has already been said about it. I just what to just say how just ridiculous some people are to blame Metacritic for a rating a movie has. "i am not going to trust metacritic again". What?!! You dopes do realize that metacritic just basically accumulates all the scores from the real critics, don't you? They don't rate anything! hint hint, Bruce T. SIGH! Expand
  13. CoreyH.
    Jan 12, 2008
    10
    Umm... haven't seen it. I would, however, like to point out, that your prediction was completely wrong, M G. The film did exceptionally well at the box-office. Just because you didn't like it, don't assume that other people, who actually think when they watch a movie, won't.
  14. Rich
    Jan 28, 2008
    2
    This movie has to be the worst movie of the year and yet it gets acclaim from reviewers. When I go see a movie I want a good plot maybe a twist here and there and some action. You get all of that in this movie correction except the plot because the plot is totally dumb. Its so linear and when the main guy dies 3 quarters into the movie you stop caring bout the movie and start wonderingThis movie has to be the worst movie of the year and yet it gets acclaim from reviewers. When I go see a movie I want a good plot maybe a twist here and there and some action. You get all of that in this movie correction except the plot because the plot is totally dumb. Its so linear and when the main guy dies 3 quarters into the movie you stop caring bout the movie and start wondering why is this movie still going. It has its moments in the middle of the movie but thats bout it. Don't get me wrong the movie has some great acting but damn I don't go to the movies to be bored to death bout sumthing not relevent. Thats how I felt bout the ending like wtf!!!. Everyone in the thetear even the older folks were cursing this movie as a waste of time. And that is exactly what it was. So basically if you want to see a movie with great acting and a boring plot go see this movie. If not then see anything else but this please don't waste your hard earned cash on this crap. Expand
  15. blueenigma-blackgirl
    Feb 10, 2008
    2
    When I watch a film, I expect to experience a series of emotional pulls throughout the movie, either from the characters, the setting, the storyline, or a combination of elements. While watching this movie, I felt distinctly flat, and became increasing disenchanted as the story went on. The characters were underdeveloped, and I never cared what happened to any of them. The sparseness of When I watch a film, I expect to experience a series of emotional pulls throughout the movie, either from the characters, the setting, the storyline, or a combination of elements. While watching this movie, I felt distinctly flat, and became increasing disenchanted as the story went on. The characters were underdeveloped, and I never cared what happened to any of them. The sparseness of the set and the lack of a true score are both unique ideas, and in the right hands can be great stock for a masterful film; however, technique alone cannot carry a film, particularly if paired with ill-designed substance. For example, the movie is ridden with peculiar scenes that defy common sense and left me more distracted than engrossed. If we look at the scene where Llewelyn passed the suitcase of money through the duct to a different room, the question of purpose comes to mind. Recall, he did this prior to discovering the money was fitted with a tracking device. Thus, it wasn Expand
  16. KH.
    Feb 10, 2008
    9
    The story works at a few levels and some folks were only looking at the basic plot and hence disliked the compressed narrative near the end. Some stories concern themselves with more than just the relating of plot. This movie is one of the more complicated movies. If you're looking for shooting action with a bad guy and a hero, you'll be disappointed and give this movie a low score.
  17. LindaS
    Feb 16, 2008
    10
    My heart was in my throat from the very beginning of this movie and stayed there til the end. This was a definite Coen Bros. movie and possibly their best one yet. The fear that Bardem projected through the entire movie was so gripping that it needs to be seen twice - the monologues of Tommy Lee Jones (Sheriff Bell) were priceless - gave you the feeling that he was making them up trying My heart was in my throat from the very beginning of this movie and stayed there til the end. This was a definite Coen Bros. movie and possibly their best one yet. The fear that Bardem projected through the entire movie was so gripping that it needs to be seen twice - the monologues of Tommy Lee Jones (Sheriff Bell) were priceless - gave you the feeling that he was making them up trying to escape the overwhelming situation that was happening and he was helpless to correct it. Expand
  18. NK
    Feb 3, 2008
    6
    For me, Stephen Hunter (Washington Post) has hit the nail on the head. I appreciate what the Coen's are doing, I just don't care for it.
  19. AnonymousMC
    Feb 3, 2008
    1
    The beging was great! had all the makings of a good movie......then it just flat out sucked. All of the plot just came to a crashing end, they didnt even show how the hotel scene went down. How can the main charicter just be cut out of a movie with no explination? And, just when you think you might get some get some little closer on the film, the damn credits come on. How anyone in thereThe beging was great! had all the makings of a good movie......then it just flat out sucked. All of the plot just came to a crashing end, they didnt even show how the hotel scene went down. How can the main charicter just be cut out of a movie with no explination? And, just when you think you might get some get some little closer on the film, the damn credits come on. How anyone in there right mind would say this is the best movie of the year, I don't know. It was a horrible way to end a movie, and makes me think that I should be a director. Becasue anyone could do that and make millions of dollars. If all you have to do is make a few exciting shooting scenes and then roll the credits. Who would chose that as a job. Expand
  20. TylerC.
    Feb 6, 2008
    10
    The Coen Brother's second perfect film. Acting, direction, cinematography, all exact.
  21. DavidS.
    Mar 13, 2008
    1
    Overrated, over-hyped, couldn't wait until it was over. Enough said.
  22. Maggie
    Mar 15, 2008
    0
    Soooo stupid, soooo lame, soooo boring. Give me my 2 hours back. Soooo hollywood crap.
  23. JoyceC.
    Mar 2, 2008
    9
    After reading most of the reviews given here, people start yapping about how crappy the ending was. Well, from my opinion, I thought the ending was neat. I overhear people walking out of the theatre saying, "where did the oscars come from.." or "that ending was awful." Well what did you expect, for Ed Tom Bell to catch Chigurh and arrest him and happily ever after. The ending of the film After reading most of the reviews given here, people start yapping about how crappy the ending was. Well, from my opinion, I thought the ending was neat. I overhear people walking out of the theatre saying, "where did the oscars come from.." or "that ending was awful." Well what did you expect, for Ed Tom Bell to catch Chigurh and arrest him and happily ever after. The ending of the film would basically end how it would in real life because people have to realize that the bad guy doesn't always win. And it was kind of strange, but people who hated the ending won't shutup about the fact that the film didn't turn out how you expected. Well, the Coen brothers surprise us with a weird ending. Do you think that the movie should've been neatly wrapped up with an expected ending? Apparently no, the Coen brothers ended it how it would in real life which was kind of cool from my point of view. I thought No Country was a very good movie with suspenseful moments and an exciting premice. It's neat how the title fits in with the story how its no country for old men. Though in the end, you actually cared about the characters and overall, No Country for Old Men was definitely worth my day. Expand
  24. SteveS.
    Mar 25, 2008
    5
    This must be the most highly over-rated movie of 2007. Violence was just gratuitous after a while. The plot goes awry half way through: after the transponder in the money bag is discarded, how does Javier track his prey?? I just did not see that at all; it just becomes a tactic (by the directors) to kill more people. And the ending... what was that all about?? The sheriff retires, the This must be the most highly over-rated movie of 2007. Violence was just gratuitous after a while. The plot goes awry half way through: after the transponder in the money bag is discarded, how does Javier track his prey?? I just did not see that at all; it just becomes a tactic (by the directors) to kill more people. And the ending... what was that all about?? The sheriff retires, the villain walks away (without the money), so what was the point of the movie?? This was a major disappointment for me after all the hype. Expand
  25. Leibniz
    Mar 30, 2008
    7
    A real thriller. The actors and the director did a great job. Why a 7? The ending was like "Let Anton Chigurh decide what happens next".
  26. MikeSt.
    Mar 4, 2008
    1
    Anyone 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.
  27. KL
    Mar 7, 2008
    7
    Not a bad film, and since the film seems to be a faithful adaption of the novel then the actual ending couldn't change. It is a subtle ending which, to some that might have got gripped by the Chigurh Vs Moss scenes may have got lost on, the film's opening lines spoken by Sherriff Tom Bell are crucial, but I can reasonable imagine that after 2 and a half hours most viewers would Not a bad film, and since the film seems to be a faithful adaption of the novel then the actual ending couldn't change. It is a subtle ending which, to some that might have got gripped by the Chigurh Vs Moss scenes may have got lost on, the film's opening lines spoken by Sherriff Tom Bell are crucial, but I can reasonable imagine that after 2 and a half hours most viewers would be a pains to remember what was said! That aside the film was well made but not quite the perfect film that some here have held it up to be. There are a few plot holds and scenes which didn't make much sence and wouldn't really happen in reality although this could be a critism of the writer of the original novel. Spoilers: Why did Moss go back with water to the injured man in the truck? Assuming that he did manage to survive after Moss left him, water alone wouldn't save the man. When the Chigurh come calling on Moss, why did Moss, a man that goes hunting not take some sort of cover or different position rather than sit squarely oin the bed so that Chigurh wouldn't be able to get a clean shot off first? Woody Haroldson's character also seemed to be rather pointless. Moss's off screen demise was truely anticlimatic having followed the guy's trials for much of the movie. Was this decision to do Moss death offscreen just done in that manner just to be different and suprising... perhaps but it still was very anticlimatical all the same. In conclusion No Country For Old Men was good but could have been better. Expand
  28. FlorianW.
    Mar 8, 2008
    10
    A stunning piece of cinema, personally, I think it's one of the best movies of the decade. The superb acting, to the minimalist, yet deep narrative that forced you to watch it mindfully and last but not least the immense amount of symbolism and deeper meaning elevate it to heights I thought unreachable for today's mainstream cinema. The ending was superb, it got my mind racing, A stunning piece of cinema, personally, I think it's one of the best movies of the decade. The superb acting, to the minimalist, yet deep narrative that forced you to watch it mindfully and last but not least the immense amount of symbolism and deeper meaning elevate it to heights I thought unreachable for today's mainstream cinema. The ending was superb, it got my mind racing, even if most questions were answered more or less. The final 20 minutes were far from boring either, the insights into Chigurh's fatalistic mindset, establishing his role as a quasi-angel-of-vengeance as well as the role of greed in the movie thrilled me. Highly recommended, even if I can't guarantee you'll like it - but that's how it is with art, it is discourse put into form. Where entertainment tries to please the masses, art seeks to challenge the mind. Expand
  29. JacoboN.
    Apr 20, 2008
    3
    Overrated movie, a not so good FARGO .
  30. SK
    Apr 20, 2008
    0
    A 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.
Metascore
91

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.