Synopsis: There Are No Clean Getaways
Acclaimed filmmakers Joel and Ethan Coen deliver their most gripping and ambitious film yet in this sizzling and supercharged action-thriller. When a man stumbles on a bloody crime scene, a pickup truck loaded with heroin, and two million dollars in irresistible cash, his decision to take the money sets off an unstoppable chain reaction of violence. Not even West Texas law can contain it. Based on the novel by Pulitzer Prize-winning author Cormac McCarthy, and featuring an acclaimed cast led by Tommy Lee Jones, this gritty game of cat and mouse will take you to the edge of your seat and beyond – right up to its heart-stopping final moment.
************************************************************************
For a long time, based only on the title and artwork, I steered clear of ‘No Country for Old Men’. It just didn’t appeal to me, and I couldn’t be bothered – I had so many other fish to fry and not even the Coen Bros’ reputations could overcome these mundane hurdles.
Frankly, I only picked it up because I kept hearing such great things about it. Plus I got a good deal on it; when it’s cheap enough I can sometimes be convinced to give something a chance. Almost every movie, good or bad, has its price. Almost. 
All this to say that I sat down to watch this with no real preconceptions, not even knowing the plot. Heck, years ago, I thought it was a western, and even mixed it up frequently with ‘There Will Be Blood’. Basically, the other day, all I knew was that it was the Coen Bros’ work and that it’s worth seeing. That’s about it.
So you can imagine my elation when ‘NCFOM’ shot out of the gate and kept going for about ninety minutes. For all of that time I was on the edge of my seat, wondering what would come next – knowing full well that, with the Coens, anything could happen.
The music might have helped. I’m really not a fan of Carter Burwell; I appreciate his skill, but his music usually leaves me cold. However, in this film he created a perfectly atmospheric score that helped to set the stage – it totally created a mood. The audio work was also quite good, overall (ex: the few gun shots came out clearly and sounded realistic).
The film began with some of the most beautiful on-screen scenery in recent memory. Texan landscapes may be somewhat barren, but they can also be gorgeous. Roger Deakins has been doing the Coens’ films for years and has won numerous awards. It shows.
After the early tranquility of these shots, however, things gradually pick up and then gather speed all the way until about 3/4 of the way in. This is when the chase between our two main characters, played by Josh Brolin and Xavier Bardem, cools dramatically.
Josh Brolin was simply terrific here; he injected grizzled touches of James Coburn and Kris Kirstophersen. He was completely believable (hardly surprising, since he has personal experience to back up the part). Wow. He’s really developed over the years – to think that he started out in ‘The Goonies’!
Xavier Barden was also a stand-out in ‘No Country’, as anyone who’s seen it will attest. He plays up his character’s creepiness in a way that is unconventional in these types of films. Even his look, his hair, his pallor, made one uneasy. All this to say that his turn elevated the film above its peers, making it quite memorable. 
Tommy Lee Jones was good, as per usual, but played a role he’s done oft before (including in ‘The Fugitive’). Kelly Macdonald was superb. I immediately took to her in ‘Trainspotting’, so I’m glad to see that she’s still around, giving us her best. 
Meanwhile, Woody Harrelson was decent enough, but he has a few ticks (especially facial ones) that recur in his roles – something which reminds me of ‘Cheers’ almost without fail. I’m a HUGE fan of the show, but it’s a distraction to associate comedy with his more serious roles. 
I adored the cat and mouse game between Brolin and Bardem. That was actually thrilling, considering that both are trackers – and exceptionally good ones at that. A large part of the film was essentially a question of one trying to outwit the other, and always managing just barely. 
I can’t into details without ruining the film, but I hated that the film changed gears 3/4 of the way in. They removed so many characters from the film so casually, unceremoniously. It may be true to life in some ways, but it felt unsatisfying to me, in light of the high I was on until then.
I actually thought that the Coens were playing tricks on us and that these characters would return later (you know how it is… “unexpectedly”, the hero comes out of nowhere to save the day, or the bad guy everyone thinks is dead come back for one last scare ;).
But it was not so. Suddenly we discover that, in actuality, the main character was, until then, a side character!
What was the point? What were they, or the original author, trying to say by doing this? Why would we follow two characters so tightly for 90 mins, and then abruptly move on to other characters for the rest of the film?
While I still enjoy the film in the end, this sudden shift did detract from my appreciation. Whereas I would give the first 90 minutes an 8.5-9 out of 10, I’d give that last part a 7-7.5. And I have yet to figure out how to reconcile the two.
So, in the end, I think ‘No Country for Old Men’ is better than just an 8.0, but I can’t quite give it an 8.5. Gonna have to go halfsies on this one.
Perhaps someday I’ll wrap my mind around that ending and notch it up a little bit. Lord knows I’ll be seeing it again. 
thecriticaleye 