Good Is The New Bad - Film Reviews And More

Everyone has an opinion. Yours is probably wrong.

No Country For Old Men

January 10, 2008 Jeffrey Williams 4 Comments

Tweet

In Chinatown, the malignant Noah Cross remarks that “politicians, ugly buildings, and whores all get respectable if they last long enough.” He could have easily added filmmakers to that list. Hollywood is as brutal a business as any on the planet. It’s also fond of snubbing great works, and showering accolades upon lesser contributions if the talent can remain standing long enough to accept them. (Scorsese is the most recent recipient of this largesse, receiving Oscars for his decidedly minor work The Departed as a consolation prize for being snubbed for his masterworks Goodfellas, Raging Bull, and Taxi Driver.)

The accolades currently being showered down on No Country For Old Men say more about the poor quality of films in release this year than it does for the greatness of the Coen brother’s current film. Over the years, they have established themselves as one of the pillars of independent American cinema, but they firmly remain a niche product. The mainstream found a flavor of the month in their quirky crime drama Fargo, but their films mostly survive among the art house audiences.

The Coens are master craftsmen, perhaps the last of a cinematic breed. They write, direct, and edit their films themselves. The Coen-verse is an arch, formal place to live, where the slightest gesture is a coin flip away from morphing into an outburst of violence. Their films veer from the comic to the casually sadistic, but all of them exist in airless worlds, hermetically sealed off from the concerns of reality.

No Country For Old Men is adapted from the Cormac McCarthy novel. Josh Brolin is Llewelyn Moss, a hunter who stumbles into the wreckage of a drug deal gone bad. He steals a satchel full of money from the scene and almost gets away cleanly, until a simple act of kindness complicates his getaway. Moss goes on the run, pursued by the malevolent Anton Chigurh, a killer who might be the devil incarnate.

There’s an extremely high level of craft that is on display. Perhaps instead of the tradition “directed by” credit, a more precise description might be”engineered by”. It’s one thing to marvel at a beautifully constructed piece of work. It’s quite a different thing to be engaged by it, or moreover deeply moved by it. The Coens create perfect – but perfectly airless – pieces of cinema. They’re unsympathetic, emotionally distant observers disinterested in sharing their inside jokes with the world at large. Real life isn’t allowed to intrude or disrupt the clockwork windings. There’s nobody to root for, or against, the audience just gets to watch the springs uncoil and cleanly run their course.

Purists might hail it as a triumph, but No Country For Old Men isn’t more than a minor work from the Coens, as they’ve been essentially re-making the same existential crime drama since the beginning of their career. If you lined their films up on a map, the drive from Miller’s Crossing to Barton Fink to Fargo to The Man Who Wasn’t There to No Country For Old Men would be as flat and empty as the drive from Abilene to El Paso. Despite the masterful craftsmanship, the sum of the parts is never greater than the whole. After the quirky moments and pinpoint specific dialects, there’s no greater moral or philosophical weight to take away.

No Country For Old Men is as opaque as Barton Fink, offering little insights to its characters. The act of kindness that ultimately dooms Moss is brief and soon forgotten. The motivations to stay one step ahead of the ruthless Chigurh are never more complex than simple survival and the outcome is rarely, if ever, in doubt. A Simple Plan – both the novel and the film – takes a similar setup and weaves a far more compelling drama. In the Coen-verse, life might be nasty, brutal, and short but fortunately, it’s painlessly free from consequences.


The basic problem of translating a book to the screen is neatly illustrated in No Country For Old Men, as well. Cormac McCarthy, to the extent that he’s readable, is strongest as a minimalist. He’s a prose artist, which is the worst thing of all to translate to the screen.

Books are not movies. Movies summon their power from the near god-like abilities of the director – controlling light, shadow, sound – every aspect of reality but time. Movies work because they play out in a fixed, unblinking stream. All of the cinematic elements are choreographed and unfold in a precise, unswerving 24 frames per second. It is, in many respects, an experience of tyranny. Go get popcorn in the middle, and every frame of film you missed is gone.

Cinema does not lend itself to elaborate poetry and long recitations. The Coen brothers are an ideal choice to adapt McCarthy, and a shining argument against adapting him at all. The beauty of his books drips from his Hemingway crisp prose. The final speech, on the page, is fantastic. But it takes a moment to sink in, and to really comprehend the speech and the nuances of it requires you to spend a moment looking at it on the page.

Loretta Bell: How’d you sleep?
Ed Tom Bell: I don’t know. Had dreams.
Loretta Bell: Well you got time for ’em now. Anythin’ interesting?
Ed Tom Bell: Well they always is to the party concerned.
Loretta Bell: I’ll be polite.
Ed Tom Bell: Okay. Two of ’em. Both had my father. It’s peculiar. I’m older now then he ever was by twenty years. So in a sense he’s the younger man. Anyway, first one I don’t remember so well but it was about money and I think I lost it. The second one, it was like we was both back in older times and I was on horseback goin’ through the mountains of a night. Goin’ through this pass in the mountains. It was cold and snowin’, hard ridin’. Hard country. He rode past me and kept on goin’. Never said nothin’ goin’ by. He just rode on past and he had his blanket wrapped around him and his head down and when he rode past I seen he was carryin’ fire in a horn the way people used to do and I could see the horn from the light inside of it. About the color of the moon. And in the dream I knew that he was goin’ on ahead and that he was fixin’ to make a fire somewhere out there in all that dark and all that cold, and I knew that whenever I got there he would be there. Out there up ahead. And then I woke up.

On screen, that moment appears out of nowhere and is over before the words can even sink in. Any impact that they gain from Tommy Lee Joneâ’s bone-weary drawl doesn’t off-set the inability to read and absorb them. Savoring them is impossible, because the magic isn’t in the drawl, or the granite features of Tommy Lee Jones or his character, the beauty is in the west Texas dry language. Soon as you inflate those words to life size and real time, the magic disappears.

Tweet

Share this:

  • Share
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr

Related

Filed Under: Film Review Tagged With: Cormac McCarthy, Joel and Ethan Coen, screenplay adaptation

Social

  • View jeffrey723’s profile on Twitter
  • View jeffrey723’s profile on Instagram
  • View jeffrey723’s profile on YouTube
  • View mile47post’s profile on Vimeo

Follow me on Twitter

My Tweets
« Tear Down the Wall: The eMusic World
Cloverfield »

Comments

  1. Jeffrey Williams says

    January 30, 2008 at 5:34 pm

    I’ve been reading an old review of Barton Fink, and Terrence Raferty exquisitely skewers the Coens for their empty, isolated films:

    “The Coens started out…as genre movie parodists and cynical wits, but in Barton Fink, the Coens appear to be taking their lack of seriousness seriously: they’ve become nihilist showoffs.”

    “Joel Coen’s smooth, precisely choreographed, decorative camera style gives even the most horrifying events a high gloss: the movie makes its argument, proceeds from its hypothesis to its conclusion, with the polished, haughty manner of a professor delivering a lecture he’s been trotting out for years.”

    And most damningly:

    “Maybe the best way to understand the Coens – to put their intellectual agility and fundamental coldness into perspective – is to think of them as jaded graduate students amusing themselves by working up rarefied, wittily erudite interpretations of their favorite authors.”

    That was written 17 years ago about Barton Fink, and it’s all directly applicable to No Country For Old Men. The Coens have been remaking one of two movies – a comedy or an oblique drama – for the better part of the last 18 years.

    Reply
  2. Russell says

    February 10, 2008 at 8:37 am

    “…would be as flat and empty as the drive from Abilene to El Paso.” Hmmm…you’ve obviously never made that drive. Then again, just like the “fly-over” areas of the country you have apparently looked over, a person’s experience with a film is all relative to what they focus on.

    Reply
  3. Jeffrey Williams says

    February 10, 2008 at 11:10 am

    OK, guilty on the bad metaphor. I could have accurately and with first-hand knowledge said “the drive from Omaha to Ogallala” instead, but I wanted to stick with the Texas metaphor. The repeated accounts I’ve heard from friends who have made that drive left me feeling it was accurate

    Still, the point remains that there’s very little artistic development that’s happened between Barton Fink and No Country. The Coens have perfected their style, but they haven’t pushed it to any new ground.

    Bottom line is that I enjoyed watching No Country, but it’s hollow – more technical achievement than emotional engagement. It’s a well made chase picture, but the profundity stops there. The book is a vastly different experience, and any errors in translation aren’t necessarily the fault of the Coen’s, but of problems with the whole process of adapting a work to the screen.

    As for the fly-over states, all my relatives in the mid-west are puzzled by the hype over both There Will Be Blood and No Country. The only Best Picture Oscar entrant that they’re rooting for is Michael Clayton.

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. There Will Be Blood | Good Is The New Bad - Film Reviews And More says:
    February 5, 2008 at 11:11 am

    […] like the Coen’s static No Country For Old Men, There Will Be Blood is just an icy facade, devoid of substance. In a year or two, after a dozen […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply to There Will Be Blood | Good Is The New Bad - Film Reviews And More Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2025 · Ambiance Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.