Author Topic: No Country for Old Men  (Read 48702 times)

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Elite Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4572
    • Filmspotting
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #60 on: November 28, 2007, 10:12:59 AM »
About the Chigurh-Bell scene at the end... Brolin definitely said there is the possibility that Chigurh isn't "really there." Do with that what you will.
Follow Filmspotting on Twitter at http://twitter.com/filmspotting

Listen to Filmspotting at https://www.filmspotting.net/ and on Chicago Public Radio (91.5 FM)

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #61 on: November 28, 2007, 10:18:21 AM »
I read something smart on IMDB yesterday (I was shocked) about Chigurh not just being a psycho assassin but Death itself.

Quote
My Dad sent me an email of his interpretation of this film. Have a read, and tell me if you think he's on the right track...
I like his synopsis, but maybe I am biased because I'm related. But it reads pretty good imho.

    The intense drama in this suspenseful movie certainly kept me riveted to the screen and at the edge of my seat but when the ending wasn’t what most if not all of the audience expected I wondered if I missed something. I found the answer in the last few scenes, starting with Chigurh sitting at the curb with gruesome injuries as a result of the car accident which left the other driver dead, to the ending where he just walked away.

    There had to be something more, and when I recalled what Chigurh said to the two young fellows who showed concern for his severe injuries and offered any help they could give, I sensed that there was more to the movie than death and destruction. As he walked away, he turned and said to them in essence “you haven’t seen me”. This simple statement helped me understand why some people died and others lived when Anton revealed himself to them in one way or another. I don’t think that Anton was hired to find the missing money and kill those that stood in his way, but rather that he was always there and revealed himself to those whose fate it was to die. That was his mission and reason for existing. His presence, I believe, was symbolic in nature but the fact that he was visible added not only suspense but also a potent dimension of fear. There was no point looking for him. He always found the intended target and it was pointless to try to run and hide from him.

    If we look at Chigurh as the personification of death and get over the idea that he was after the two million or so dollars, killing any and all that interfered with his search to find it, then we can see some interesting symbolism that makes it profoundly evident that death is never far from those who engage in dangerous deeds or occupations. The sheriff had such an occupation but he also saw death so many times in various forms during his time as lawman. Being at the end of his career, could it be that he turned introspective and was so pre-occupied with death that his dreams may have created its personification in the form of Anton Chigurh?

    Rather than write about the obvious causes leading to death, I will give my theory of whether or why some people died and others didn’t, discussing those cases I can still recollect.

    Starting with the two boys who offered their help. The key is that although they saw Anton, they did not see him as Death. Anton said to them “you didn’t see me”. The gas station attendant who was challenged to call the outcome of the coin flip was spared because this time the outcome was in his favor. Perhaps the message here is that being so isolated, he could easily be the target of someone intent on doing harm. Anton represented such a threat and the man behind the counter probably didn’t realize how close he came to being killed. On the other had, Llewellyn’s wife, although death was very real to her at this point in her life, refused to give in to his challenge and became a survivor. The sheriff encountered death on a daily basis but unlike his colleague at the start of the movie, escaped its clutches so far. Nevertheless, he was cognizant of its threat, as symbolically illustrated by Anton crouching in a corner inside the motel room, but in he confronted his fears and went inside. Once in the room, he turned on the lights and sat down on the bed relaxed. Anton was gone, but this episode was for me confirmation of Chigurh’s symbolic nature.

    Another incident gave credibility to my theory. It was the scene where Anton enters the office of the man who sent Carson Wells to find the money. He shot him as soon as he entered. I believe that it was symbolic of the sudden death of a man who obviously lived an unhealthy life style and probably died of a massive heart attack. Now what about the young accountant? He asked Anton “are you going to kill me too?” to which Anton replied with the question “can you see me?” I trust that the young accountant got the message and got out of there instead of answering with a “yes”. The heavy-set lady Chigurh asked if she knew of Llewellyn’s whereabouts was too occupied with, among other things, doing her nails and hardly acknowledged his presence. I’m sure that this saved her life.

    I have mentioned incidents I could remember and saw those as evidence that the deeper message of the movie was that there are circumstances where death is very near. There are those who have a close call, and those who simply refuse to give in and become survivors. There are also those who meet death through acts of violence or a life style that sends them to an early grave. And all too often there are innocent victims simply because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time. Anton doesn’t discriminate. He exists to fulfill his mission swiftly and without mercy or compassion.

    Could it be that the events depicted in the movie were incidents the sheriff recalled and that Anton and the strange methods he used to kill his victims were exaggerated manifestations of the brain’s attempt to put a human face on the symbols of death? I believe that the movie gave some insight into the mind of Sheriff Bell who, facing retirement, recalled some of the more traumatic and memorable events from his career and came face to face with thoughts of his own mortality and its finality. But he also showed courage to confront his fears (at the motel crime scene) and apprehensions.

    It would take me too long to respond to the many other scenarios, but trust that I have said enough to encourage people to take a fresh look at this movie. I found my discovery of its deeper meaning interesting enough to want to see it again. This time, the ending will make perfect sense to me.

The author gets a couple of things wrong (Carla Jean does die...) but it works, I think.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Elite Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4572
    • Filmspotting
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #62 on: November 28, 2007, 10:28:18 AM »
Haven't gone through it yet in detail... but of course, saying "have you seen me" or "you haven't seen me" 'could' just be his way of saying... I was never here. Doesn't have to be something more metaphysical than that. However, I wouldn't put it past the Coens at all.
Follow Filmspotting on Twitter at http://twitter.com/filmspotting

Listen to Filmspotting at https://www.filmspotting.net/ and on Chicago Public Radio (91.5 FM)

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #63 on: November 28, 2007, 10:32:21 AM »
And here is another good article about the difference between the book and the movie from The AV Club.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #64 on: November 28, 2007, 10:33:32 AM »
Haven't gone through it yet in detail... but of course, saying "have you seen me" or "you haven't seen me" 'could' just be his way of saying... I was never here.

That's what I took it to mean, but this is an interesting, if not "correct", theory. At least I thought so.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

kypade

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 213
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #65 on: November 28, 2007, 10:51:16 AM »
It's interesting (and he's certainly not the only one to see it similarly), but whether you buy into it or not doesn't strike me as too important. "Death" or not, it's still a physical character interacting with other characters. Can't see how reading it that way could ever be misinterpreting anything. (Unless he is saying that Chigurh never existed at all, and was symbolic of death, not representative of Death, in which case I don't get, or buy it. I also haven't read the theory in depth though.)

Clovis8

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11719
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #66 on: November 30, 2007, 01:25:13 AM »
Wow I loved this movie. I think it might be on my top 10 all time best list. A question though....I am not 100% sure Llywelan dies? They never show a closeup of his body and never make any clear statements about his death. Then they show his mother-in-law's funeral. Could it not be that she was killed in the motel and this is why Llywelan's wife cries when the sheriff shows up? Was there some clear evidence that Llyewlan actually dies?

I too was a little confused by ending and will be going to see this move again. But wow is it amazing.

Osprey

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 360
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #67 on: November 30, 2007, 03:53:50 AM »
I'm not sure why you think bringing up Death Proof helps defend this film. Tarantino's been going downhill for a while, since Jackie Brown in my estimation.  Death Proof is the weakest thing of his I've seen.  I think NCFOM was a much better movie.

I maintain that this is a good noir that is being blown out of proportion due to who directed it.
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. It's like saying everybody likes Death Proof because it has Tarantino's name on it. No, Death Proof is that good BECAUSE Tarantino directed it, just as No Country is that good BECAUSE the Coen Bros. directed it. I guess everyone just thought I was rambling during our review because every inch of that film is a Coen Bros. film

pixote

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 34237
  • Up with generosity!
    • yet more inanities!
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #68 on: November 30, 2007, 04:07:44 AM »
I'm not sure why you think bringing up Death Proof helps defend this film. Tarantino's been going downhill for a while, since Jackie Brown in my estimation.  Death Proof is the weakest thing of his I've seen.  I think NCFOM was a much better movie.

Adam didn't use Deathproof to defend No Country for Old Men, but rather to try to rebut your asserted correlation between a film's critical reception and a film's authorship.

That being said, I don't think your original point was, to borrow Adam's word, ridiculous. Not completely. However, my experience with No Country for Old Men is completely the opposite: I tend to be more critical of films whose directors have done great work in the past — because of the higher expectations I have going in.

pixote
Great  |  Near Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Fair  |  Mixed  |  Middling  |  Bad

Rene A. Moncivais

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 368
Re: No Country for Old Men
« Reply #69 on: November 30, 2007, 09:13:19 AM »
Wow I loved this movie. I think it might be on my top 10 all time best list. A question though....I am not 100% sure Llywelan dies? They never show a closeup of his body and never make any clear statements about his death. Then they show his mother-in-law's funeral. Could it not be that she was killed in the motel and this is why Llywelan's wife cries when the sheriff shows up? Was there some clear evidence that Llyewlan actually dies?

I too was a little confused by ending and will be going to see this move again. But wow is it amazing.

They showed Llywelan's body didn't they?
"What about Oliver Stone?"

"Ummm, send him meat."