I've seen this movie a hundred times and it never crossed my mind that it needs music, I didn't think about it until now it's almost like I didn't even notice the lack of music
@@donaldo141194 It makes everything more intense, no suspense-music actually makes it more suspenseful. The Coen Brothers really know how to make it work to their advantage.
I think it's effective because music tends to foreshadow too often. In real life there are rarely previews or foreshadowing. In my movies I don't want to know something is about to happen.
Larry John - the milk is purely to affirm that Sugur was there, that he knew they were coming and that he would get him before they did. Because he sees it all coming, and he is amazed nobody else does. The predictability of humans is baffling to Sugur. He kind of wants them to smarten up *and catch him if at al possible... because he's not really sure he otherwise exists.* 2 cents.
I think there's another subtle aspect to the moral that most people missed in this film. Up until Moss' showdown with Chigurh, the villain is seen as almost immortal and essentially unstoppable. Moss is able to wound him and offer him his first true challenge, which feels emotionally appropriate because Moss is the protagonist. Then, when Moss is killed, Chigurh goes back to being unstoppable and terrifying again. Chigurh is a personification of evil itself, which none of us can survive without the aid of heroes or at least heroism; in Moss' absence, evil is free to move about and operate unimpeded and unchallenged. At the end of the film, when Chigurh is severely injured in a startling car accident and limps away with his bones sticking out, his future is now uncertain, and he is shown in a shocking turn to be much more vulnerable than we had thought. We are left to realize that the image of unconfrontable evil in our minds was always an illusion and an exaggeration; that even the most terrifying villain is ultimately powerless against the forces of entropy which rule the universe. He may be stronger or more fearsome than we are, but to a careless moment at a stop sign, he's just another accident victim. At the very moment of the film when the sheriff is explaining his choice to resign, certain that he cannot contend with the changing times, the thing he feared the most is shown broken and defeated. So to me, the real moral of the film is that nothing - not even the devil himself - is immune to the winds of change. There was never a "good old days"; only ever a relentless march of time, which consumes everything in its path. The sheriff, at this point, ceases to become a character, and joins the viewer in offering interpretations of the film we have just seen. And in failing to understand the fragility of all things - even evil - the sheriff's interpretation of the film, and indeed his whole assessment of his world, is shown to be tragically incorrect.
@@nunliski He specifically said "to me". And maybe there is a real moral. The one that autor had in mind while writing the story, but it doesn't mean that your interpretation is wrong, or another person's interpretation is wrong. There can be as many interpretations as many there are members of the audience, my teacher used to say. If you were forced to interpret things in a certain, "true" way in your school, then you had shitty teachers. If you can back up your understanding of the movie by some facts from it and it makes logical sense, then your interpretation is by all means true.
In the "good old days" the sheriff's didn't wear a gun. But they were also shot in the gut at sunrise by a band of Indians and took all day to die while the wife watched over him. In the book, teachers said gum chewing was their major discipline problem back in 1960, but now it's rape, drugs, violence. He says it's because parents don't raise children, grandparents do, and politeness is the first bulwark of civilization. But Bonnie and Clyde in the 30's, Al Capone, hell, the Civil War before that; "this country is hard on people," as the old man says. I think Chigurrh getting hit by the car is that there HAS to be some sort of a universal balance. He got away with it, he killed Carla Jean because of a promise, and he had to balance the scales. Did you like "The Counselor," the movie? Cormac McCarthy wrote the script when he was in his 80's, and critics panned it saying it was too focused on death and morbidity. I think that was unfair. A deep man at the end of his life, with an archive of dark themed stories, we should listen to what he has to say, maybe he has a perspective we don't. At least it was original.
Dennis Mayne no, Chigurh is becoming an old man. It’s time for him to go. He met Moss, who managed to shoot him, Carla, who’s even younger, and refused to play his game, saying « it’s just you », and then the kids on bikes distracted him and he had the accident. Clock’s ticking, wheel is turning, he’s becoming old and it’s time for him to go.
Tiny detail I just noticed: There's this recurring scene we see in action and suspense films nowadays where the protagonist is driving through an intersection and they get T-Boned, but you almost always see the car that hits them in the distance of the interior shot. The scene where Chigurgh gets T-Boned it comes from the opposite side, almost like the viewer is in his headspace, and we're just as oblivious to the other car as he is. Anyway, I just thought I'd point that out, even though it's a bit off topic.
Pretty much in any movie where someone is driving and it shows them at a certain angle, like a side shot, and I seen an intersection approaching, I always expect a car to hit them haha.
*3:27**-**3:41* The way that entire scene played out was the most disturbing scene in a movie that I've ever seen. The way the victim stays so calm and trustworthy because he assumes it's a police officer. So much so that he even lets him put that "kill piece" right up to his forehead. Which I assume is exactly how it would play out in real life because people are programmed to think "He's a cop, he won't hurt me." A really genius scene all around.
Yep so true. I have seen both movies like 10 times each and i cannot decide which one of them is the best one. I think There Will Be Blood might be better by just a hair. Like 9.4 vs 9.3.
One of the reasons I love shows like Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul is that quite often they just show a character doing something and force the audience to figure it out. It's a really engaging and I wish more shows and movies did similar instead of spoon-feeding exposition.
You can even notice Walter adopting or learning some of the mannerisms of his enemies as well, like folding a towel on the floor before vomiting (Gus Fring does it).
Absolutely. I don't know why the directing doesn't get as much praise as the writing. Every time you hear someone talk about those shows it's always "Oh the writing's so good, it's masterful writing" blah, blah, blah. And the writing's good... Most of the time but it's the directing that always impressed me the most in the show. Ever since Walter pieced together the pieces of plate he dropped in episode 3 was when I knew the show was something special. There's no inner monologue saying "I'm missing a piece of plate oh nooooooooo!!!" Instead it lets you literally put the pieces together when you remember him dropping it right in front of Crazy 8 earlier and what it means to Walt's moral dilemma.
The movie is a load of crap. The Cohen brothers took an interesting story and made a slow moving thriller with a non climatic climax. All that build up of tension just to have the protagonist shown dead bleeding on the floor for 2 seconds. After that, the film just drags till the scene where sherriff Bell talks about some weird dream. Total waste of film and time...
@@rcrxjlb Well, thats for taking the heat on that. I also found it dull as dishwater. It couldn't reallly decide whether to be a thriller, action movie, or 'neo' western. It was basically The Terminator plot with a more pessimistic ending. I LIKED that the protagonst got shot off screen, that was really the main inventive part, because thats what he 'deserved'. But in todays climate with what is going on at the border it reads pretty racist. Chigurgh before Trump could have passed symbolically as the drug trade, which just kills everybody, is beyond the law, and shows no mercy. Of course the idea of simply doing like alcohol and legalizing it never fits into the narrative. Woody Harrelson essentially only gets three scenes, for some reason he's a cocky killer despite going after a known psychopath and basically not looking behind him when he goes into a building. Lesson number one dude in contract kiler school, make goddam sure nobody came in the door behind you before going up stairs. And how many times does it need to be said, you can't make a fucking silencer that blocks the noise of a gun that much. But in todays world it almost reads as though he's the fear of mexican immigration-those mexicans, they just can't be reasoned with, can't be bargained with, etc.. Its pretty much racism for the elite hollywood crowd that doesn't want to be outright racist against mexicans. That was a different world even back then, even though things were pretty bad on the border, but that almost seems blatant today. But this was nowhere as good as Blood Simple and I really don't see what the fuss is about, unless people just like violence, which lots do in movies. Sometimes the Coens make great movies, sometimes good, and sometimes its "Hail Caesar", which was also a stinker-in my humble opinion of course, I'm well aware that thats a minority opinion, to each their own.
The bad guy was wounded, the kids didn't know he was a bad guy, and the kids were offered money for the shirt, which they initially declined, but accepted only after the bad guy insisted. There is no ''the good guy gets screwed for being good'' in that particular case.
@@mbpm6135 Llewellyn: 500 bucks for that coat. Guy: Let me see the money. Chigurh: What do you take for the shirt? Teen: Well hell mister I'll give you my shirt. Its not a good guy gets screwed for being good statement. Sometimes people that get help dont deserve it. Cormac/Cohen brothers wrote it that way for a reason.
Adam Zahavi Exactly. They play with the narrative tropes of the protagonist and the audience’s expectation of what will happen to him. Moss could be seen ultimately as a reluctant “hero” but the fact is that he stumbled across money that didnt belong to him, he was smart enough to know where it came from and what would happen once “they” figured out what happened to it. He absolutely is a gray character but I never saw him as a hero in the classical sense. For some reason we root for him but only because we as the audience know what’s after him for taking the money. It’s always interesting and fresh to see characters that not only define the traditional “good” vs “bad”, but also to frame the morally ambiguous character as such. One of my favorite movies ever and to me the Cohen bros have never made a bad movie.
+Tommy Mc-- the movie didn't end like that for a reason. Same reason there was no time given to Llewellyn's death. You kind of missed the point of the entire film if you wanted more action and death. That said i'm not trying to attack or dismiss you. But this isn't a gun-toting action thriller. It's more of a pensive, existential drama about the age old battle with the perfect amount of thrilling action thrown in.
I never noticed that curtain that was parted before. Thanks for that. I saw this movie in an early screening before its theatrical release. The earlier cut never showed Moss gunned down. So the rest of the movie I was left thinking “what happened to Moss?” I think this was a callback to the book, as the sheriffs talk about Moss being killed, but there’s no payoff/showdown. I think that the Coen bros. had to give the audience the “equals 4” (Moss dead on screen) answer cause we were so invested with him. We needed a confirmation. One of my favorite movies. Great vid, Michael. :)
_"It's your lucky quarter. Don't put it in your pocket sir. Or it'll get mixed in with all the others, and become just a coin..... Which it is."_ There's some very calming substance in the strangely illogical mind of Anton Chigurh. The best screen villain since The Terminator.
It`s not illogical, its the True meaning. We don't know how lucky we are until that luck is mixed with the mundane history of our lifes. That's why so many times "the true love" only reveal himself after we can no longer have it, like a lucky coin mixed it's just a past experience now, of great importance in our minds but meaningless at the same time. It's the abyss of time and loss, it's deep and disturbing.
Deep, the meaning of the coin is assigned by the current owner..... as Sheriff Bell is assigning meaning to his life ( quit and live, fight and die)….. as Llewelyn is assigning meaning to his life ( low enough to risk it for money) ….. as Chigurh is assigning meaning to his life (only worth living if he achieves his goals)
Oddly I recently found an old 1967 quarter in my change, a few months after watching this film. and because of this film, I put it on my desk where its been for years.I was only 8 years old in 67' but I did not want to mix it with my other change where it would have just been another coin....which it is.
I always thought this film was overrated. This makes me realize, I'm just an idiot....and not competent enough to be able to understand fantastic filmmaking. Well done.
The first time I watched No Country, I didn't get it but something about it held on to me. After additional viewings, I began the understand it more: at it's core, it is a classic film noir from the 1940s. This film made me go back and rewatch many Coen brothers films, and it became clear that noir is a thing with them (especially Big Lebowski of all films). I guess the best a movie can do for you is grab hold of you, even if you can't quantify it. I rarely believe people when they say they completely get a story right away, that likely means they're watching Paul Blartt: Mall Cop.
A lot of the time lessons found in movies are unintended. It doesn't mean they aren't there. I know that there is quite a lot of metaphors seen in fiction, and really other forms of art too, that are the creation of the audience.
While it's a great movie I feel like Cormac Mcarthy deserves a lot of credit. Not only for the story he created, but his writing style translates into film extremely well.
McCarthy should be credited for his story , not the film. He wrote an awesome novel of words on paper. He deserves no credit for bringing that story to audio and visual excellence.
Brian Fabre but McCarthy originally wrote NCFOM as a screenplay, then as a novel. The Coen brothers are brilliant, but many of the film’s notes this video praises are just as much to Cormac McCarthy’s novel as they are to the Coens. Especially the little instances that show the audience who Moss, Chigurh, and Bell are. Those aren’t invented moments by the Coens, they are in the novel as well. It might be the most faithful adaptation ever. The Coen brothers, the best filmmakers in the business, deserve a huge amount of credit for making an exceptional film. But a lot of what they did was not change what Cormac McCarthy wrote, and merely convert that brilliance from the pages to the screen.
I haven't read any of his books, but I disagree with his writing style translating into film extremely well, purely from having watched The Counselor. (Cormac McCarthy actually wrote the screenplay, while Ridley Scott directed the film.)
@@CornyBum I got my info from the writers directly, they said one brother read aloud, while the other brother wrote the screenplay from it. I haven't actually read the book, didn't like the movie that much, I enjoyed this TALKING about the movie MUCH more than the movie itself.
I remember reading the novel and getting to the part that said the protagonist's body was found, and he wasn't even killed by the main antagonist. I re-read that part at least 5 times thinking there was some kind of misprint.
I had to do a thesis on this film in a class. I watched it so much to complete the paper I got sick of it and haven't picked it up in over 5 years. This video might have brought it back for me. Thank you.
The book explains why he was arrested to begin with. He snapped a guys kneck or choked him to death (doesnt specify) in an altercation outside of a diner of bar. They arrested him hours later. He said he allowed himself to get arrested to see if he could escape from the situation.
Yes, Anton tells, I think Wells about it. There was some guys at a diner and one of them told shit to Anton. The last insult was the draw for Anton. He waited for the guy outside the diner and killed him. And that is how Anton got arrested.
Teens were innocent at first...they acted according to their gut feelings and offered help without expecting anything in return, but when they were offered money and they took it the two of them became separated and began to argue about the way it should be divided. This holds a significant meaning in the movie. The ways in which humanity can be shattered with the arrival of greediness and complete silence of the universe to our ideals of right and wrong.
That's probably the main reason for the entire scene!! It seems just a moment of normality but it's deep. . Why do they even have this crash scene, which is unlikely at best? A small town, a green light... come on that's just not believable. Why bother. . I didn't know why until reading your comment. Surely it is to remind us that we're not so different from Llewelyn or the kids (or Chigurh even), we'd take the gold -- or at least we would argue about it with our brother. We are happy to imagine ourselves as these two kids, but then we subconsciously admit we're liable. . Cain and Abel, dinner's ready! Stop fighting you two!
@@nmarbletoe8210 sorry it took long time to reply. Yes. This is such a unique movie which reminds us the state of humanity is not a thing that can be explored through heros and villains. Innocence and guilt stand face to face in a dry barren land to identify one another. Everything is so random and vague. Guilty man loses his excuse of insanity to justify his crimes and innocent man loses his excuse of innocence to justify his existence. In the end only things that remain in that deserted place are death, pain and incompetence. This and American beauty hold a special place in my heart.
So it struck me: Chigurh absorbed a little of their innocence and generosity, and left them with a tiny seed of his evil. I note that with that compound fracture, which Chigurh could in no way have set unaided, his end was near. Death, crippling, or capture were his alternatives.
I honestly have no attention span anymore. I cannot sit through a movie at all without constantly wanting to mess with my phone. I pretty much only watch TH-cam videos about movies instead of actual movies. But that No Country For Old Men, even with zero soundtrack, is one of the most engaging - real, gritty - films I have ever seen. Masterpiece.
The moral of the story is that there is no moral to the story. That is a hard reality to come to terms with. 'I feel over-matched. ' In the words of Cormac McCarthy, author of the book, "Your heart's desire is to be told some mystery. The mystery is that there is no mystery.”
The reason there's "no moral" to the story is that the most powerful character in the movie is amoral. This gives us the actual moral of the movie - Don't let amoral monsters have power. Most of the characters in the movie are spiritually dead or defeated, masquerading as "humble folk". Humble folk are outmatched by monsters.
I dont think so. Actually what really strikes me on this movie how much are sheriff Bell and Anton Chigurh similar. They are both honorable people in the old fashioned way. For example Chigurh once he recovers money, doest even think about taking them and escaping. Or he kills Llewelyn´s girlfriend for one and simple reason only - because he promised that to Llewelyn. Both of them are men of their words and principles, but as a added feature Anton Chigurh kills people.
I disagree. The theme of the movie, to me, seems to be the unavoidable fate coming to you. Everyone in the movie/book seems to know exactly what's coming to them before it gets there and Chigur represents something inescapable. That's just my take on it anyways! Maybe not so much a moral but a theme
I love this movie but I don't know if it worked. Everyone I talked to after seeing this movie was mostly just confused about how Luwellyn died and thought they missed something
It is spelled Llewelyn. It is Welsh. I cant even begin to explain how you really pronounce this in Welsh. In the movie Carla Jean says it like lou ellen. Llewellyn was the last king of Wales effectively.
@@marcossoni8198 well, when people got a vitness to their crime, they say "you didn't see me", in the past tense. So its a bit confusing that he formulated it a bit differently, in the present tense. So, you think he spared him? I just find it highly unlikely that a professional killed would leave a witness like that
@@StRanGerManY I think he killed him. It was like an understated question. eg: "Are you going to kill me?" "Does a Bear shit in the woods?" That sort of thing. You've seen me, therefore you are a dead man.
What I like about these videos is that they explain explicitly what I think is going on in your subconscious mind when you realize you are watching a really well made film. Maybe you can't put it into words, but you just know it. It's like code running in the background, rules that are allowing the whole thing to work invisibly and work well.
I remember when my girl friend told me this movie is boring. I pulled a coin outta my pocket and told her to call it. What happened next was up to chance...
My favorite thing about No Country for Old Men is how it reinvents the Indestructible Evil trope. Anton Chigur is an antagonist in the same vein as the Predator, Jason Vorhees, or the T-1000. Seemingly motivated only by the tracking, hunting, and killing of their quarry. However Anton posses no traits of the supernatural, he's a flesh and blood human being like every other character in the story, what's unsettling and alien about him is his warped morality. Betting a mans life on a coin toss, blowing up a car so he can steal from a pharmacy, insisting on paying a young man for his shirt so he can make a sling for his broken arm. Anton is far from invincible, he's injured and nearly killed multiple times throughout the movie, but his survival is what begs a deeper and more profound question. Anton believes himself to be an agent of fate, that he is simply an embodiment of chances unbiased effect on reality, a cold unfeeling universe that is mechanics driven not emotion driven. Thing is, he survives everything that the film throws at him, he walks away while the protagonist lies in a morgue. So is he right? Is he an Indestructible Evil not in the sense he cannot be harmed, but in the sense that what he does is sanctioned by fate itself, thus granting him impunity?
I think the car wreck was him being put back into his place by whatever force he followed. Giving llewelyns wife the chance for a coin toss remission was not his choice to make. Her fate had already been sealed by llewellyn when he refused to come to an arrangement over the phone.
He's also very patient. That made it very intense in the scenes where he's conversing with another character because I keep expecting him to blow up and kill the guy out of rage or yell at the kid for not taking the money, but he doesn't. I don't think he ever got angry or at least he didn't express it. He's indestructible in that sense.
That's a really good point. I always thought the leg self-surgery scene was supposed to recall the Terminator as well, and the shotgun showdown between Lewellyn and Chigurh is reminiscent of the shotgun introduction Kyle Reese and the Terminator had, at least the 12 gauge and 00-Buck part.
i think its because he doesnt act like your conventional villain. The movie doesnt rant and rave about how badass he is or show him pull off unbelievable tricks like shooting the wings off a fly at 50 paces while blindfolded or bench pressing a humvee. Instead he is what's sometimes referred to as "dangerously intelligent" and "brutally effective", he uses pretty understandable tactics like shooting people through doors and using the pnumetic tool to silently kill. Having a credible, dangerous man with understandable goals is much scarier than having Jason Vorhees/Michael Meyers style unstoppable, unbeatable psychopath who kills for no other reason than he's really into stabbing people.
What's incredible is that Javier Bardem was later cast as a Bond villain was wasn't scary at all. Creepy, yes. Scary, no. They should have just made Anton Chigurh the villain of Skyfall.
I wish we get more mysterious villains like Anton chigurh nowadays. We don't need backstories for villains to be great. The Joker and Hannibal lector are other examples
Vader was great before but the prequels despite all their problems really added some more depth to his character. But most of it especially hayden's acting and the childhood (which was unnecessary) was executed Very poorly
I love the scene in the gas station, especially, when Chigurh squeezes the snack pack after finishing it and puts it on the counter and says "What's the most you've ever lost..". Jeez that one of the most goosebumping scenes I've ever seen.
No Country For Old Men is my favorite Coen brother's film and is in my top five favorite films of all time. It's a film with so much to take in, it throws all conventional storytelling tropes out the window and instead tells an enthralling psychological character study. Great Vid.
John Hall she didnt try stop his husband. But then again she always said it herself: his husband does it like he does. He wouldn’t listen to her. She really died for knowing nothing would work the way she wants and not fighting against the nature of things
By that line of logic I suppose the two good Samaritans who stopped to help Chigurh were to blame for their own deaths because they didn't trust their instincts enough, huh?
@@johnhall5129 She let her mother come with her. Moss denied to that, which in turn ended up revealing his location which led to his death. Since Moss never willingly gave Anton his money he went there to kill her.
Prove that he killed her. We don't know from the film. Him checking his boots after walking through the entire house proves nothing. He methodically lifts his boots to avoid the blood from killing Carson Wells.
I love this video, but I think you missed an important point of the moral of the movie, one that almost departs from the meaning in the book. Rather than realize that times have changed and violence is the new norm, Sheriff Bell realizes that the world has always been chaotic and violent, and it is he who has changed. I think the most critical part of this subtle adjustment made in the movie is the story told to Bell by Ellis about their famous predecessor. You can find the scene here: th-cam.com/video/d1U3MyX0pmE/w-d-xo.html. The senseless violence of the past is reflected in Bell's current case, and I think that's the real purpose of the move. "What's coming" is Bell's own age, not the way of the world shifting.
There's also a scene where Bell describes a scene where a man shoots a steer and the bullet ricochets off and hits him in the arm. I think this also adds to the "chaos" and inability to control situations. Even Chigurh can't escape from the chaos of the world when he's t-boned In the one of the final scenes coincidentally breaking his arm.
@@degausser5495 I agree, especially about that final scene in the movie: an anticlimatic ending on a completely random act of violence is exactly how a movie about the chaos of the world would end
I’ve adored this film since this first time I saw it over a decade ago when I was in high school, but I never consciously was aware there was really not much in the way of a soundtrack. What I did remember was how much simple foley sounds effects like the wrapper on the counter at the gas station had a huge impact on me. Now it makes so much sense as to why. Your ears aren’t bombarded with noise unlike virtually every other movie, so when there is sound, it’s both really intentional and makes an impact on the viewer. Expertly crafted masterpiece!
Every now and then, I come to TH-cam to watch the initial speech of Tommy Lee Jones. I believe is one of the best speeches ever given in a movie. It set up the scenario right away, it shows you the nature of what is the Heroe of the story and just leaves you with the feeling that "ok.. this movie is gonna be rough". Amazing analysis man!
If you like that speech you should really read the book. It’s fucking great. And the Sheriff is more fleshed out than he is in the movie, making that ending way way better.
you should watch The Sunset Limited then. The movie is practically just one long speech between him and samual jackson. Nice fresh pace of a film clearly adapted from a play based on how it is filmed. If you are a fan of Tommy that is one portrayal you should definitely watch if you have not already.
“- Carla Jean Moss: I ain't got the money. What little I had is long gone, and there's bills aplenty to pay yet. I buried my mother today. Can't pay for that neither. - Anton Chigurh: I wouldn't worry about it. - Carla Jean Moss: I need to sit down.”
Yeah, that dialog is more terryfing than any horror movie, and the resolution is hearthbreaking and brilliant. This inocent woman caught in the middle of a relentless battle and no "hero movie" move to save her. We sincerely hope not, but inside we know his fate is sealed when Chigur appear in her house.
This dialogue also demonstrates Carla Jean as the moral center of the film. She was loyal, responsible and caring. In the end, she was courageous, and refused to escape her fate unlike her husband and the Sheriff.
@@shanonsnyder9450 her husband really put her life on a time clock when he took that money...so another thing that’s obvious Is If we let our greed get ahold of us we are bound for trouble.
One of the greatest films ever made. And one of the few instances of a film adaptation surpassing the source material. And this is coming from a huge Cormac McCarthy fan. The Coens trimmed all of the fat, tightened the story and put laser focus on characters and motivations. A true modern masterpiece.
@Lady Vengeance: Sorry, but you've gone too far. I agree that it's a great movie. And that it's a great novel. But there's no "fat" in the book. It's arguably one of the least fat major novels of all time. What the Coens actually "trimmed" was a significant characterization sub-plot: the hitchhiking girl. So the experience of the movie . . . and of the novel . . . turn out to be different. One is not better enough than the other . . . to be worth pointing out.
QED The hitchhiking girl subplot was unnecessary and frankly I found it out of character for Llewelyn to behave the way he does in with her in the book. Not to mention the hotel sequence is much tighter in the film. And finally, most importantly, the Coens made a major change to the source material that I find more impactful than the source novel. When Anton confronts Carla Jean at the end of the film, she refuses to call the coin toss. She forces Anton to make the decision. In the book she initially resists but ultimately calls the toss and loses. The Coens’ interpretation is far more powerful. The book and the film are masterpieces of their respective media. But a case can at least be made that the Coens improved on the source material. And that is more than can be said for most adaptations.
@@Lady_Vengeance My opinion: Llewelyn's behavior with the girl is a brilliantly scripted microcosm of his character. But I concede that this may be a "guy thing". So you might want to explore it further with male friends of yours. Regards . . .
Well, they omitted the actual ending. You know, when Chigurgh meets with the money men and explains that he works for their "new supplier." This reveals what went down at the drug deal gone bad, and who did it, and why. Probably because the Coen brothers like their films to be just a string of seemingly random and bizarre events.
@@JadeDude1973 Right. I myself prefer that ending . . . but it's not enough for me to say that the movie is better. There's room here for each to work in its own way . . .
This movie makes you THINK. That's what art is about. Giving you information , sharing ideas and concepts and letting you think about the events and situations.
I truly appreciate the increasingly rare script that respects the audience, brought to life by a filmmaker (filmmakers) who has faith in people's ability to follow along. I think you could count the lines of purely expositional dialogue on one hand.
Fucking brilliant analysis. This was one of the hardest movies for me to watch when I was younger because I didn't really understand what was going on. Why did Josh Brolin's character have to die off-screen? What were Chigurh's motives? What the heck were those dreams at the end? I never really appreciated it until recently when I watched A Serious Man, and realised that the seemingly ambiguous story of NCFOM actually had a purpose of its own. Goes without saying that it's now one of my all time favourite movies.
Yes dude! It took me not having seen the film for more than 6 years to understand Lee Jones' perspective/dreams of his late father, and how it related to the world changing around him as he retired. So goddamn good.
I just remember being so pissed at Moss for returning to the scene of the massacre... He had that money free and clear! Transfer that money to a new bag... and ditch that homing beacon... then BOUNCE tf outta Dodge. The minute he had that little crisis of conscience, I knew he opened a big fat shit can full of problems. I thought for sure, a man who fought in Vietnam should be able to disconnect from his feelings of humanity and walk away without any moral crisis over what some shitbag drug dealers did to each other. War and repeated exposure to violence would jade such an individual and make them a creature of pure logic and have a keen sense of trusting their survival instincts. Talk to anyone who works in law enforcement or emergency medicine... there are limits to our compassion that make us seem like uncaring Assholes (look up Gallows Humor) to "normal" people, but we rarely have sympathy for those who bring their problems onto themselves via their own poor life choices, whereas the innocent victims (usually children) breaks our hearts to the point where people have to leave that line of work. Just my own take on that film from my perspective... 🤔
The parallels between No Country For Old Men and Serious Man are numerous. In Serious, the brothers hilariously mock inane (and ancient) attempts to invent meaning and purpose for Life with a large L. In No Country, they come to grips with the futility and sadness of those attempts.
Tracy Ranger. Nope. Had nothing to do with his empathy and guilt ridden conscience. Moss' character was doomed from the moment he took possession of the satchel full of money because he didn't even check the money for a tracking device. The transponder was geo-navigating his whereabouts the entire time. Led death right to his front door. He was a wise military hunter, he should have known better frankly.
To elaborate, in No Country, fate is chaotic. In A Serious Man, God intervenes. Gopnik's great-great-great grandmother killed a man - or was it a golem? - or did he live? In any case, the family was cursed "even unto the fourth generation." But Gopnik did a Job with a long o. He kept the faith, or tried to. Things started looking up. The man who coveted Gopnik's wife died in a car wreck. Everything seemed to be getting all better until Gopnik took money for changing one of his students' grades. Oops. God wrath time again. An ominous call from Gopnik's doctor. Gopnik's son pursued by a bully and a tornado. There was even an omen that the USA was in peril. Now the irony is this: chaos or some capricious invisible hand - there is no way to tell the difference. Call it.
This movie is like the Pink Floyd of movies. Nothing over-technical, but perfect in pace and execution...hidden meanings that still arise. The simplicity of the hidden complexity is why I still watch it.
One of my favourite movies ever. I remember discussing this movie with my students that I was guest teaching for a day. It was pretty cool to hear grade 8s discussing the more subtle hints/points in this movie. We had a brief bond over film and it was quite rewarding.
Man, Michael, you CRUSHED this! You explain things in a way that people like myself can understand and apply to their own videos. Keep it up, I loved this!!! 😁🤘
He made a mistake with Carla Jean and the boots. It only implies something it is not an actual fact. To him it implies what happened to me it implies that the psychopath is obsessed with his boots.
@@bighands69 I understand that it does not mean for sure she was killed and that implication does not equal fact. But when you say that it only shows that he is obsessed with his boots, to take it a bit further, his obsession seems to do with the cleanliness of his boots. So since it has prior shown him remove his boots from becoming dirty it seems logical that something happened inside the house just prior to him leaving that warranted his fear of dirty boots. The most logical and reasonable answer is the implied killing of Carla Jean. To wrap up, you can stick with your idea of the boots obsession but it seems like to me you have been given an equation like 1+2×3 and you are knowingly choosing to only solve the first part of 1+2 and willingly ignoring ×3 for whatever reason that suites you. Anyway, good day!
I love the midpoint scene where Llewellyn leaves the hotel eluding Chigurh. The whole cat and mouse feel to it, with ZERO dialog is fantastic! My favorite movie, will watch again today. Great video, thank you.
As someone who grew up in rural hill country in Texas, the end of this film was simply sublime. "..and in the dream I knew, he was goin on ahead and he was fixin to make a fire, and he was somewhere out there in all that dark and all that cold. I knew that when I got here, he'd be there and then I woke up." Masterful.
I’ve read McCarthy’s works, and if there’s one thing that can be said about his books, it’s that they’re extremely light on dialogue. I would say the average book contains about 80% prose, characters silently interacting with the world around them, and the choices and consequences that befall them. The other 20% is dedicated to dialogue. McCarthy is deliberate in his writing. He never once holds your hand, or makes you feel like an idiot. There’s no spoon feeding in any of his books. He gives you just enough information, and expects you to piece the rest together from the clues provided.
That doesn't sound right for "No Country for Old Men". I've just looked at the paperback . . . and randomly found multiple instances where 2 consecutive pages have 80% dialogue.
It took some time for me to get use to his rejection of punctuation. No Country was the first McCarthy book I read; largely because I saw the film was to come out. So, thank you Coen Bros for introducing me to a great writer. Now I've read The Orchard Keeper, The Road, Blood Meridian, Suttree, and Child of God. All equally raw. Do not attempt if already depressed.
@@Alan-io2ew that's one of the points in the movie, you can follow the rules but still end up dead, just like the villain gets hit by a car even though he was going through a green light.
"...meaning is always more powerful when it can be synthesized in the mind of the viewer instead of spoon fed through on-the-nose dialogue" What a great quote. Definitely what I felt after finished watching Aftersun. Really minimalistic film that requires viewer to synthesize all of the meaning
I LOVE it when movies trust the audience to put 2 and 2 together Sometimes I'm way too stupid to get all of it, but whenever someone makes me notice details that suggest what happened off-screen that's one of the best feelings ever. Thank you for this video! your channel is so GOOD
One thing that I appreciated is they showed that moss was calculated in his moves ( with the curtains you mentioned ) but he didn't consider that when Wells found him in the hospital that Anton could also both find him and when Wells threatened his Wife that Anton could also do the same thing. This inevitably led to his downfall trying to protect his wife which cannot be done perfectly and then him losing all the hands he gained when he tried to go there and the position was compromised. This happened after he lost a lot of blood and is really cool to see a protagonist make a mistake because the antagonist is truly ahead of him and showing him losing in that way was a nice change in scenery from movies. I wish new movies would have this same level of thoughtful writing because it's truly good cinema.
I literally watched No Country For Old Men for the first time. AN d not sure as to why i waited so long. I bought it years ago, its been on my shelf. I knew it wasn't a conventional movie and I was waiting for the right time. It was worth the wait. Great video, I really enjoy your mind set on movies.
@@Sirrajj Sheriff Bell and the other sheriff he has coffee with after Llewelyn is killed. The country is too rough for all the old law man. Remember the opening where he speaks of sheriffs who didn't carry a gun, now it is machine guns and air actuated bullets. It has become "No Country for Old (law)Men"
Doneandgone It sometimes takes ideas to simmer and the more you understand things in life or in general movies can become better or worse, nothing wrong with not getting something at one time.
One of my favorite lines of dialogue ever. The Sheriff and his deputy are surveying the shootout in the Dessert and the Deputy exclaims “Hell Sheriff isn’t this a mess?” To which the Sheriff blandly replies “Well if it’s not, it’ll do ‘till the mess gets here”.
Watched this film for the first time about a week ago, because I am studying it in my film class in September, and one thing I that stood out to me was the extreme tension in this film, I could name 3 or 4 scenes but the one which stood out to me, was when he returns to the murder scene (at the start) with water, at night. When the cars roll up from afar and the headlights go down and then that burst his tires. I guess what I mean is how well they take their time in creating tension, they have long build ups which just make everything so nailbiting. This film was incredible, on of those films where after watching it you're just sat there for a moment speechless; then for the next few hours you're just thinking about it and it only. Also I think a great screenplay to make a video on would be The Good, The Bad and The Ugly or The Grand Budapest Hotel.
@Prabs s , i know right it's pure visual storytelling and again in the case of him revisiting the murder site with the water at night, I think that perhaps the coen brothers manage such tension is by shooting an establishing shot where in which it is a wide shot of the crime scene and he enters the frame from the right, this shot, for me at least added so much suspense because there was so much space in the frame for other characters or any suspicious tiny bit of movement that might suggest the presence of another person. Further more once the car full of the cartel arrives, I think as well as tension, the coen's add dredd into the scene because not only have they set up what these people are willing to do (slaughter a gang of 6 or so men and a dog), also by showing them puncture his tires it acts as almost a seal of his fate, as they're not going to let him escape. One more thing to mention is that the camera sticks, for the most part with the character (I have forgotten his name) and so it positions us with him, as we too try to figure out how to to escape or what to do; like you said there's no score and so, not to say that a score takes you out of the film, in fact I think the complete opposite, it makes it feel so real as if you are there, just with the sound of his breathing and gravel being kicked. Just one last thing to add about the silence is that we hear the cartels voice from afar as it slowly Louden's as they near us, only adding to the threat of an impending doom.
I could take that scene seriously. Dude is attempting to sneakily look over the hood of a truck to try and see who is rolling up on him.......While wearing a giant ass cowboy hat. I also got tilted at dude for noticing his cowboy boots are not good for running so then when he goes to buy new clothes he buys more cowboy boots..... I was basically cheering for the idiot to die the whole movie.
After I watched this film I sat my Dad down too watch it although he said it didn't really interest him he was willing to try it. Halfway through the film he pauses it and says, "I'm shocked, this movie is actually really good"
Your videos are always concise, insightful, and fresh. Your appreciation for film and screenwriting is both informative and enthusiastic. Thank you for sharing with us, I'm learning a lot and finding inspiration for writing through your channel :)
I don't know many theory things in movie making, but if I may make an observation, No Country for old Men is one of the only movies that does not have a soundtrack at all. I feel this alleviates the fact that this isn't your typical Hero movie. This is just a random guy with a certain background that happens to find money and ends up being killed for it. Nothing ehroic there. I feel this further underlines how powerless we can be in the face of evil.
What do you mean by "in the face of evil" ? Do you mean evil like the main guy getting killed or how he was powerless in the face of taking the money in the first place or how even the powerful cop who should keep bad things away from people felt powerless when facing the evil world ?
In a society where good could prevail and everyone could benefit, people will always opt to only benefit themselves because they do not trust others. It's what I feel this movie highlights. Everyone is in it for themselves and everyone dies as a result.
When I watched this I didn't recognize Moss, I thought that was just a random guy. I didn't realize he had died until near the end. Had to rewind to see if it was really him.
Yeah, this was really odd. After it is established that he died, the camera always shows him from an angle, almost as if he was a completely random character that just got killed but who isn't really all that important for the plot.
I've seen this film probably 20 times. Never once caught the hotel curtain thing...or the lack of music. Being a musician I'm surprised it never dawned on me that I was more tense because of the lack of sounds/music. What a goddamn film.
I also like the beginning where it depicts moss tracking and hunting in his own way. With deer. Then we see chigurh driving down the road tracking his next victim on “the hunt”. I’ve just always liked that contrast
I had no idea about his "care for boots cleanliness" thing! I always assumed he killed Carla Jean, but this just confirms it. Thanks for pointing this out!
Awesome video! Would love a video on There Will Be Blood. The use of background elements in the story telling and themes of sacrifice / demons really comes through the characters in the background as well!
I’m currently reading the novel. This video was incredibly helpful for me to understand the plot and characters more than when i started reading it. Also for a future video I think Call Me By Your name would be interesting
When a video from you pops up in my notification, most likely I haven't seen the film.And I try to watch those films in order to watch your video.Thanks to you that I have watched a lot of good films because of you.And it definitely allows me to understand films with a new perspective and purpose rather than just watching for entertainment.
What is all about with Chigurh's car accident? That almost drove me mad!! My opinion is it's sort of karma... he said to Wells "if the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?", yet Chigurh himself follows some rules blindly, as the green semaphore was enough to him... and that almost killed him: he is not immune to the chaos. But the fact that he didn't die is brilliant, maybe we expected another kind of justice, and we're left with an image of a suffering man, realizing that his life was already nightmare, and will always be. What are your opinions??
@Bear Arms Very good point of view, thanks! Well, he gave the money to the kid also (mostly?) to buy the kid's silence... This was very interesting because within seconds we see the kid passing from good will to corruption, at the end he doesn't want to share the money with the other kid... he is a worse kid than before just by meeting Chigurh, it seems like we literally see the evil spreading around! Just brilliant
I believe it made two points. 1. It shows that not even monsters are impervious to the chaos of the universe. 2. It ironically throws Anton’s “Rules” quote back in his face, which is the only subtle scrap of closure we get.
You are right to point out Chigur's question - he must now answer that about his own life. The truth is he had no reason to kill the women, he was simply following some rule he invented for himself.
🎧 Listen to our podcast episode in which we do a deeper dive into No Country for Old Men: bit.ly/3AoG6nD 🎥 What’s your favorite Coen Brothers film? And what movie should we look at in a future video?
For a future video I would love to see you tackle Silence of the Lambs or the Hannibal TV show. Maybe the difference between the portrayals of Hannibal Lecter.
From this video iv come to realize how much respect this film has for the audience. It treats the audience as adults who are not going to be spoon feed. No Country for Old Men is a modern masterpiece. Tommy Lee Jones especially is outstanding.
Man let me tell you, your channel is teaching me so much about film that I had previously been lacking and if I ever become an actor it’s because I meticulously studied your videos
This film grows on you with repeat viewings, at the same villain becomes more menacing. What makes that so crazy is that he's the real star of the film.
Please please do The Departed. The two plus two theory is perfect for this film. The section of this video where you talk about a scene happening in the audience's imagination is perfectly exemplified in The Departed at the end. We are left to infer that the psychiatrist, Madolyn, opened Billy's letter after his death and had an intense emotional breakdown once she knows the truth about his identity and why he was sent to see her in the first place: a double agent for the Boston City Police department. More importantly we realize the extent of Billy's completely justified anxiety and how well he is able to control even with a gun pointed to his face. So when he asks her for Valium in their first meeting, she scoffs thinking he's just an ex con looking to score. At the end (after Billy's death) she realizes he was going through genuine pulsating anxiety due to the stress of being undercover for the Boston Police Department. Throughout the film, Billy pops a Valium to collect his composure. For instance, when he threatens Mark Wahlberg's character by threatening to abandon his job and get on an airplane once Billy realizes how deep the mole is inside PD. He pops another when he enters the shack midway through the film. In a split second, he pops a valium and uncocks his gun, suggesting that in his currently distressed and apprehensive mind, this time he might not ever leave that shack alive. Ray Winstone appears and demands sensitive information on all of Costello's crew to find the mole. Billy realizes his demise is imminent and that it's only a matter of time before he's found out. He cashes his chips in by impregnating Madolyn that very night. Billy being the father of her unborn child leaves an even more potent emotional impact even though this entire scene of her opening the letter is not in the film. When she finds out the truth about Colin, Madolyn says "I thought I was the liar" referring to her pregnancy. There is an incredibly insightful essay written by Annette Wernblad in her book The Passion of Martin Scorsese about this film (as well as every Scorsese film made up to that point) on the characters, plot, and themes of the film. No one has made a video essay on this film and it sorely deserves one of this quality. Thank you so much for making great content. Your passion for intelligent film and writing is infectious and stand out from all the other "Ending Explained" videos that plague youtube. Your video on True Detective and it's parallels to Se7en was particularly sagacious. I look forward watching more of your content in the future.
What i like about this movie is that you can feel the intensity in every part of the movie which is what i like about it it keeps you at the edge of your seat
Did not like this film at first, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. This and There Will Be Blood are two of the finest films of the 2000s.
You know, I don’t really like No Country for Old Men that much. But this video kinda gave me a good idea of why people do like it. It was pretty interesting! Thanks.
I was a little perplexed by it on first viewing. But, given that the Coen bros served it up, I had to watch again. On second viewing, I got it. I think I've seen it four times now. Maybe five.
I also am not a big fan of the film, despite it being masterfully directed with wonderful cinematography. I can appreciate many things about the movie, both in craftsmanship and for being wonderfully ambitious, however I believe it is ultimately unsuccessful in delivering on the ambition with a meaningful statement regarding it's theme. In many ways it purposefully undercuts itself when it comes to showing the theme through story/character and then at the end delivers a monologue explaining the theme in a flat way. Theme should be felt, regardless if it is understood or not. I understood the themes of No Country For Old Men but did not feel it (I'm happy for you if you did). It felt like hearing a joke that is incomplete without an explanation but any joke that uses an explanation of the joke as a punchline isn't going to hit you in the gut. Especially if the punchline is "jokes don't always make sense".
I think it's because people take the moral presented near the end at face value. The film is fundamentally about how people romanticize the past and their willful ignorance of moral flaws that are intrinsic to our society. A lot of people read the film as "The world is becoming more decadent. This is no country for old men.", when the actual message seems to be the rebuttal itself, "Things have always been this bad. You've just been naive." By the end of the film, Sheriff Bell resigns because he can't comprehend the direction society, and by extension criminality, is heading. He discusses it with a colleague and they run through the motions of blaming the youth; tattoos, piercings, hair, the whole 'chivalry is dead' spiel. Bell later discusses his resignation with his uncle and is abruptly set straight. His uncle recites a story about one of the old-timers Bell had been romanticizing since the start of the story and how he was brazenly shot by some outlaws on his front porch in 1909. They watched him bleed out for hours and later left his home out of bordem. The film begins with Bell uncertain of the future, believing it to be this dangerous unknown quantity, and ends with him realizing that he never had a firm grasp on just how cruel the world was to begin with. "What you got ain't nothing new. This country's hard on people. You can't stop what's coming... That's vanity." - Uncle Ellis
@@Iritis- To go even deeper I realized that humanitie's( law enforcement and citizens) efforts to desperately understand & balance the 'good and evil' morality is a waste of time. Causing the Sheriff to realize that he was niave his whole career because law enforcement causes you to be too close to the bigger picture to see the whole thing.
The lack of music score is also a very conscious and effective move in this film.
Yes I always thought was interesting and unique that there's no music
I've seen this movie a hundred times and it never crossed my mind that it needs music, I didn't think about it until now it's almost like I didn't even notice the lack of music
@@donaldo141194 It makes everything more intense, no suspense-music actually makes it more suspenseful. The Coen Brothers really know how to make it work to their advantage.
I think it's effective because music tends to foreshadow too often. In real life there are rarely previews or foreshadowing. In my movies I don't want to know something is about to happen.
I never even noticed there was no OST... and I've seen this movie like 10 times.
I've just noticed that all three men also sit in the same seat at one point, yet their paths all drastically diverge to various outcomes
Mind telling me which seat
@@Deimos_the_Autist he Sofa in the trailer home
radonstone nice observation. Did all three drink milk?
nice catch. never thought of that
Larry John - the milk is purely to affirm that Sugur was there, that he knew they were coming and that he would get him before they did.
Because he sees it all coming, and he is amazed nobody else does. The predictability of humans is baffling to Sugur. He kind of wants them to smarten up *and catch him if at al possible... because he's not really sure he otherwise exists.* 2 cents.
I think there's another subtle aspect to the moral that most people missed in this film. Up until Moss' showdown with Chigurh, the villain is seen as almost immortal and essentially unstoppable. Moss is able to wound him and offer him his first true challenge, which feels emotionally appropriate because Moss is the protagonist. Then, when Moss is killed, Chigurh goes back to being unstoppable and terrifying again. Chigurh is a personification of evil itself, which none of us can survive without the aid of heroes or at least heroism; in Moss' absence, evil is free to move about and operate unimpeded and unchallenged. At the end of the film, when Chigurh is severely injured in a startling car accident and limps away with his bones sticking out, his future is now uncertain, and he is shown in a shocking turn to be much more vulnerable than we had thought. We are left to realize that the image of unconfrontable evil in our minds was always an illusion and an exaggeration; that even the most terrifying villain is ultimately powerless against the forces of entropy which rule the universe. He may be stronger or more fearsome than we are, but to a careless moment at a stop sign, he's just another accident victim. At the very moment of the film when the sheriff is explaining his choice to resign, certain that he cannot contend with the changing times, the thing he feared the most is shown broken and defeated.
So to me, the real moral of the film is that nothing - not even the devil himself - is immune to the winds of change. There was never a "good old days"; only ever a relentless march of time, which consumes everything in its path. The sheriff, at this point, ceases to become a character, and joins the viewer in offering interpretations of the film we have just seen. And in failing to understand the fragility of all things - even evil - the sheriff's interpretation of the film, and indeed his whole assessment of his world, is shown to be tragically incorrect.
Ugh. Reading that was painful. Brought me back to mountains of bullshit from high school and college.
There is no "real moral of the film."
@@nunliski He specifically said "to me". And maybe there is a real moral. The one that autor had in mind while writing the story, but it doesn't mean that your interpretation is wrong, or another person's interpretation is wrong. There can be as many interpretations as many there are members of the audience, my teacher used to say. If you were forced to interpret things in a certain, "true" way in your school, then you had shitty teachers. If you can back up your understanding of the movie by some facts from it and it makes logical sense, then your interpretation is by all means true.
Chigurh has become an old man, cause he was confronted and worn down by Moss, his wife, who refused to play his game, and the kids who distracted him.
In the "good old days" the sheriff's didn't wear a gun. But they were also shot in the gut at sunrise by a band of Indians and took all day to die while the wife watched over him. In the book, teachers said gum chewing was their major discipline problem back in 1960, but now it's rape, drugs, violence. He says it's because parents don't raise children, grandparents do, and politeness is the first bulwark of civilization. But Bonnie and Clyde in the 30's, Al Capone, hell, the Civil War before that; "this country is hard on people," as the old man says.
I think Chigurrh getting hit by the car is that there HAS to be some sort of a universal balance. He got away with it, he killed Carla Jean because of a promise, and he had to balance the scales.
Did you like "The Counselor," the movie? Cormac McCarthy wrote the script when he was in his 80's, and critics panned it saying it was too focused on death and morbidity. I think that was unfair. A deep man at the end of his life, with an archive of dark themed stories, we should listen to what he has to say, maybe he has a perspective we don't. At least it was original.
Dennis Mayne no, Chigurh is becoming an old man. It’s time for him to go. He met Moss, who managed to shoot him, Carla, who’s even younger, and refused to play his game, saying « it’s just you », and then the kids on bikes distracted him and he had the accident. Clock’s ticking, wheel is turning, he’s becoming old and it’s time for him to go.
Tiny detail I just noticed: There's this recurring scene we see in action and suspense films nowadays where the protagonist is driving through an intersection and they get T-Boned, but you almost always see the car that hits them in the distance of the interior shot. The scene where Chigurgh gets T-Boned it comes from the opposite side, almost like the viewer is in his headspace, and we're just as oblivious to the other car as he is. Anyway, I just thought I'd point that out, even though it's a bit off topic.
Reminds me of the car crash in Adaptation.
Ken H Yes! Sudden, violent, and abrupt! And devastating
Pretty much in any movie where someone is driving and it shows them at a certain angle, like a side shot, and I seen an intersection approaching, I always expect a car to hit them haha.
Great observation.
Same, I just noticed that
*3:27**-**3:41*
The way that entire scene played out was the most disturbing scene in a movie that I've ever seen.
The way the victim stays so calm and trustworthy because he assumes it's a police officer. So much so that he even lets him put that "kill piece" right up to his forehead. Which I assume is exactly how it would play out in real life because people are programmed to think "He's a cop, he won't hurt me."
A really genius scene all around.
The driver was an unassuming, passive cow, killed by a weapon designed for him.
sorry, but if that's the most disturbing scene you've ever seen, than you haven't seen anything yet.
Fozza doesn’t need to be gory to be disturbing! Big difference.
ha! no. not everybody will act that way. some of us don't trust cops
AlphaDeltaXray Hahaha... watch the movie “Bone Tomahawk” if you want to see a disturbing scene.....
“No country for old men”and “there will be blood”..damn we were spoiled in 2007
Yep so true. I have seen both movies like 10 times each and i cannot decide which one of them is the best one. I think There Will Be Blood might be better by just a hair. Like 9.4 vs 9.3.
I'd give almost anything to go back
@@ayushtripathi9463 well that makes sense cuz it's more fun than TWBB
Ayush Tripathi I have always thought that NCFOM was better written and directed but somehow There Will be Blood was the better movie
@@yandhi5016 well, it had DDL
One of the reasons I love shows like Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul is that quite often they just show a character doing something and force the audience to figure it out. It's a really engaging and I wish more shows and movies did similar instead of spoon-feeding exposition.
Oh yes. The writers seem to have perfected this technique in Better Call Saul. Those scenes are some of the best I've ever seen.
You can even notice Walter adopting or learning some of the mannerisms of his enemies as well, like folding a towel on the floor before vomiting (Gus Fring does it).
Another show that does this exceptionally well is The Americans.
I adore details like this. Like you said, it's more engaging, and I think we really need more of it.
Absolutely. I don't know why the directing doesn't get as much praise as the writing. Every time you hear someone talk about those shows it's always "Oh the writing's so good, it's masterful writing" blah, blah, blah. And the writing's good... Most of the time but it's the directing that always impressed me the most in the show. Ever since Walter pieced together the pieces of plate he dropped in episode 3 was when I knew the show was something special. There's no inner monologue saying "I'm missing a piece of plate oh nooooooooo!!!" Instead it lets you literally put the pieces together when you remember him dropping it right in front of Crazy 8 earlier and what it means to Walt's moral dilemma.
This movie was brilliant, it told you nothing, but gave you everything.
Amen.
The movie is a load of crap. The Cohen brothers took an interesting story and made a slow moving thriller with a non climatic climax. All that build up of tension just to have the protagonist shown dead bleeding on the floor for 2 seconds. After that, the film just drags till the scene where sherriff Bell talks about some weird dream. Total waste of film and time...
@@rcrxjlb Well, thats for taking the heat on that. I also found it dull as dishwater. It couldn't reallly decide whether to be a thriller, action movie, or 'neo' western. It was basically The Terminator plot with a more pessimistic ending. I LIKED that the protagonst got shot off screen, that was really the main inventive part, because thats what he 'deserved'. But in todays climate with what is going on at the border it reads pretty racist. Chigurgh before Trump could have passed symbolically as the drug trade, which just kills everybody, is beyond the law, and shows no mercy. Of course the idea of simply doing like alcohol and legalizing it never fits into the narrative. Woody Harrelson essentially only gets three scenes, for some reason he's a cocky killer despite going after a known psychopath and basically not looking behind him when he goes into a building. Lesson number one dude in contract kiler school, make goddam sure nobody came in the door behind you before going up stairs. And how many times does it need to be said, you can't make a fucking silencer that blocks the noise of a gun that much.
But in todays world it almost reads as though he's the fear of mexican immigration-those mexicans, they just can't be reasoned with, can't be bargained with, etc.. Its pretty much racism for the elite hollywood crowd that doesn't want to be outright racist against mexicans. That was a different world even back then, even though things were pretty bad on the border, but that almost seems blatant today. But this was nowhere as good as Blood Simple and I really don't see what the fuss is about, unless people just like violence, which lots do in movies. Sometimes the Coens make great movies, sometimes good, and sometimes its "Hail Caesar", which was also a stinker-in my humble opinion of course, I'm well aware that thats a minority opinion, to each their own.
@@rcrxjlb Amen brother, you nailed it.
@@rcrxjlb That's because 2+2 is too difficult for ya.
The good guy asks for a jacket, and they sell it to him.
The bad guy asks for a shirt, and the kid gives it up out of kindness.
The bad guy was wounded, the kids didn't know he was a bad guy, and the kids were offered money for the shirt, which they initially declined, but accepted only after the bad guy insisted. There is no ''the good guy gets screwed for being good'' in that particular case.
@@mbpm6135
Llewellyn: 500 bucks for that coat.
Guy: Let me see the money.
Chigurh: What do you take for the shirt?
Teen: Well hell mister I'll give you my shirt.
Its not a good guy gets screwed for being good statement. Sometimes people that get help dont deserve it. Cormac/Cohen brothers wrote it that way for a reason.
MB PM the good guy was even more wounded
Adam Zahavi Exactly. They play with the narrative tropes of the protagonist and the audience’s expectation of what will happen to him. Moss could be seen ultimately as a reluctant “hero” but the fact is that he stumbled across money that didnt belong to him, he was smart enough to know where it came from and what would happen once “they” figured out what happened to it. He absolutely is a gray character but I never saw him as a hero in the classical sense. For some reason we root for him but only because we as the audience know what’s after him for taking the money. It’s always interesting and fresh to see characters that not only define the traditional “good” vs “bad”, but also to frame the morally ambiguous character as such. One of my favorite movies ever and to me the Cohen bros have never made a bad movie.
That's why they don't use the words "good guy" and "bad guy" in movies. They use "protagonist" and "antagonist" instead
One of my favorite films of all time! Thanks for this
Paint really love the film, never liked the ending. I thought it would have been cool if tommy lee jones killed or got killed by the nut
+Tommy Mc-- the movie didn't end like that for a reason. Same reason there was no time given to Llewellyn's death. You kind of missed the point of the entire film if you wanted more action and death. That said i'm not trying to attack or dismiss you. But this isn't a gun-toting action thriller. It's more of a pensive, existential drama about the age old battle with the perfect amount of thrilling action thrown in.
One of the goats in cinema for sure
Bad editing
Dead guy in motel opens his eyes and blinks like wtf
I never noticed that curtain that was parted before. Thanks for that.
I saw this movie in an early screening before its theatrical release. The earlier cut never showed Moss gunned down.
So the rest of the movie I was left thinking “what happened to Moss?”
I think this was a callback to the book, as the sheriffs talk about Moss being killed, but there’s no payoff/showdown.
I think that the Coen bros. had to give the audience the “equals 4” (Moss dead on screen) answer cause we were so invested with him. We needed a confirmation.
One of my favorite movies. Great vid, Michael. :)
I also never noticed the curtain, or the lack of soundtrack. And I watched this movie like 5 times! Good breakdown
_"It's your lucky quarter. Don't put it in your pocket sir. Or it'll get mixed in with all the others, and become just a coin..... Which it is."_
There's some very calming substance in the strangely illogical mind of Anton Chigurh. The best screen villain since The Terminator.
It`s not illogical, its the True meaning. We don't know how lucky we are until that luck is mixed with the mundane history of our lifes. That's why so many times "the true love" only reveal himself after we can no longer have it, like a lucky coin mixed it's just a past experience now, of great importance in our minds but meaningless at the same time. It's the abyss of time and loss, it's deep and disturbing.
Deep, the meaning of the coin is assigned by the current owner..... as Sheriff Bell is assigning meaning to his life ( quit and live, fight and die)….. as Llewelyn is assigning meaning to his life ( low enough to risk it for money) ….. as Chigurh is assigning meaning to his life (only worth living if he achieves his goals)
Oddly I recently found an old 1967 quarter in my change, a few months after watching this film. and because of this film, I put it on my desk where its been for years.I was only 8 years old in 67' but I did not want to mix it with my other change where it would have just been another coin....which it is.
I always thought this film was overrated. This makes me realize, I'm just an idiot....and not competent enough to be able to understand fantastic filmmaking. Well done.
Lol
I still don’t enjoy this film at all. Its ok to think it’s overrated.
The first time I watched No Country, I didn't get it but something about it held on to me. After additional viewings, I began the understand it more: at it's core, it is a classic film noir from the 1940s. This film made me go back and rewatch many Coen brothers films, and it became clear that noir is a thing with them (especially Big Lebowski of all films).
I guess the best a movie can do for you is grab hold of you, even if you can't quantify it. I rarely believe people when they say they completely get a story right away, that likely means they're watching Paul Blartt: Mall Cop.
A lot of the time lessons found in movies are unintended. It doesn't mean they aren't there. I know that there is quite a lot of metaphors seen in fiction, and really other forms of art too, that are the creation of the audience.
@@decimalexercise7154 Yes it was such a huge deal in the late 2000s and it was good but I have pretty much totally forgotten it.
While it's a great movie I feel like Cormac Mcarthy deserves a lot of credit. Not only for the story he created, but his writing style translates into film extremely well.
McCarthy should be credited for his story , not the film. He wrote an awesome novel of words on paper. He deserves no credit for bringing that story to audio and visual excellence.
Brian Fabre but McCarthy originally wrote NCFOM as a screenplay, then as a novel. The Coen brothers are brilliant, but many of the film’s notes this video praises are just as much to Cormac McCarthy’s novel as they are to the Coens. Especially the little instances that show the audience who Moss, Chigurh, and Bell are. Those aren’t invented moments by the Coens, they are in the novel as well.
It might be the most faithful adaptation ever. The Coen brothers, the best filmmakers in the business, deserve a huge amount of credit for making an exceptional film. But a lot of what they did was not change what Cormac McCarthy wrote, and merely convert that brilliance from the pages to the screen.
@@mikearchibald744 i agree ,read the book after seeing the movie and was amazed how it was exactly as written in the book
I haven't read any of his books, but I disagree with his writing style translating into film extremely well, purely from having watched The Counselor. (Cormac McCarthy actually wrote the screenplay, while Ridley Scott directed the film.)
@@CornyBum I got my info from the writers directly, they said one brother read aloud, while the other brother wrote the screenplay from it. I haven't actually read the book, didn't like the movie that much, I enjoyed this TALKING about the movie MUCH more than the movie itself.
I remember reading the novel and getting to the part that said the protagonist's body was found, and he wasn't even killed by the main antagonist. I re-read that part at least 5 times thinking there was some kind of misprint.
I had to do a thesis on this film in a class. I watched it so much to complete the paper I got sick of it and haven't picked it up in over 5 years. This video might have brought it back for me. Thank you.
Wary Trout you’re not funny
@@ejromm Idk man, you should see some of the comments I post when I'm high and watching Chris Chan videos...
The book explains why he was arrested to begin with.
He snapped a guys kneck or choked him to death (doesnt specify) in an altercation outside of a diner of bar. They arrested him hours later. He said he allowed himself to get arrested to see if he could escape from the situation.
Yes, Anton tells, I think Wells about it. There was some guys at a diner and one of them told shit to Anton. The
last insult was the draw for Anton. He waited for the guy outside the diner and killed him. And that is how Anton got arrested.
Teens were innocent at first...they acted according to their gut feelings and offered help without expecting anything in return, but when they were offered money and they took it the two of them became separated and began to argue about the way it should be divided.
This holds a significant meaning in the movie.
The ways in which humanity can be shattered with the arrival of greediness and complete silence of the universe to our ideals of right and wrong.
That's probably the main reason for the entire scene!! It seems just a moment of normality but it's deep.
.
Why do they even have this crash scene, which is unlikely at best? A small town, a green light... come on that's just not believable. Why bother.
.
I didn't know why until reading your comment. Surely it is to remind us that we're not so different from Llewelyn or the kids (or Chigurh even), we'd take the gold -- or at least we would argue about it with our brother. We are happy to imagine ourselves as these two kids, but then we subconsciously admit we're liable.
.
Cain and Abel, dinner's ready! Stop fighting you two!
@@nmarbletoe8210 sorry it took long time to reply. Yes. This is such a unique movie which reminds us the state of humanity is not a thing that can be explored through heros and villains. Innocence and guilt stand face to face in a dry barren land to identify one another. Everything is so random and vague. Guilty man loses his excuse of insanity to justify his crimes and innocent man loses his excuse of innocence to justify his existence. In the end only things that remain in that deserted place are death, pain and incompetence.
This and American beauty hold a special place in my heart.
man, so many like u in the comment section have these beautiful interpretations to tell. i am just amazed. wish i had that level of understanding.
@@bhagyashrigaikwad4679 🙂
So it struck me: Chigurh absorbed a little of their innocence and generosity, and left them with a tiny seed of his evil.
I note that with that compound fracture, which Chigurh could in no way have set unaided, his end was near. Death, crippling, or capture were his alternatives.
I honestly have no attention span anymore. I cannot sit through a movie at all without constantly wanting to mess with my phone. I pretty much only watch TH-cam videos about movies instead of actual movies. But that No Country For Old Men, even with zero soundtrack, is one of the most engaging - real, gritty - films I have ever seen. Masterpiece.
The moral of the story is that there is no moral to the story. That is a hard reality to come to terms with. 'I feel over-matched. ' In the words of Cormac McCarthy, author of the book, "Your heart's desire is to be told some mystery. The mystery is that there is no mystery.”
The reason there's "no moral" to the story is that the most powerful character in the movie is amoral. This gives us the actual moral of the movie - Don't let amoral monsters have power.
Most of the characters in the movie are spiritually dead or defeated, masquerading as "humble folk". Humble folk are outmatched by monsters.
Blood Meridian. What a phenomenal piece of work.
I dont think so. Actually what really strikes me on this movie how much are sheriff Bell and Anton Chigurh similar. They are both honorable people in the old fashioned way. For example Chigurh once he recovers money, doest even think about taking them and escaping. Or he kills Llewelyn´s girlfriend for one and simple reason only - because he promised that to Llewelyn. Both of them are men of their words and principles, but as a added feature Anton Chigurh kills people.
I disagree. The theme of the movie, to me, seems to be the unavoidable fate coming to you. Everyone in the movie/book seems to know exactly what's coming to them before it gets there and Chigur represents something inescapable. That's just my take on it anyways! Maybe not so much a moral but a theme
Meridian is a book that begs to be an epic film. Read it several times...@@INFEDnoX
The off screen death is to make the viewer FEEL how sheriff bell feels when he finds Luwellyn dead.
Absolutely brilliant story telling.
I love this movie but I don't know if it worked. Everyone I talked to after seeing this movie was mostly just confused about how Luwellyn died and thought they missed something
The book does the same thing. Never had a single page play out Moss’s death.
Who killed him then? I am more confused than ever now
@@swansong007cartel members
It is spelled Llewelyn. It is Welsh. I cant even begin to explain how you really pronounce this in Welsh. In the movie Carla Jean says it like lou ellen. Llewellyn was the last king of Wales effectively.
Best 2+2 moment:
Accountant: "You going to shoot me?"
Chigurh: "Do you see me?"
I don't get it, don't have enough IQ to put 2 and 2 this time :(
@@StRanGerManY his response is obvious to us he said no otherwise if he "sees him" he would be dead
@@marcossoni8198 well, when people got a vitness to their crime, they say "you didn't see me", in the past tense. So its a bit confusing that he formulated it a bit differently, in the present tense.
So, you think he spared him? I just find it highly unlikely that a professional killed would leave a witness like that
@@StRanGerManY
I think he killed him.
It was like an understated question.
eg:
"Are you going to kill me?"
"Does a Bear shit in the woods?"
That sort of thing.
You've seen me, therefore you are a dead man.
@@TheDulcifer ohhh, this makes a lot sense! Thanks, now I can sleep in peace.
I was in denial regarding Carla Jean's death. Thank you for breaking my heart.
What I like about these videos is that they explain explicitly what I think is going on in your subconscious mind when you realize you are watching a really well made film. Maybe you can't put it into words, but you just know it. It's like code running in the background, rules that are allowing the whole thing to work invisibly and work well.
I remember when my girl friend told me this movie is boring. I pulled a coin outta my pocket and told her to call it.
What happened next was up to chance...
Or maybe you made your own luck like Harvey Dent
you got there the same way the coin did...
James Bachmann Yer damn right I did
I hope your shoes are clean.
The movie isn't boring....girls are boring.
My favorite thing about No Country for Old Men is how it reinvents the Indestructible Evil trope. Anton Chigur is an antagonist in the same vein as the Predator, Jason Vorhees, or the T-1000. Seemingly motivated only by the tracking, hunting, and killing of their quarry. However Anton posses no traits of the supernatural, he's a flesh and blood human being like every other character in the story, what's unsettling and alien about him is his warped morality. Betting a mans life on a coin toss, blowing up a car so he can steal from a pharmacy, insisting on paying a young man for his shirt so he can make a sling for his broken arm. Anton is far from invincible, he's injured and nearly killed multiple times throughout the movie, but his survival is what begs a deeper and more profound question. Anton believes himself to be an agent of fate, that he is simply an embodiment of chances unbiased effect on reality, a cold unfeeling universe that is mechanics driven not emotion driven. Thing is, he survives everything that the film throws at him, he walks away while the protagonist lies in a morgue. So is he right? Is he an Indestructible Evil not in the sense he cannot be harmed, but in the sense that what he does is sanctioned by fate itself, thus granting him impunity?
Scott Barnard stealing money from a cartel (id assume) is considered immoral? I wouldn’t think so
I think the car wreck was him being put back into his place by whatever force he followed. Giving llewelyns wife the chance for a coin toss remission was not his choice to make. Her fate had already been sealed by llewellyn when he refused to come to an arrangement over the phone.
He's also very patient. That made it very intense in the scenes where he's conversing with another character because I keep expecting him to blow up and kill the guy out of rage or yell at the kid for not taking the money, but he doesn't. I don't think he ever got angry or at least he didn't express it. He's indestructible in that sense.
Why is everyone smarter than me
That's a really good point. I always thought the leg self-surgery scene was supposed to recall the Terminator as well, and the shotgun showdown between Lewellyn and Chigurh is reminiscent of the shotgun introduction Kyle Reese and the Terminator had, at least the 12 gauge and 00-Buck part.
I found this film an edge-of-your-seat experience. One of the best, scariest villains ever.
i think its because he doesnt act like your conventional villain. The movie doesnt rant and rave about how badass he is or show him pull off unbelievable tricks like shooting the wings off a fly at 50 paces while blindfolded or bench pressing a humvee. Instead he is what's sometimes referred to as "dangerously intelligent" and "brutally effective", he uses pretty understandable tactics like shooting people through doors and using the pnumetic tool to silently kill. Having a credible, dangerous man with understandable goals is much scarier than having Jason Vorhees/Michael Meyers style unstoppable, unbeatable psychopath who kills for no other reason than he's really into stabbing people.
What's incredible is that Javier Bardem was later cast as a Bond villain was wasn't scary at all. Creepy, yes. Scary, no. They should have just made Anton Chigurh the villain of Skyfall.
@@---cr8nw Well, different character and different scripts, also very different Directors.
I loved the soundtrack especially.
Absolutely (especially since there isn't one, making the film more relatable.)
Jerk Mehoff I tried looking for it but I couldn’t find any of the songs :( Could you send me a link?
Jared Clark it has no soundtrack
I'm not sure who's being whooshed here.
N. R. Neither am i, buddy! Neither am i!
Such a great film filled with well shot tension and build up. Javier has so much power behind his words and yet such calm body language.
The sets, the cinematography, the story, the acting, the dialogue. "No Country For Old Men" is a masterpiece. My favorite movie of all time.
I wish we get more mysterious villains like Anton chigurh nowadays. We don't need backstories for villains to be great. The Joker and Hannibal lector are other examples
Lorne Malvo from the first season of the series Fargo is a very similar sort of villain, an agent of chaos
What do you people think about Darth Vader ? Was he a better villain before his backstory ?
Vader was great before but the prequels despite all their problems really added some more depth to his character. But most of it especially hayden's acting and the childhood (which was unnecessary) was executed Very poorly
@Rexvan Podung I like the full story of Vader but yeah the way it was made didn't impress me
@@amanms1999 Yes i agree the acting was bad and almost everything else in those 3 movies were bad except for the story. The 3rd one was the best.
I love the scene in the gas station, especially, when Chigurh squeezes the snack pack after finishing it and puts it on the counter and says "What's the most you've ever lost..". Jeez that one of the most goosebumping scenes I've ever seen.
That line, and "Raymond, why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitare?"
No Country For Old Men is my favorite Coen brother's film and is in my top five favorite films of all time. It's a film with so much to take in, it throws all conventional storytelling tropes out the window and instead tells an enthralling psychological character study. Great Vid.
The other 4?
I’m in the minority because my favorite is The Hudsucker Proxy. Most people don’t give it many props.😢
@@suryaprakash-mo6ui Shawshank, her, fantastic Mr Fox, return of the king
@@sebastianliebelt-boord3603 great picks!
The murder of Carla Jean makes me sad every time.
For what? Name one sin she committed. She just did as she was told to, blindly. She was just another in the long list of Chigurh's "code".
John Hall she didnt try stop his husband. But then again she always said it herself: his husband does it like he does. He wouldn’t listen to her. She really died for knowing nothing would work the way she wants and not fighting against the nature of things
By that line of logic I suppose the two good Samaritans who stopped to help Chigurh were to blame for their own deaths because they didn't trust their instincts enough, huh?
@@johnhall5129 She let her mother come with her. Moss denied to that, which in turn ended up revealing his location which led to his death. Since Moss never willingly gave Anton his money he went there to kill her.
Prove that he killed her. We don't know from the film. Him checking his boots after walking through the entire house proves nothing. He methodically lifts his boots to avoid the blood from killing Carson Wells.
I love this video, but I think you missed an important point of the moral of the movie, one that almost departs from the meaning in the book. Rather than realize that times have changed and violence is the new norm, Sheriff Bell realizes that the world has always been chaotic and violent, and it is he who has changed. I think the most critical part of this subtle adjustment made in the movie is the story told to Bell by Ellis about their famous predecessor. You can find the scene here: th-cam.com/video/d1U3MyX0pmE/w-d-xo.html. The senseless violence of the past is reflected in Bell's current case, and I think that's the real purpose of the move. "What's coming" is Bell's own age, not the way of the world shifting.
This
9:30 - I think this addresses your point. Sheriff Bell's experience is nothing new.
There's also a scene where Bell describes a scene where a man shoots a steer and the bullet ricochets off and hits him in the arm. I think this also adds to the "chaos" and inability to control situations. Even Chigurh can't escape from the chaos of the world when he's t-boned In the one of the final scenes coincidentally breaking his arm.
@@degausser5495 I agree, especially about that final scene in the movie: an anticlimatic ending on a completely random act of violence is exactly how a movie about the chaos of the world would end
Damn. Well-put.
I’ve adored this film since this first time I saw it over a decade ago when I was in high school, but I never consciously was aware there was really not much in the way of a soundtrack. What I did remember was how much simple foley sounds effects like the wrapper on the counter at the gas station had a huge impact on me. Now it makes so much sense as to why. Your ears aren’t bombarded with noise unlike virtually every other movie, so when there is sound, it’s both really intentional and makes an impact on the viewer. Expertly crafted masterpiece!
It never hit me until just now that Breaking Bad does this too.
I think Rachel means letting the audience add 2+2
@@TheAmericanpyro Yes, that's what I meant 😅
Yes! Better Call Saul has like 20 minute scenes with no dialogue that make the audience work very hard to put 2 + 2 together.
I love the name Saul Goodman (S'all good, man.) Saul was St. Paul's name before he hallucinated Jesus. Maybe I'll change my name to Saul.
@@JiveDadson fuck i didn't notice that about his name
Every now and then, I come to TH-cam to watch the initial speech of Tommy Lee Jones. I believe is one of the best speeches ever given in a movie. It set up the scenario right away, it shows you the nature of what is the Heroe of the story and just leaves you with the feeling that "ok.. this movie is gonna be rough". Amazing analysis man!
If you like that speech you should really read the book. It’s fucking great. And the Sheriff is more fleshed out than he is in the movie, making that ending way way better.
I know exactly what you mean. I read it just a couple a years ago and it renew my admiration for the movie and the Coen brothers.
Haha now I’m gonna have to look up that speech. And watch the movie again!😁👍
you should watch The Sunset Limited then. The movie is practically just one long speech between him and samual jackson. Nice fresh pace of a film clearly adapted from a play based on how it is filmed. If you are a fan of Tommy that is one portrayal you should definitely watch if you have not already.
@@amadousef846 I was given the book years before I saw the film and Cormac's style was too crazy
“- Carla Jean Moss: I ain't got the money. What little I had is long gone, and there's bills aplenty to pay yet. I buried my mother today. Can't pay for that neither.
- Anton Chigurh: I wouldn't worry about it.
- Carla Jean Moss: I need to sit down.”
Yeah, that dialog is more terryfing than any horror movie, and the resolution is hearthbreaking and brilliant. This inocent woman caught in the middle of a relentless battle and no "hero movie" move to save her. We sincerely hope not, but inside we know his fate is sealed when Chigur appear in her house.
This dialogue also demonstrates Carla Jean as the moral center of the film. She was loyal, responsible and caring. In the end, she was courageous, and refused to escape her fate unlike her husband and the Sheriff.
@@hernanuliana9111 And upon re-watches, we know Carla Jean's fate is sealed once Llewellyn chooses the money over her via that phone call with Anton.
@@shanonsnyder9450 her husband really put her life on a time clock when he took that money...so another thing that’s obvious Is If we let our greed get ahold of us we are bound for trouble.
One of the greatest films ever made. And one of the few instances of a film adaptation surpassing the source material. And this is coming from a huge Cormac McCarthy fan. The Coens trimmed all of the fat, tightened the story and put laser focus on characters and motivations. A true modern masterpiece.
@Lady Vengeance: Sorry, but you've gone too far. I agree that it's a great movie. And that it's a great novel. But there's no "fat" in the book. It's arguably one of the least fat major novels of all time. What the Coens actually "trimmed" was a significant characterization sub-plot: the hitchhiking girl. So the experience of the movie . . . and of the novel . . . turn out to be different. One is not better enough than the other . . . to be worth pointing out.
QED The hitchhiking girl subplot was unnecessary and frankly I found it out of character for Llewelyn to behave the way he does in with her in the book. Not to mention the hotel sequence is much tighter in the film. And finally, most importantly, the Coens made a major change to the source material that I find more impactful than the source novel. When Anton confronts Carla Jean at the end of the film, she refuses to call the coin toss. She forces Anton to make the decision. In the book she initially resists but ultimately calls the toss and loses. The Coens’ interpretation is far more powerful. The book and the film are masterpieces of their respective media. But a case can at least be made that the Coens improved on the source material. And that is more than can be said for most adaptations.
@@Lady_Vengeance My opinion: Llewelyn's behavior with the girl is a brilliantly scripted microcosm of his character. But I concede that this may be a "guy thing". So you might want to explore it further with male friends of yours. Regards . . .
Well, they omitted the actual ending. You know, when Chigurgh meets with the money men and explains that he works for their "new supplier." This reveals what went down at the drug deal gone bad, and who did it, and why. Probably because the Coen brothers like their films to be just a string of seemingly random and bizarre events.
@@JadeDude1973 Right. I myself prefer that ending . . . but it's not enough for me to say that the movie is better. There's room here for each to work in its own way . . .
This movie makes you THINK. That's what art is about. Giving you information , sharing ideas and concepts and letting you think about the events and situations.
I truly appreciate the increasingly rare script that respects the audience, brought to life by a filmmaker (filmmakers) who has faith in people's ability to follow along. I think you could count the lines of purely expositional dialogue on one hand.
Fucking brilliant analysis. This was one of the hardest movies for me to watch when I was younger because I didn't really understand what was going on. Why did Josh Brolin's character have to die off-screen? What were Chigurh's motives? What the heck were those dreams at the end? I never really appreciated it until recently when I watched A Serious Man, and realised that the seemingly ambiguous story of NCFOM actually had a purpose of its own. Goes without saying that it's now one of my all time favourite movies.
Yes dude! It took me not having seen the film for more than 6 years to understand Lee Jones' perspective/dreams of his late father, and how it related to the world changing around him as he retired. So goddamn good.
I just remember being so pissed at Moss for returning to the scene of the massacre... He had that money free and clear! Transfer that money to a new bag... and ditch that homing beacon... then BOUNCE tf outta Dodge. The minute he had that little crisis of conscience, I knew he opened a big fat shit can full of problems. I thought for sure, a man who fought in Vietnam should be able to disconnect from his feelings of humanity and walk away without any moral crisis over what some shitbag drug dealers did to each other. War and repeated exposure to violence would jade such an individual and make them a creature of pure logic and have a keen sense of trusting their survival instincts. Talk to anyone who works in law enforcement or emergency medicine... there are limits to our compassion that make us seem like uncaring Assholes (look up Gallows Humor) to "normal" people, but we rarely have sympathy for those who bring their problems onto themselves via their own poor life choices, whereas the innocent victims (usually children) breaks our hearts to the point where people have to leave that line of work. Just my own take on that film from my perspective... 🤔
The parallels between No Country For Old Men and Serious Man are numerous. In Serious, the brothers hilariously mock inane (and ancient) attempts to invent meaning and purpose for Life with a large L. In No Country, they come to grips with the futility and sadness of those attempts.
Tracy Ranger. Nope. Had nothing to do with his empathy and guilt ridden conscience. Moss' character was doomed from the moment he took possession of the satchel full of money because he didn't even check the money for a tracking device. The transponder was geo-navigating his whereabouts the entire time. Led death right to his front door. He was a wise military hunter, he should have known better frankly.
To elaborate, in No Country, fate is chaotic. In A Serious Man, God intervenes. Gopnik's great-great-great grandmother killed a man - or was it a golem? - or did he live? In any case, the family was cursed "even unto the fourth generation." But Gopnik did a Job with a long o. He kept the faith, or tried to. Things started looking up. The man who coveted Gopnik's wife died in a car wreck. Everything seemed to be getting all better until Gopnik took money for changing one of his students' grades. Oops. God wrath time again. An ominous call from Gopnik's doctor. Gopnik's son pursued by a bully and a tornado. There was even an omen that the USA was in peril. Now the irony is this: chaos or some capricious invisible hand - there is no way to tell the difference. Call it.
This movie is like the Pink Floyd of movies. Nothing over-technical, but perfect in pace and execution...hidden meanings that still arise. The simplicity of the hidden complexity is why I still watch it.
One of my favourite movies ever. I remember discussing this movie with my students that I was guest teaching for a day. It was pretty cool to hear grade 8s discussing the more subtle hints/points in this movie. We had a brief bond over film and it was quite rewarding.
Man, Michael, you CRUSHED this! You explain things in a way that people like myself can understand and apply to their own videos. Keep it up, I loved this!!! 😁🤘
ᅚᅚ ᅚᅚ fuck off
He made a mistake with Carla Jean and the boots. It only implies something it is not an actual fact.
To him it implies what happened to me it implies that the psychopath is obsessed with his boots.
@@bighands69 I understand that it does not mean for sure she was killed and that implication does not equal fact. But when you say that it only shows that he is obsessed with his boots, to take it a bit further, his obsession seems to do with the cleanliness of his boots. So since it has prior shown him remove his boots from becoming dirty it seems logical that something happened inside the house just prior to him leaving that warranted his fear of dirty boots. The most logical and reasonable answer is the implied killing of Carla Jean. To wrap up, you can stick with your idea of the boots obsession but it seems like to me you have been given an equation like 1+2×3 and you are knowingly choosing to only solve the first part of 1+2 and willingly ignoring ×3 for whatever reason that suites you. Anyway, good day!
This is one of the great movies of this century. Thank you for taking the time to address it properly.
WakeRunCollapse The book is better. Have you read it?
I haven't. Truth be told, I'm not much of a reader, and I fear I'd only compare the book to what I experienced from the movie after all this time.
I love the midpoint scene where Llewellyn leaves the hotel eluding Chigurh. The whole cat and mouse feel to it, with ZERO dialog is fantastic! My favorite movie, will watch again today. Great video, thank you.
As someone who grew up in rural hill country in Texas, the end of this film was simply sublime. "..and in the dream I knew, he was goin on ahead and he was fixin to make a fire, and he was somewhere out there in all that dark and all that cold. I knew that when I got here, he'd be there and then I woke up." Masterful.
Just came across the channel a week ago, and I also watched this movie like two weeks ago. Very pleasant surprise for my first notification.
Awesome! That works out well.
I’ve read McCarthy’s works, and if there’s one thing that can be said about his books, it’s that they’re extremely light on dialogue. I would say the average book contains about 80% prose, characters silently interacting with the world around them, and the choices and consequences that befall them. The other 20% is dedicated to dialogue. McCarthy is deliberate in his writing. He never once holds your hand, or makes you feel like an idiot. There’s no spoon feeding in any of his books. He gives you just enough information, and expects you to piece the rest together from the clues provided.
Yes. I remember that from Blood Meridian.
That doesn't sound right for "No Country for Old Men". I've just looked at the paperback . . . and randomly found multiple instances where 2 consecutive pages have 80% dialogue.
It took some time for me to get use to his rejection of punctuation. No Country was the first McCarthy book I read; largely because I saw the film was to come out. So, thank you Coen Bros for introducing me to a great writer. Now I've read The Orchard Keeper, The Road, Blood Meridian, Suttree, and Child of God. All equally raw. Do not attempt if already depressed.
Moss is calm and methodical.
Moss...His name is fitting.
Do you think he ever gets a hot ear?
Didn't save him tho'
@@Alan-io2ew true
Grows on the north side of a tree?
@@Alan-io2ew that's one of the points in the movie, you can follow the rules but still end up dead, just like the villain gets hit by a car even though he was going through a green light.
LFTS on 12 angry men would be interesting.
Jungo - MY FAVORITE MOVIE!!!
Yes, please.
THIS.
Jungo I agree
holy moly yes
"...meaning is always more powerful when it can be synthesized in the mind of the viewer instead of spoon fed through on-the-nose dialogue"
What a great quote. Definitely what I felt after finished watching Aftersun. Really minimalistic film that requires viewer to synthesize all of the meaning
I LOVE it when movies trust the audience to put 2 and 2 together
Sometimes I'm way too stupid to get all of it, but whenever someone makes me notice details that suggest what happened off-screen
that's one of the best feelings ever. Thank you for this video!
your channel is so GOOD
There IS a country for old men. It's called Florida.
Sheriff Bell should have just moved to Florida. Problem: solved.
Or Nevada
It's called Thailand.
Ironically, that's also where the craziest headlines come out of.
Strange that nobody has picked up on the fact that Florida isn't a country...
One thing that I appreciated is they showed that moss was calculated in his moves ( with the curtains you mentioned ) but he didn't consider that when Wells found him in the hospital that Anton could also both find him and when Wells threatened his Wife that Anton could also do the same thing. This inevitably led to his downfall trying to protect his wife which cannot be done perfectly and then him losing all the hands he gained when he tried to go there and the position was compromised. This happened after he lost a lot of blood and is really cool to see a protagonist make a mistake because the antagonist is truly ahead of him and showing him losing in that way was a nice change in scenery from movies. I wish new movies would have this same level of thoughtful writing because it's truly good cinema.
I literally watched No Country For Old Men for the first time. AN d not sure as to why i waited so long. I bought it years ago, its been on my shelf. I knew it wasn't a conventional movie and I was waiting for the right time. It was worth the wait. Great video, I really enjoy your mind set on movies.
Nice!👍😁
So hard to definitively settle which Coen brothers film is the best, but I’m confident in saying I think this is it.
I think this is my favorite too.
"Sheriff Bell, the only central character to actually change during the film."
Which would make him the protagonist.
He actually is, indeed. He is US trying to make sense of all that has happened.
@@giodc8599 that makes 2000 pounds of sense
The plot was hidden before you, all along. The story is about Sheriff Bell accepting the reality of life and his insignificance.....
Whose OLD in three of them ? Sheriff.
What's title of the film ?
@@Sirrajj Sheriff Bell and the other sheriff he has coffee with after Llewelyn is killed. The country is too rough for all the old law man. Remember the opening where he speaks of sheriffs who didn't carry a gun, now it is machine guns and air actuated bullets. It has become "No Country for Old (law)Men"
Love this movie! Tremendously good villain. Saw it when I was younger and didn't get it until I reached my twenties. Well explained video once again!
Doneandgone It sometimes takes ideas to simmer and the more you understand things in life or in general movies can become better or worse, nothing wrong with not getting something at one time.
No Country For Old Men is another example of the Coen brothers' mastering of film making. I own the BluRay of this film so I can watch it anytime.
One of my favorite lines of dialogue ever. The Sheriff and his deputy are surveying the shootout in the Dessert and the Deputy exclaims “Hell Sheriff isn’t this a mess?”
To which the Sheriff blandly replies “Well if it’s not, it’ll do ‘till the mess gets here”.
Some of Tommy Lee's lines in this movie are seriously iconic.
Watched this film for the first time about a week ago, because I am studying it in my film class in September, and one thing I that stood out to me was the extreme tension in this film, I could name 3 or 4 scenes but the one which stood out to me, was when he returns to the murder scene (at the start) with water, at night. When the cars roll up from afar and the headlights go down and then that burst his tires. I guess what I mean is how well they take their time in creating tension, they have long build ups which just make everything so nailbiting. This film was incredible, on of those films where after watching it you're just sat there for a moment speechless; then for the next few hours you're just thinking about it and it only. Also I think a great screenplay to make a video on would be The Good, The Bad and The Ugly or The Grand Budapest Hotel.
William Brown its amazing how so much tension was created without one bit of music or score.
Interesting you say that since direction and acting thoroughly elevates an otherwise ok screenplay with the good the bad and the ugly
@Prabs s , i know right it's pure visual storytelling and again in the case of him revisiting the murder site with the water at night, I think that perhaps the coen brothers manage such tension is by shooting an establishing shot where in which it is a wide shot of the crime scene and he enters the frame from the right, this shot, for me at least added so much suspense because there was so much space in the frame for other characters or any suspicious tiny bit of movement that might suggest the presence of another person. Further more once the car full of the cartel arrives, I think as well as tension, the coen's add dredd into the scene because not only have they set up what these people are willing to do (slaughter a gang of 6 or so men and a dog), also by showing them puncture his tires it acts as almost a seal of his fate, as they're not going to let him escape. One more thing to mention is that the camera sticks, for the most part with the character (I have forgotten his name) and so it positions us with him, as we too try to figure out how to to escape or what to do; like you said there's no score and so, not to say that a score takes you out of the film, in fact I think the complete opposite, it makes it feel so real as if you are there, just with the sound of his breathing and gravel being kicked. Just one last thing to add about the silence is that we hear the cartels voice from afar as it slowly Louden's as they near us, only adding to the threat of an impending doom.
I could take that scene seriously. Dude is attempting to sneakily look over the hood of a truck to try and see who is rolling up on him.......While wearing a giant ass cowboy hat. I also got tilted at dude for noticing his cowboy boots are not good for running so then when he goes to buy new clothes he buys more cowboy boots..... I was basically cheering for the idiot to die the whole movie.
After I watched this film I sat my Dad down too watch it although he said it didn't really interest him he was willing to try it. Halfway through the film he pauses it and says, "I'm shocked, this movie is actually really good"
This 2+2 technique is heavily used in BrBa and Better call Saul
And the very first episode of BCS is one of the best examples of this
Your videos are always concise, insightful, and fresh. Your appreciation for film and screenwriting is both informative and enthusiastic. Thank you for sharing with us, I'm learning a lot and finding inspiration for writing through your channel :)
Also last thing: Great transition to the ending with the Prem Pro timeline viewable, AND sync'd to your actual monologue. Very nice.
Thanks for noticing the details!
I watched this for the first time yesterday and I loved everything about it.
I don't know many theory things in movie making, but if I may make an observation, No Country for old Men is one of the only movies that does not have a soundtrack at all. I feel this alleviates the fact that this isn't your typical Hero movie. This is just a random guy with a certain background that happens to find money and ends up being killed for it. Nothing ehroic there. I feel this further underlines how powerless we can be in the face of evil.
Sound design is a brilliant in this film. Especially, use of absolute silence at the key moments in the film.
What do you mean by "in the face of evil" ? Do you mean evil like the main guy getting killed or how he was powerless in the face of taking the money in the first place or how even the powerful cop who should keep bad things away from people felt powerless when facing the evil world ?
Main guy was up against both Cartels and Chigur. He was of no match. I mean Evil like in the prisoner's dilemma.
@@WulfLOL1 I don't see how the prisoner's dilemma has anything to do with this could you explain how you see it ?
In a society where good could prevail and everyone could benefit, people will always opt to only benefit themselves because they do not trust others. It's what I feel this movie highlights. Everyone is in it for themselves and everyone dies as a result.
When I watched this I didn't recognize Moss, I thought that was just a random guy. I didn't realize he had died until near the end. Had to rewind to see if it was really him.
Yeah, this was really odd. After it is established that he died, the camera always shows him from an angle, almost as if he was a completely random character that just got killed but who isn't really all that important for the plot.
@@CanIHasThisName a daunting truth that the main character is nothing but a disposable extra.
@@CanIHasThisName
Kooky username bud.
@@CanIHasThisName You're the real psychopath here with that username buddy lol. c:
@@joshualeahy2162 Could say the same about you.
I've seen this film probably 20 times. Never once caught the hotel curtain thing...or the lack of music. Being a musician I'm surprised it never dawned on me that I was more tense because of the lack of sounds/music. What a goddamn film.
i didnt pick up on any of that when i watched it, still loved it but, didnt realize just how deep it went
"If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?"
Benedict Sumberbatch do you have any idea how crazy you are
@Benedict Sumberbatch: "The rule [logos] is both the end and the means . . . in and of itself."
I also like the beginning where it depicts moss tracking and hunting in his own way. With deer. Then we see chigurh driving down the road tracking his next victim on “the hunt”. I’ve just always liked that contrast
I had no idea about his "care for boots cleanliness" thing! I always assumed he killed Carla Jean, but this just confirms it. Thanks for pointing this out!
Awesome video! Would love a video on There Will Be Blood. The use of background elements in the story telling and themes of sacrifice / demons really comes through the characters in the background as well!
Especially considering that these movies were made at the exact same location. Michael, please, do it 😊
No country had to shut down shooting for
One day, cause smoke from the there will b blood set was all over the sky.
So many great examples of "show don't tell" in this movie. My absolute favorite film!
Can you do one on The Departed?
OMG YES
Doing it for the Infernal Affairs Trilogy shluld be better.
I’m currently reading the novel. This video was incredibly helpful for me to understand the plot and characters more than when i started reading it. Also for a future video I think Call Me By Your name would be interesting
I love the horn with fire dream at the end - the culmination of the theme.
A light of hope "in all that dark and all that cold."
When a video from you pops up in my notification, most likely I haven't seen the film.And I try to watch those films in order to watch your video.Thanks to you that I have watched a lot of good films because of you.And it definitely allows me to understand films with a new perspective and purpose rather than just watching for entertainment.
What a great compliment, thank you!
What is all about with Chigurh's car accident? That almost drove me mad!! My opinion is it's sort of karma... he said to Wells "if the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?", yet Chigurh himself follows some rules blindly, as the green semaphore was enough to him... and that almost killed him: he is not immune to the chaos. But the fact that he didn't die is brilliant, maybe we expected another kind of justice, and we're left with an image of a suffering man, realizing that his life was already nightmare, and will always be. What are your opinions??
@Bear Arms Very good point of view, thanks! Well, he gave the money to the kid also (mostly?) to buy the kid's silence... This was very interesting because within seconds we see the kid passing from good will to corruption, at the end he doesn't want to share the money with the other kid... he is a worse kid than before just by meeting Chigurh, it seems like we literally see the evil spreading around! Just brilliant
Killing off Chigur with the car accident would have defeated McCarthy's theme, that evil has no reason and is always with us.
I believe it made two points.
1. It shows that not even monsters are impervious to the chaos of the universe.
2. It ironically throws Anton’s “Rules” quote back in his face, which is the only subtle scrap of closure we get.
You are right to point out Chigur's question - he must now answer that about his own life. The truth is he had no reason to kill the women, he was simply following some rule he invented for himself.
He didn't see what was coming. Neither did anyone else. Neither do any of us alive. I fucking love it. You can't hold back the tide.
One of my favourite films ever. Along with Seven, Silence of the Lambs, Angel Heart, Alien, the Shining, and Gladiator.
Get the name right. It’s “No country for old- holy shit this movie is good”
🎧 Listen to our podcast episode in which we do a deeper dive into No Country for Old Men: bit.ly/3AoG6nD
🎥 What’s your favorite Coen Brothers film? And what movie should we look at in a future video?
After this, it's Inside Llewyn Davis. That movie is just pure magic.
Fargo.
The answer to both questions is Fargo.
For a future video I would love to see you tackle Silence of the Lambs or the Hannibal TV show. Maybe the difference between the portrayals of Hannibal Lecter.
Barton Fink
From this video iv come to realize how much respect this film has for the audience. It treats the audience as adults who are not going to be spoon feed. No Country for Old Men is a modern masterpiece. Tommy Lee Jones especially is outstanding.
Any more films that “respect the audience” like this movie does? I would definitely love to watch more of these.
Bladerunner.
2001: A Space Odyssey
@@chuckcribbs3398 By chance, the two movies I watched this evening were 2001 and this,.
Anton Chigurh is my favorite villain of all time. I have never been that terrified by a fictional character in my entire life 😖
If you haven't already, read Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy. Judge Holden gives Chigurh a run for his money
Fun fact, Bardem hated the haircut because he had to wear it for weeks and in public it made him incredibly self conscious.
Man let me tell you, your channel is teaching me so much about film that I had previously been lacking and if I ever become an actor it’s because I meticulously studied your videos
"If the rules you follow brought you to this of what use were the rules?"
Holy shit i've been waiting for you to do a NCFOM video for SO long!! Thanks so much
This film grows on you with repeat viewings, at the same villain becomes more menacing. What makes that so crazy is that he's the real star of the film.
Please please do The Departed. The two plus two theory is perfect for this film. The section of this video where you talk about a scene happening in the audience's imagination is perfectly exemplified in The Departed at the end. We are left to infer that the psychiatrist, Madolyn, opened Billy's letter after his death and had an intense emotional breakdown once she knows the truth about his identity and why he was sent to see her in the first place: a double agent for the Boston City Police department. More importantly we realize the extent of Billy's completely justified anxiety and how well he is able to control even with a gun pointed to his face. So when he asks her for Valium in their first meeting, she scoffs thinking he's just an ex con looking to score. At the end (after Billy's death) she realizes he was going through genuine pulsating anxiety due to the stress of being undercover for the Boston Police Department. Throughout the film, Billy pops a Valium to collect his composure. For instance, when he threatens Mark Wahlberg's character by threatening to abandon his job and get on an airplane once Billy realizes how deep the mole is inside PD. He pops another when he enters the shack midway through the film. In a split second, he pops a valium and uncocks his gun, suggesting that in his currently distressed and apprehensive mind, this time he might not ever leave that shack alive. Ray Winstone appears and demands sensitive information on all of Costello's crew to find the mole. Billy realizes his demise is imminent and that it's only a matter of time before he's found out. He cashes his chips in by impregnating Madolyn that very night. Billy being the father of her unborn child leaves an even more potent emotional impact even though this entire scene of her opening the letter is not in the film. When she finds out the truth about Colin, Madolyn says "I thought I was the liar" referring to her pregnancy.
There is an incredibly insightful essay written by Annette Wernblad in her book The Passion of Martin Scorsese about this film (as well as every Scorsese film made up to that point) on the characters, plot, and themes of the film. No one has made a video essay on this film and it sorely deserves one of this quality.
Thank you so much for making great content. Your passion for intelligent film and writing is infectious and stand out from all the other "Ending Explained" videos that plague youtube. Your video on True Detective and it's parallels to Se7en was particularly sagacious. I look forward watching more of your content in the future.
You should become a writer because you seem to enjoy it so much haha, but I agree with you yeah The Departed is pretty awesome
Michael, please keep the lessons coming. You have a gift and I look forward to many more videos 👍🏼
What i like about this movie is that you can feel the intensity in every part of the movie which is what i like about it it keeps you at the edge of your seat
Did not like this film at first, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. This and There Will Be Blood are two of the finest films of the 2000s.
me after watching the movie: hmm good film.
me after watching 5 youtube videos analyzing the movie: holy shit this is a masterpiece!
me too
This is one of the only movies that ever forced me to watch and rewatch it over and over...love it
You know, I don’t really like No Country for Old Men that much. But this video kinda gave me a good idea of why people do like it.
It was pretty interesting! Thanks.
Yeah, I don't like masterful directing, cinematography, and writing either. ಠ_ಠ
I was a little perplexed by it on first viewing. But, given that the Coen bros served it up, I had to watch again. On second viewing, I got it. I think I've seen it four times now. Maybe five.
I also am not a big fan of the film, despite it being masterfully directed with wonderful cinematography. I can appreciate many things about the movie, both in craftsmanship and for being wonderfully ambitious, however I believe it is ultimately unsuccessful in delivering on the ambition with a meaningful statement regarding it's theme. In many ways it purposefully undercuts itself when it comes to showing the theme through story/character and then at the end delivers a monologue explaining the theme in a flat way.
Theme should be felt, regardless if it is understood or not. I understood the themes of No Country For Old Men but did not feel it (I'm happy for you if you did). It felt like hearing a joke that is incomplete without an explanation but any joke that uses an explanation of the joke as a punchline isn't going to hit you in the gut. Especially if the punchline is "jokes don't always make sense".
I think it's because people take the moral presented near the end at face value. The film is fundamentally about how people romanticize the past and their willful ignorance of moral flaws that are intrinsic to our society. A lot of people read the film as "The world is becoming more decadent. This is no country for old men.", when the actual message seems to be the rebuttal itself, "Things have always been this bad. You've just been naive."
By the end of the film, Sheriff Bell resigns because he can't comprehend the direction society, and by extension criminality, is heading. He discusses it with a colleague and they run through the motions of blaming the youth; tattoos, piercings, hair, the whole 'chivalry is dead' spiel. Bell later discusses his resignation with his uncle and is abruptly set straight. His uncle recites a story about one of the old-timers Bell had been romanticizing since the start of the story and how he was brazenly shot by some outlaws on his front porch in 1909. They watched him bleed out for hours and later left his home out of bordem. The film begins with Bell uncertain of the future, believing it to be this dangerous unknown quantity, and ends with him realizing that he never had a firm grasp on just how cruel the world was to begin with.
"What you got ain't nothing new. This country's hard on people. You can't stop what's coming... That's vanity." - Uncle Ellis
@@Iritis- To go even deeper I realized that humanitie's( law enforcement and citizens) efforts to desperately understand & balance the 'good and evil' morality is a waste of time. Causing the Sheriff to realize that he was niave his whole career because law enforcement causes you to be too close to the bigger picture to see the whole thing.