No Country For Old Men (2007)
The ultimate search for morality
In continuation to the previous two, here is an another film, probably the best of the lot, which uses its characters to appeal to us on a philosophical level. This movie particularly treads on the thin line separating fate and free-will, which form the basis of our morals, and subsequently our characters.Without further ado, let’s see what this one has to offer. No Country For Old Men is a neo-western thriller, which is one of my most favourite genres. I have written a separate article explaining the nuances and appeal of the genre. The movie is directed by the duo Ethan and Joel Coen, and is based on a novel of the same name by Cormac McCarthy. Interestingly, Cormac had originally written it as a screenplay, which was picked up by the Coen brothers after the success of the novel.
The premise of the story is set in the aftermath of an illegal drug deal gone wrong in the vicinity of USA-Mexico border. Anton Chigurh(Javier Bardem) is a hitman, who doesn't value human life, and lives in with a pessimistic mindset. He is hired to recover money lost in a shootout. LLewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) stumbles upon this money and decides to run away with it and his wife, Carla Jean(Kelly MacDonald). Chigurh finds the identity of the man who stole the money and goes after his life. Meanwhile, sheriff Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones) starts investigating the case. The rest of the plot is a cat and mouse chase between Chigurh and LLewelyn, as Bell tries to save the couples’ lives.
As the plot and the character arcs are very linear, it’s easy to dissect and understand the film. Most movies of this genre choose to portray death as very fragile. It can happen in a matter of seconds, and people would to go to any lengths to stay alive. No Country For Old Men does the opposite, it reminds us that death is also a slow deteriorating phenomenon, how we age with time and die eventually, ultimately asking the age old question — what is the point of life anyway? This is evident in the characters too. Anton Chigurh has a very low regard for human life and always see the bad in people. He sees the worst in society as he is exposed to drug dealers, mobsters and bounty hunters, which brings out the worst in them. This and all his other character traits can be extracted from just one beautiful scene at the gas station. As the owner tries to make small talk, Chigurh starts to get annoyed at the pointlessness of the conversation. As the conversation moves ahead, Chigurh decides that the owner’s life has reached it’s end point, whether or not Chigurh kills him. The shopkeeper crosses the line when he says that the gas station was an inheritance from his father-in-law. This, for Chigurh, is as big an offence as any. Living life without working hard for it is against Chigurh’s morals. He holds unrealistically high expectations about people, and if they don’t meet them, their lives are in the hands of fate.
This is the only justification for Chigurh’s murder. To him, none of this is his fault. The people deserve their the death, he is just the one who delivers it upon fate’s decision. The same situation is repeated with Carson Wells, as he tries to reason with Chigurh by offering him money, the most valuable thing for Wells. It doesn’t work, just like it doesn’t for Carla Jean, who tries a different approach by understanding him and hoping to change his morals. Her life is also decided by a coin toss, even though she had done no harm to Chigurh; it’s only because of a promise he made to a dead man. To understand why hard work and honesty are the most important qualities for Chigurh, we have to understand Llewelyn. He is a staunch believer in free will, meaning every man decides his own fate. He doesn’t try to fight his fate, as he sets off with the money, knowing that it could cost him his life. However, as he also dies in the end, not in hands of Chigurh, we nevertheless come back to the same question — is there really free will, or all of it is just fate? Which of the two should form the basis of all our morals? And this is how the film intends to grow upon our minds. With the death of LLewelyn, Sheriff Tom Bell becomes the protagonist out of the blue. This brings us to my favourite part of the movie. In the beginning we see, the disciplined and optimistic sheriff also believes in free will, and he thinks people should be responsible for their actions. He has a clear view of right and wrong, and that is what has led him to become a police officer. As he leaves the community, he begins to feel the invisible forces that will always best him, leaving him no control of things. He starts to accept that maybe his fate is out of his hands. Even though he never meets Chigurh, he is the one responsible for opening up Bell’s mind. After LLewelyn and Carla Jean’s deaths, he accepts that he has failed and hands over his resignation. The movie never has a black and white view of morals. It solely relies on actions, and their consequences. As LLewelyn chooses to help out a dying man, he ends up alerting the mob. It further enables Chigurh to come after his life, which would have been very blissful with all the money he had found, had he chosen not to bring water to the dying man. LLewelyn dies carrying the same morals he lived his whole life with, without bothering to change. On the other hand, Bell tries to understand irrationality and complex behaviours, why people behave the way they do. He fails because his morals are too strong and positive. The film ends on a subtle note as Bell tries to reminisce the good old days and realising that they were never there. The world has always been strange and irrational, the only that has changed is that he has grown old. He has been outmatched by a younger generation he doesn’t understand and he accepts it while he imagines his afterlife. At this point, we come back to Chigurh, whose life has completed a full circle, as he gets hit by a car, becoming a victim of blind fate. It doesn’t end here though, because at the very end we see a change in Chigurh’s character. He offers the kid a 100$ bill, looking away from him. This shows that he has also accepted his fate and it’s time to surrender to the next generation. There is indeed, no country for old men.
Not trying to take credit from the directors, but the movie is dominated by the superb acting of Javier Bardem and Tommy Lee Jones. For Josh Brolin, I feel this is the movie that made him a star. The laud is incomplete without mentioning Rogear Deakin. It’s his ninth collaboration with the Coen brothers and he makes the terrain setting very realistic. He uses wide-angle image shots of the sparse desert, like an almighty that looks upon to the violent chaos that ensues. The film went on to receiving 8 Oscar nominations, winning four out of them, including the Best Movie. The fact that I have watched it so many times makes me wonder whether it is really the best movie of this century.
