Good not Great

Rating: 7/10 (6 February 2008)

I've seen this film twice now and although I enjoyed and appreciated it the first time around, I was less forgiving about it after a second viewing. I personally think the Coen Brothers are brilliant filmmakers but No Country just doesn't work for me. First thing that bugs me is the folly of the films supposed primary theme; chance. Seriously, all the coin flipping is so blatant and un-subtle that surely it can't be what the film is about, can it? I've always found the Coen's work to be very refined, so to be bashed over the head with something so clichéd as a-man-flipping-a-coin-to-represent-chance just doesn't seem quite right for me.
Obviously, No Country isn't a bad film. Technically it's brilliant, in terms of cinematography; shot selection, lighting and framing everything on screen is impeccably done. Also, the acting is superb; Bardem's Chigurh is instantly iconic. Brolin's LIewelyn (surely a name that should be used more in movies) is strong but vulnerable, unapologetically simple, yet layered. Equally, Tommy Lee Jones's Ed Tom is an interesting and enigmatic character. However therein is one of the main problems I have with this film; the Ed Tom story thread just doesn't fit in this film; thematically and tonally it's at odds with the main story and all it does is succeed in giving the film a bloated feel. For me, it's a case of a good performance that has been added to the detriment of the rest of the film.
So what is No Country For Old Men about? It can't be about chance as that is too obvious. It can't be about getting old because it has so little to say. Is it about the insignificance of man off-set against the indeterminably powerful presence of nature and the relentless passage of time? Perhaps, but the Coen's have never been complex and pretentious just for the sake of being complex and pretentious.
I can appreciate the fact that No Country is a good film, well made with some great composite elements. However I don't feel it has the vibrancy of O Brother, Where Art Thou?, or the humour of Fargo, or the intelligence of Barton Fink. For me, this film is an un-satisfying mix of art house film-making and mainstream marketing, which benefits from great performances and an interesting central story but is damaged by poor choices in terms of muddled themes, sound design and the inclusion of an unnecessary sub-plot in what otherwise would have been a brilliant film.