|
No Country For Old Men [2008] | ![No Country For Old Men [2008]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51jqVo%2BHIHL._SL160_.jpg)
 enlarge | Directors: Ethan Coen, Joel Coen
Actors: Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, Kelly Macdonald, Stephen Root
Studio: Paramount Home Entertainment
Category: DVD
List Price: £19.99
Buy New: £11.79
You Save: £8.20 (41%)
New (15) Used (3) from £10.00
Rating:  88 reviews
Sales Rank: 29
Format: Pal
Languages: English (Original Language), Spanish (Original Language)
Rating: Suitable for 15 years and over
Region: 2
Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 117 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
EAN: 5014437942838
ASIN: B00147AJQ8
Theatrical Release Date: February 28, 2008
Release Date: June 2, 2008
Availability: Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: UK SELLER NO IMPORT DUTY CHARGES.Discount given on multiple purchases. Established Independent Music Loving UK seller, items sent out within 24 hours. 100% no quibble money back guarantee if at all unhappy with your purchase. I grade items very strictly you will not get an 'as new' item covered in scratches and fingerprints from me! I care!!
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.co.uk Review
The Coen brothers make their finest thriller since Fargo with a restrained adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's novel. Not that there aren't moments of intense violence, but No Country for Old Men is their quietest, most existential film yet. In this modern-day Western, Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) is a Vietnam veteran who needs a break. One morning while hunting antelope, he spies several trucks surrounded by dead bodies (both human and canine). In examining the site, he finds a case filled with $2 million. Moss takes it with him, tells his wife (Kelly Macdonald) he's going away for awhile, and hits the road until he can determine his next move. On the way from El Paso to Mexico, he discovers he's being followed by ex-special ops agent Chigurh (an eerily calm Javier Bardem). Chigurh's weapon of choice is a cattle gun, and he uses it on everyone who gets in his way--or loses a coin toss (as far as he's concerned, bad luck is grounds for death). Just as Sheriff Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), a World War II veteran, is on Moss's trail, Chigurh's former colleague, Wells (Woody Harrelson), is on his. For most of the movie, Moss remains one step ahead of his nemesis. Both men are clever and resourceful--except Moss has a conscious, Chigurh does not (he is, as McCarthy puts it, "a prophet of destruction"). At times, the film plays like an old horror movie, with Chigurh as its lumbering Frankenstein monster. Like the taciturn terminator, No Country for Old Men doesn't move quickly, but the tension never dissipates. This minimalist masterwork represents Joel and Ethan Coen and their entire cast, particularly Brolin and Jones, at the peak of their powers. --Kathleen C. Fennessy
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 83 more reviews...
 An event of a movie that is sure to divide August 7, 2008
M. Gardner (Somerset, England)
No Country for Old Men is a film guaranteed to divide. For many it will be a soulless shell of a tale with little impact and a simple sour taste after viewing it. However, for others, like myself, it is surely a sparse masterpiece. Bardem's Anton Chigurh is the very epitome of menacing. His voice sounds almost subterreanean and his fatalist coin toss has echoes of a certain Harvey Dent. Soulless is a word that may be used by this movie's detractors, but then again such a concept is everywhere in this movie. In Bardem's eyes, in the dusty corpse ridden plain where Brolin's protagonist first finds the briefcase of money, indeed every camera shot is breathtakingly beautiful but also incredibly stark, removed. Chigurh's presence infects the very nature of the film from cinematography to the sparse, haunting score.
It is a film that is similar in many ways to The Proposition, another inverted Western where the outlaws seem to have the upper hand over the ageing, jaded Sheriffs. Recognition should go to Brolin, whose performance would tower here were it not for Bardem, and Jones, and to the Coens themselves for successfully translating an excellent book into an excellent film. The pace and the mood is spot on. The ending though is troublesome. By following the book and leaving the ending open the film runs the risk (and a glance at some of the reviews on here will testify to this) of concluding limply. But for myself, the result was one of speechless wonderment. It is not a film one might particularly enjoy. It is not one that I necessarily want to see again any time soon. But I am certainly glad that I did see it and if you haven't, I suggest you buy, rent, borrow, or blag. Because it is a film that everyone really does need to see. At least once.
The best film I've seen all year August 6, 2008
Mr. N. S. Rodgers (London. UK)
This film gripped me from the begining to the end. It's lack of music and simple use of sound effect, dialogue, film technique and great script creates the tension. The characters are brilliantly portrayed, with the best perfromance reserved for Javier Bardem. The ending, whilst intially a bit of a surprise, just helps to emphasise the reality that not everything in life finishes neatly with a nice conclusion.
 No country for watching this movie August 5, 2008
Ventris Arden
1 out of 3 found this review helpful
The problem with this sort of film is just not caring about anyone in the movie. Mr Evil may be intent on getting someone's money back but it's not going to make any difference to his life. Not too many hobbies. Can't see him loading Mozart on his iPod. Can't see him loading his iPod. All he wants to do is wave his vacuum cleaner in the air and look enigmatic. Say clever things like - well, I didn't catch any so maybe he'll just have to do the menacing stare. I can see where the oscars came from. They do the same thing in Hollywood. Sort of two dimensional. Yeh, well, enigmatic stare...
No Country for Old Men August 4, 2008
Good Papaya (Malecon)
I put off watching this for quite a while because of the mediocre reviews. I'd read Cormac McCarthy's book and didn't want to be disappointed by the film version. Having now watched the film I'm baffled by the reviews. The novel is bleak, but probably the most accessible of his books. The title really sums it up. Set in 1980s Texas, in the early stages of the cross-border drug trade, the ruthless, often sadistic and pointless violence of the new criminal class has rendered the old fashioned, comparatively decent law enforcers redundant, baffled and powerless. Hence, No Country for Old Men.
I was pleasantly surprised by the film. It portrays the events of the book perfectly, almost scene for scene, in all its bleak pointlessness. That is the point! The characterisation and acting are superb; the locations and sets are wonderful. The first hour or so is one of the most convincing and entertaining pieces of cinema I've ever seen. If it then tails off slightly it is the fault of the book rather than the film. McCarthy's outlook is so bleak that nobody ever gets out alive or undamaged - there are no happy endings in this story. The main character has no redeeming qualities, which, for me, was the one weakness of the book.
Javier Bardem's character, Chigurh, was a kind of human Terminator who didn't quite `belong' here. Most of the characters in the story were bad or corrupt in some way, their purpose to illustrate the new, ruthless criminality, but they would not go out of their way to hunt and kill people who were not obstructing them, not really anything to do with them. Chigurh did not need to be quite so psychotically determined, killing even those who could not possibly harm him. McCarthy could have made his point without leaving quite so large a trail of dead bodies. That, to me, is his weakness - he sees no chinks of light anywhere - they exist, but he doesn't see them. I also thought Bardem, although brilliant, was miscast. The haircut from hell didn't help.
Again, this is the fault of the book. Although the story could have had happier outcomes for some of the characters without detracting from its purpose, the Coens, once they had decided to film it, could hardly have messed with the work of such a prominent writer. They did a brilliant job, retaining a very black humour throughout, although those appalled by the violence may have missed it. With slight reservations, a great film.
 Nothing special August 4, 2008
tayloran9 (London UK)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
I refrained from seeing No Country for Old Men for a good few months. I didn't go to the cinema to watch it and I waited a day or so once I rented it. I was not overly eager to see it as I had a feeling I was going to be underwhelmed. Even with the Oscar and the glittering critical acclaim, I just knew it wouldn't be anything special and I was right.
There was a time when I was a big Coen's fan but I feel like I have outgrown them if that's the right word. I remember as a film student being wowed by their films' quirkiness, style and cleverness. However, I now find myself wanting more from a `good' film, for example, real emotional involvement, psychological realism e.g. the characters behaving as they probably would were they real people, characters that show development or different sides to them. This has always been the Coen's biggest weakness - providing characters that we really care about, that are interesting in more ways than just being fun to watch because of their exaggerated mannerisms. Barton Fink was an exception, John Turturro was amazing and we sort of cared for him and Francis McDormand in Fargo and Jeff Bridges in The Big Lebowski were similar but even then, there was always an element of cartoonishness about them. I find myself agreeing more and more with those reviewers who were always more reserved in their appreciation of the Coen's, citing their works as placing more importance in the style rather than the content.
Why does Bardem's killer use the cattle stun gun? He's shown us that he's more than willing to use a silenced shotgun to do his dirty work so why lug around this huge bulky chunk of metal? It's no quieter or less messy than his shotgun. I haven't read the book so I don't know whether it is a Coen invention but it seems to be nothing more than a shallow stylistic device. Again with Bardems 60's style bobbed hair style - this must surely be a Coen invention since they have a history of adorning their characters with bizarre hairstyles - again it is nothing more than a shallow stylistic device to say, `look, this is a Coen film'! And some of the dialogue! For instance, the much quoted line where Brolin's character asks his wife to tell his mum he loves her if he doesn't return - yes it's very snappy dialogue but exists for no other reason than that and would only really work if we were to believe that a man had forgotten his mother had died. Hmmm.
No Country is a good film. It is enjoyable and there are some decent set pieces where the tension and suspense is quite high and it's good to see the Coen's exercising some restraint but apart from the `indie' ending, there is nothing really to separate it from any other high end Hollywood thriller but the critics will have you believe it is something so much more. It isn't and don't let the injections of an old man's musings or a killer's deterministic speeches make you think it is.
In fact, how can the film really be about the changing face of America or fate - these are huge grand themes and ones that would benefit from a very different sort of approach. Perhaps something more akin to a multi stranded approach like the way Crash dealt with racism - something that justifies or `proves' its message by using an assortment of situations and relations. Taking a small crime story that really focuses on three men and saying this represents worldly change is stretching it to say the least. And then the story shoots itself in the foot and contradicts itself completely towards the end when Tommy Lee Jones' character visits his uncle and his uncle relays him the story of a violent past event way back in 1901, the point being that the world has always been a violent place and it is not getting worse as the poor sheriff thinks!
So what is the film trying to say??? One minute it seems to suggest the world is becoming increasingly hostile and the next minute it says that it's always been like this! I remember Seven played around with the same theme.
I actually liked the ending, I thought it was nicely understated and shows how things can fizzle out and be left unresolved. I didn't care to know whether or not Bardem killed the wife, because it wasn't at all important to the story (although I feel the Coen's may have given a clue e.g . Bardem checks the soles of both his shoes as he leaves the house, perhaps checking for blood stains? - it doesn't really matter anyhow).
A previous reviewer compared No Country to The Terminator and I would agree. No Country is basically a suspenseful genre movie about a man being chased by a seemingly unstoppable killer (there's even a scene where he `repairs' himself). Yes the acting, injections of wit and cinematography are up to the usual high Coen's standards but I personally didn't find the film to be exhilarating or refreshing or particularly deep and meaningful. It's a good genre movie, sadly nothing else.
|
|
|
|
Merlin's Cave | |
