A movie (and book) about a
Texas bumpkin who stumbles across $2 million,
heroin and a slew of dead drug dealers in the desert. Rather than doing the civil deed of contacting authorities, the bumpkin steals the money and is subsequently chased by a
silly-lookin'
fella with a bad haircut. Although (we're told) the bad haircut dude kills anyone who inconveniences him, the
case rule exception is morbidly obese
beauty queens at trailer parks. As all of this is going on, a small town codger sheriff chats with people and occasionally investigates the
case, but otherwise has little to do with the bumpkin and the bad haircut dude.
By the
end, the audience has just witnessed the same allegories, cliches and plot holes of cinema in the past 60 years (although the film's apologists claim we just "didn't get it", and that the movie has a profound, cryptic meaning - which is often their own interpretation.) While "No Country" did gain a significant amount of critical/award acclaim, reception was actually much more polarized, evident by the defensive/flamebait nature of the film's defenders.
NCFOM Fanboy: I think anyone who doesn't like this film should just watch a Hollywood-produced movie with gratuitous violence, explosions, car crashes and limited character development, such as Die
Hard 4 or Transformers!
COMMON SENSE MOVIEGOER: But wasn't "No Country For Old Men" also a Hollywood-produced movie with gratuitous violence, explosions, car crashes and limited character development?
NCFOM Fanboy: U just didn't understand it! Who are UR favorite directorz? I bet I know.
COMMON SENSE MOVIEGOER: Well, I liked the Coen brothers' films before they made the "No Country" BS. I'm also a fan of movies by Scorsese, Kubrick, Huston, Jarmusch, Lumet, Eastwood, Welles...
NCFOM Fanboy: HA HA HA, I knew it! Didn't the Stanley Kubrick guy direct the first and second TRANSFORMERS moviez? HA HA HA, U
suck, case closed!
