No Country for Old Men (2007)

Cast

Woody Harrelson
as Carson Wells
Javier Bardem
as Anton Chigurh
Garret Dillahunt
as Wendell
Kelly Macdonald
as Carla Jean Moss

Get more information about No Country for Old Men (2007) on IMDb

Genres & Description

Action Crime Drama Thriller

8.1 / 10

In rural Texas, welder and hunter Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) discovers the remains of several drug runners who have all killed each other in an exchange gone violently wrong. Rather than report the discovery to the police, Moss decides to simply take the two million dollars present for himself. This puts the psychopathic killer, Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem), on his trail as he dispassionately murders nearly every rival, bystander and even employer in his pursuit of his quarry and the money. As Moss desperately attempts to keep one step ahead, the blood from this hunt begins to flow behind him with relentlessly growing intensity as Chigurh closes in. Meanwhile, the laconic Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones) blithely oversees the investigation even as he struggles to face the sheer enormity of the crimes he is attempting to thwart.

Similar Movies

Kumiko, the Treasure Hunter

6.6

(2014)

Brotherhood

6.1

(2016)

Change in the Air

5.1

(2018)

Flying Lessons

5.6

(2010)

Comments on this trailer
Comments may include spoiler!

Adam

Great movie – first 3/4s, but poor ending. And I'm not saying that because I wanted a happy ending. I just felt it was a weak conclusion to a compelling start. - @Tuesday, October 30, 2018 2:17 AM

MLA

I definitely would have preferred it to end with the psycho killer with the bad haircut bleeding out till gone.... - @Thursday, April 5, 2018 5:12 PM

Malafakka

Silly critics who didn't like it because of an unhappy ending. That's what many critics today are worth. They are just as clueless as the filmmakers that they praise. - @Friday, January 26, 2018 12:40 AM

FritzIdler

I loved No Country For Old Men the first time, but was let down and confused by the ending. But it has grown on me with additional views. It ends anticlimactically, because that's how death, or fate, can be. It swacks you from out of left field. Accepting the ending is part of the point. What's more, what happens to Anton at the end, adds satisfaction. Because suddenly, he stops being an apparition, and becomes all to mortal. Still evil, but mortal. - @Saturday, January 7, 2017 11:55 PM

jing fan wong

it was boring - @Friday, September 23, 2016 10:29 AM

creepshowfanatic

What an amazing film! I love this movie! It's beautifully written,acted,and photographed.A real masterpiece! - @Thursday, June 9, 2016 9:32 PM

diddymuck

sounds a lot like Charlie Varrick - @Tuesday, January 26, 2016 6:41 AM

Ghostlight X

Loved every film by the Cohens except this one and Oh Brother. - @Monday, February 9, 2015 12:49 PM

Rich Carlson

I've never understood the appeal of this movie. Perhaps it is because it is surprising to a younger generation of filmgoers. You can't have lived through film in the 50's and 60's and find anything new here. - @Thursday, October 23, 2014 3:12 PM

Tenderfoot Prepper

Re: the ending. Yeah, I was disappointed too. So I've only watched 50 more times since then. People, get the f--- over it. A) it's just a movie, and B) we're stuck with the ending they gave us, so we'd better make the most of it. I like to think that Anton, after limping away from that accident, met his fate some other day. Maybe he died peacefully in his bed at the age of 100, having parlayed what was left of the $2 million into a comfortable, idyllic existence, surrounded by loving family. Or, maybe he made it another two years before someone got the drop on him. Maybe he was flayed alive; happy now, you bloodthirsty malcontents? But I honestly do think that the lifestyle of the character, careful and skilled as he was, would lead to his violent demise sooner or later. Think about it: if you are an unhinged assassin, and your plan is to betray and murder your organized crime benefactors, just how far does your life expectancy drop? The office building mob will pursue him to the ends of the earth, so don't worry that he didn't "get his" at the hands of Llewellyn or Ed Tom. It was mainly dumb luck that he didn't suffer a more serious injury during his gun battle with Llewellyn. As for Llewellyn and Carla Jean's less-than-fairy-tale-perfect ending, well...that sucks, but once again, we have to accept that not everything in life winds up ending happily for all parties involved. Once in a while, a movie can remind us of that, to jolt us out of the fantasy at the last minute, like Teddy in "Stand by Me," where he wanted to write his own ending to Gordie's pie-eating contest story. Just trust genius storytellers like McCarthy and the Coens, and if you don't like how they do things, DON'T WATCH! - @Friday, August 29, 2014 9:17 PM

MrYoungcam

Total agreement. Well said, Mr. Badham. - @Sunday, March 16, 2014 6:48 AM

Daniel Rosa

Now, seriously. It just seems they plain forgot to end the movie, that they were writing along the shootings and just said "You know what? Let's end it now". Even Se7en not only made a bad ending work, but made it memorable. - @Monday, November 25, 2013 3:20 PM

sammygirl6910

Wait ,what!? A Cormac Mccarthy story without a happy ending? - @Friday, September 27, 2013 3:19 AM

ft790

Great review! - @Thursday, September 19, 2013 2:58 PM

memonk11

Sorry for that late reply - "I prefer art that asks questions, rather than answering them. I prefer art that asks me to think" All of this has nothing to do with anything I've said. The artist can intend to ask questions, ask the viewer to think etc...The artist must have intent or, as I started off with, it's nothing more than monkey scrawls. Sorry dude. I'm just repeating myself. - @Wednesday, May 8, 2013 7:14 AM

memonk11

I can't take credit for this quote. But you "mistake interpretation for understanding". You can interpret ANYTHING anyway you want. It does not mean you understand it, nor does is mean you understand art. - @Tuesday, April 9, 2013 7:32 AM

memonk11

By the way, you keep confusing "art" with "interpretation". Interpretation is only PART of art. AND yes the artist may be taking the AUDIENCE's interpretation into account when they are communicating, if that is the artist's intent. But I'll say it again and again, NO COMMUNICATION = NO ART. AND you can interpret ANY art ANY way you want. Just because paint is thrown onto a canvas does not make it art. - @Monday, March 18, 2013 6:42 AM

memonk11

And how is Pollack not crap? Please, the whole thing is the Emperor has no clothes. Do you think Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky etc...weren't trying to communicate? Or were they just stream of conscience to some chords. Sorry dude, Lou reed has some good stuff but not much. And if " The listener's interpretation could be more valid than his" - It just shows he doesn't really know what he's doing. Sometimes he score a good one, but he has no idea how. - @Saturday, February 2, 2013 5:25 PM

memonk11

"Do you need them to show you everything?" - Just saw this idiotic response. That ending was inconsistent with everything else done in the movie. It doesn't mater if it was from the book or the director came up with it. I'm sorry I can't make it simple enough for you to understand. Perhaps a demonstration with construction paper and crayons would be a medium more suited to your pretentious intellect. - @Saturday, February 2, 2013 1:45 PM

memonk11

"Art is subjective" Nope. It's only subjective if you don't understand it. AND if the artist is not trying to communicate something, it's nothing more than monkey scrawls. That whole "Art is subjective" bullshit is why there is so much shit art in this world as well as shit artists. - @Saturday, February 2, 2013 1:39 PM

memonk11

I was wrong. The Coen brothers didn't come up with the ending but the author. So, that makes it good? Because it's from the book? That's your criteria? And: "Art is not about getting what you want", No Einstein, art is communication. The artist is trying to communicate with the viewer, whatever the medium, It's not - oh the protagonist is now dead, didn't fell like showing you. I'll say it again so you can understand. It is a perfect movie, until that shit ending, delude yourself all you want. - @Friday, November 9, 2012 9:28 AM

actlloyd Andrew

They lifted the ending straight from the....here it comes: NOVEL!!!! The ending is stunning, and it is in many ways the best thing about the movie. You are pissed because you don't get what you want. Art is not about getting what you want. Sit back and watch somebody elses vision unfold. You don't always get what you want in life either. This might not be for you, but that don't make it a bad movie. - @Thursday, November 8, 2012 3:31 PM

Yojimbosblade

fantastic ending - @Thursday, November 8, 2012 2:42 AM

jay mak

Great film - @Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:49 PM

memonk11

Incredibly tight, well paced, well acted, perfectly shot film. Until that shit ending. It's not that it's unhappy. It's that the Coen Brothers decided to be artsy and for some unfathomable reason decided to not show the fate of the hero. Everything in incredible detail, then... a cinematic version of "oh... now he's dead". THAT garbage ending DESTROYED what was up to that point a perfect film. - @Saturday, September 22, 2012 7:12 PM

PhoenixWright101

I much preferred this to There Will Be Blood, it's main rival at the Oscars that year. Lean, stylish, unpretentious and brilliantly acted. Definitely one of the Coens' best films of the past decade. - @Saturday, September 22, 2012 4:30 AM

Deep Desertt

This was a really good movie. - @Friday, September 21, 2012 7:32 PM