Component 1b: US Film Since 2005 (Spectatorship)

Explore how far the two films you have studied demonstrate the filmmakers’ attempt to control the spectator’s response.

Autumn 2020

Plan:

Introduction

Throughout both Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik, 2010) and No Country For Old Men (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2007), the respective filmmakers persistently attempt to control the spectator’s response in a variety of faceted means. Winter’s Bone implements audience positioning in ways that attempt to elicit empathy within the viewer towards the protagonist, Ree, and her struggles within an oppressive patriarchal society. Granik claims that it is “a feminist film about an anti-feminist world”, implying that the preferred reading is one in which the viewer is encouraged to support Ree’s actions throughout the film. Conversely, the Coen brothers set out to actively subvert the spectator’s preconceptions of narrative in No Country For Old Men, by encoding the film with an ambiguous thematic substance, challenging the spectator’s morals and ideologies. A passive spectator would even perhaps argue that the film is ‘unsatisfying’, as it does not conform to the conventions of a traditional narrative.

Body

Winter’s Bone – incites empathy within the viewer towards the characters, under the context of feminism

• Preferred reading – empathising with Ree as an empowered woman and her struggles against patriarchal oppression
• Negotiated reading – Ree’s actions are still immoral, despite being in a feminist world
• Active spectatorship and negotiated reading during ‘squirrel dream’ sequence. Audience’s own perception will interpret the dream to have a particular meaning – perhaps the squirrel is representative of Ree’s oppression
• Audience is positioned to view Teardrop as a symbol of toxic masculinity

No Country For Old Men – subverting audience’s preconceptions

• No traditional ‘face off’, the Sheriff is mostly uninvolved with the events of the film
• Preferred reading – siding with the Sheriff, sympathy with his disillusionment towards the senseless violence that permeates the state
• Fade to black at the end leaves the audience dwelling upon the sheriff’s dreams – symbolism of following his father into the grave
• Inevitable frustration towards the ‘unsatisfying’ conclusion – Llewelyn’s off-screen death
• Active spectatorship – pensive opening sequence, little to no dialogue. Introspective sheriff monologue – doesn’t drive the plot forward. Exemplifies the rejection of the hypodermic needle theory.
• The preconception of unconditionally supporting the protagonist’s actions is subverted when Llewelyn doesn’t give the man any water and instead takes the briefcase

• The motivations behind Anton’s ambiguous murders are to be inferred by the audience through active spectatorship – checking boots for blood after inferably killing Carla Jean, nihilistic coin flips

Conclusion

In conclusion, Winter’s Bone and No Country For Old Men use starkly contrasting methods in order to control the viewer’s response. Winter’s Bone predominately implements audience positioning in an attempt to incite empathy towards Ree and her struggles within an oppressive patriarchal society. Through the use of cinematography, mise-en-scène, sound, and dialogue, Granik encourages the spectator to support Ree’s actions. Conversely, No Country For Old Men subverts the spectator’s preconceptions of narrative conventions through the use of unorthodox narrative techniques alongside an inherently ambiguous thematic tapestry. The Coen brothers encourage active spectatorship to be exercised throughout, allowing for layered meanings of the film to be deciphered. Both films aptly demonstrate the power filmmakers possess towards shaping how a spectator responds to a film.

---

Essay – Version 1

Throughout both Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik, 2010) and No Country For Old Men (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2007), the respective filmmakers persistently attempt to control the spectator’s response in a variety of faceted means. Winter’s Bone implements audience positioning in ways that attempt to elicit empathy within the viewer towards the protagonist, Ree, and her struggles within an oppressive patriarchal society. Granik claims that the film is “a feminist film about an anti-feminist world”, implying that the preferred reading is one in which the viewer is encouraged to support Ree’s actions throughout the film. Conversely, the Coen brothers set out to actively subvert the spectator’s preconceptions of narrative in No Country For Old Men, by encoding the film with an ambiguous thematic substance, challenging the spectator’s morals and ideologies. A passive spectator would even perhaps argue that the film is ‘unsatisfying’, as it does not conform to the conventions of a traditional narrative.

During the opening sequence of Winter’s Bone, the viewer is immediately encouraged to emphasise with Ree‘s struggles in an impoverished and oppressive patriarchy. The film opens with a non-diegetic lullaby, immediately connoting a sense of intimate maternity. Cutting to a wide shot, the children are framed behind the bars of a bed-frame — implying to the viewer that they are trapped within their environment. This opening sequence also conveys the cyclical nature of nurturing – Ree’s sister, Ashlee takes care of her toy kitten, implying the idea that she herself has been nurtured by Ree. Mise-en-scène is also implemented within the domestic landscape, being littered with waste and abandoned items. This, alongside the characters clothing being ragged and humble, emphasises the poverty-stricken way of life Ree and her family leads, positioning the audience as to empathise with them.

Ree’s bravery and defiance within an oppressive patriarchy is also displayed to the spectator during the ‘cattle market’ sequence, during which Ree calls for Thump Milton at the top of her lungs. Milton is unable to comprehend her, further reinforcing the invisible yet prevalent divide between the male and female worlds. Alongside this, the non-diegetic composed score becomes discordant, creating a sense of urgency. It is layered in tandem with the cries of the cattle, creating a sensory overload which reflects Ree’s distraught state of mind. This is another example of audience positioning used in an attempt to control the spectator’s response – eliciting empathy towards Ree in this case.

An example of taking a negotiated reading by using active spectatorship occurs during the ‘squirrel dream’ sequence. During this sequence, Granik utilises unorthodox techniques such as black and white grainy footage filmed with a cheap handheld camera. Granik also implements a 4:3 aspect ratio, further contributing to the surreal nature of the sequence. A negotiated reading would argue that the squirrel in the sequence is perhaps a metaphor for Ree – as both are victims of a disrupted naturalistic environment. The danger faced by the squirrel is displayed through its shuddering fear, captured through the camera’s rapid and disorienting movements. A jarring diegetic chainsaw sound promptly enters the mix, perhaps being representative of the oppressive patriarchy that endangers Ree’s peaceful existence. A worms-eye-view shot of the trees is also used, displaying the squirrel, and by extension, Ree, as dwarfed, emphasizing her vulnerability within an oppressive patriarchal society. This reading is not explicitly conveyed by the film, but is instead only able to be inferred through active spectatorship. Each viewer will interpret this sequence in a slightly different way, exemplifying how this sequence is an example of Debra Granik attempting to control the spectator’s response.

Throughout the film, Ree’s uncle Teardrop is characterised in ways that illustrate him as a symbol of toxic masculinity – a notion that is able to be unravelled through active spectatorship. In the ‘squirrel gutting’ sequence, a focus pull is implemented to draw the spectator’s attention towards Teardrop as he approaches Ree. During their conversation, Teardrop offers some drugs to Ree, asking if she “has the taste for it yet”. Ree adamantly refuses, being indicative of her mental fortitude and purity that she possess over Teardrop, positioning the audience in a way that encourages the spectator to condemn Teardrop. In addition, during the closing sequence, Teardrop vows to seek revenge on the man that killed Ree’s father, reinforcing the cyclical nature of violence and highlighting the idea that Teardrop’s misguided sense of loyalty is a negative force, and that it is ultimately through the actions of women that the problems in the film are resolved. This further encourages the viewer to support Ree’s actions, framing Teardrop as a force of evil.

In contrast to Winter’s Bone’s attempts to control the spectator through the use of audience positioning which encourages the viewer to empathise with Ree, No Country For Old Men controls the viewer’s response by instead setting out to actively subvert the spectator’s preconceptions of narrative conventions, weaving an ambiguous thematic substance that pervades the film. Through this, active spectatorship is required to decipher a particular meaning from the Coen brothers’ enigmatic masterpiece.

The opening scene of the film immediately subverts the spectator’s expectations by beginning with a non-diegetic monologue delivered by Sheriff Ed Tom Bell. The monologue does not serve to provide exposition, but is instead an introspective monologue in which the sheriff reminisces upon the senselessly violent crimes that he has dealt with throughout his career. The viewer is left to question the meaning of this monologue, encouraged to become an active spectator by unravelling the themes of nihilism and determinism that the monologue touches upon. The preferred reading of the film is arguably for the viewer to side with the sheriff, sympathising with his disillusionment towards the nihilism that permeates Texas. This opening scene exemplifies the rejection of the hypodermic needle model which suggested that audiences were to blindly accept any messages presented within media.

Instead of being rewarded with a traditional showdown between the three main characters, the spectator’s expectations are instead subverted by the final scene of the film, with it being a pensive recount of the sheriff’s dreams. The Coens’ decision to end the film with an abrupt cut to black controls the viewer’s response in an interesting way – the spectator is forced to dwell upon the meanings of the sheriff’s dream as the credits roll. While a passive spectator would argue that this final scene is an unsatisfying conclusion to the film, an active spectator would perhaps argue that Ed Tom’s dream is symbolic of the sheriff following his father towards his impending demise.

No Country For Old Men also subverts the preconception of unconditionally supporting the protagonist’s actions during the first scene involving the character of Llewelyn Moss. During the scene, the viewer bears witness to Llewelyn’s selfish actions. He chooses to not give water to a dying man, instead taking the briefcase containing $2 million. Viewers are encouraged to employ active spectatorship – Llewelyn’s actions are arguably morally reprehensible and selfish, but this idea is not explicitly conveyed to the audience. Individual spectators are instead encouraged to decide whether or not Llewelyn’s actions are morally just.

The nature of Llewelyn’s death, being abrupt and offscreen, also serves as a means of controlling the spectator by subverting the their expectations. After a seemingly mundane and innocuous conversation between Llewelyn and a woman sitting in a pool takes place, the scene abruptly fades to black, before we cut to Sheriff Ed Tom Bell’s point of view. The Coens’ employ a POV shot of the sheriff running towards the crime during which camera shake is employed to heighten the tension. Ed Tom, however, is too late – the inevitable causality of death has already taken effect. The fact that Llewelyn is killed in such an unheroic manner by a group of characters we have never been introduced reinforces the futility of humanity, providing acute shock value for the viewer in which their response is controlled by the filmmakers.

Throughout the film, ruthless hitman Anton Chigurh commits a series of senseless, brutal murders in pursuit of the money-filled briefcase. However, Anton’s motivations that fuel his actions are highly ambiguous, choosing his victims seemingly at random, rather than just those who obstruct his aims. The meanings behind Anton’s actions are to be extracted by the viewer – by employing active spectatorship, the Coens encourage the viewer to uncover the truth behind Anton’s murders. During the ‘call it, friend-o’ sequence, Anton leaves a perfectly innocent man’s fate up to a 50/50 coin flip, perhaps reinforcing his nihilistic belief that human life is meaningless and arbitrary. After the owner argues that he didn’t put anything up to win on the coin flip, Anton informs the man that “you’ve been putting it up your whole life, you just didn’t know it”, suggesting that the end of the man’s meaningless existence has already been decided. Alongside this, during the closing sequence, it is implied that Anton does indeed kill Carla Jean. Using active spectatorship, the viewer is able insinuate that Carla is dead after Anton checks his shoes for blood – an action that he has performed many times over the course of the film. An implied reading of the scene argues that due to the fact that Carla did not let the coin decide her fate, Anton decides to end her life purely due to his belief in the insignificance of human life.

In conclusion, Winter’s Bone and No Country For Old Men use starkly contrasting methods in order to control the viewer’s response. Winter’s Bone predominately implements audience positioning in an attempt to incite empathy towards Ree and her struggles within an oppressive patriarchal society. Through the use of cinematography, mise-en-scène, sound, and dialogue, Granik encourages the spectator to support Ree’s actions to support her impoverished family. Conversely, No Country For Old Men subverts the spectator’s preconceptions of narrative conventions through the use of unorthodox narrative techniques alongside an inherently ambiguous thematic tapestry. The Coen brothers encourage active spectatorship to be exercised throughout, allowing for layered meanings of the film to be deciphered. Both films aptly demonstrate the power filmmakers possess towards shaping how a spectator responds to a film.

No Country For Old Men Close-Up (Closing Sequence)

Overview

The closing sequence of No Country For Old Men begins with Sheriff Ed Tom Bell conversing with his uncle Ellis, during which aging and violence, after which Ed Tom informs Ellis that he plans to retire as he has become so disillusioned by the recent violence that has plagued the state of Texas.

Afterwards, we cut to a gravestone of Carla Jean’s mother being lowered into the ground, reinforcing the inevitability of death. Carla soon returns home only to be greeted by Anton Chigurh sitting in her living room. As with the petrol station owner, Anton gives Carla a chance to decide her fate by flipping the coin. After she refuses, the viewer is not directly shown the outcome, but we are able to infer that Anton killed Carla after witnessing Anton checking his shoes for blood, an action the viewer has borne witness to at multiple points throughout the film. Afterwards, a car abruptly crashes into Anton’s at an intersection, significantly wounding him. Anton promptly bribes two young boys for their silence and flees.

In retirement, Ed Tom shares two dreams with his wife. In the first, he describes how he lost some money his father had given him. In the other, he and his father were riding through the mountains, after which his father had gone ahead to make a fire in the darkness, awaiting Ed Tom’s arrival.

Ideological Analysis: Nihilism

Ed Tom and Ellis’ conversation reveals that the violence stemming from nihilism that permeates the state has ultimately caused Ed Tom to retire. The film’s title even implies that there is no place for “old men” in society – traditional morals are now devoid of any meaning.

“What you got ain’t nothing new. This country is hard on people. You can’t stop what’s coming.”

Ed Tom’s uncle Ellis remarks upon the inevitable demise of humanity, referring to it as “what’s coming”. The atrocities committed by humankind transcend generation, but instead take a new form – nihilism.

The symbol of Carla Jean’s mother’s gravestone reinforces the fragility and futility of humanity. Anton’s implied decision to kill Carla Jean stems from his nihilistic attitude towards human existence. As she did not let the coin decide her fate, Anton decides to end her life purely due to his belief in the insignificance of human life. Carla remarks that Anton is “crazy”, suggesting that his nihilistic principles are unfathomable.

“I got here the same way the coin did”

Anton remarks upon the chain of causality that brought him to Carla Jean is the same that brought the coin.

The film’s final scene displays the despair of nihilism in a subtly chilling manner. Ed Tom notes in his dream monologue that he appeared to be older than his father, reinforcing the idea of mortality and age. His father riding ahead of him into unknown territory perhaps represents the inevitable void of death that Ed Tom will ultimately concede to, expressing that he will eventually follow his father into this unknown territory. Ed Tom’s resignation about his impending death serves to juxtapose Anton’s nihilistic ideology towards the supposed meaninglessness of human existence.

Sheriff Ed Tom Bell recalls his dreams to his wife

No Country For Old Men Close-Up (“What’s Coming” Sequence)

Overview

The “What’s Coming” sequence is a highly subversive and abrupt scene that reinforces the film’s nihilist ideology. The film’s main protagonist, Llewelyn Moss, is killed off-screen by Mexicans – a threat that has most likely been long forgotten in the mind of the viewer. The sequence reinforces the randomness and arbitrary nature of human existence.

Ideological Analysis: Nihilism

The sequence opens with a seemingly mundane and innocuous conversation between Llewelyn and a woman sitting in a pool. The scene abruptly fades to black, before we cut to Sheriff Ed Tom Bell’s point of view. The Coens’ employ a POV shot of the sheriff running towards the crime during which camera shake is employed to heighten the tension. Ed Tom, however, is too late – the inevitable causality of death has already taken effect. The fact that Llewelyn is killed in such an unheroic manner by a group of characters we have never been introduced to serves to reinforce the meaninglessness and inexplicability of nihilism. Ed Tom looks down upon Llewelyn’s body with pity, emphasising his disillusionment towards the futility and fragility of human existence.

Llewelyn is killed off-screen by an unknown group of Mexican assailants

No Country For Old Men Close-Up (“Call It, Friend-o” Sequence)

Overview

The “Call It, Friend-o” sequence in No Country For Old Men is a subtly powerful scene that is exemplary of the film’s nihilist ideology. The viewer witnesses Anton Chigurh, the film’s primary symbol of nihilism, visit a petrol station and engage in conversation with the owner. The conversation soon arrives at the subject of fate and chance, before Anton pulls out a coin that’s been “travelling 22 years to get here” in his words, giving the owner a chance to determine whether he lives or dies. Although this sequence does not serve to progress the film’s plot in any regard, it is a critical scene that perhaps best represents the film’s nihilist ideology.

Ideological Analysis: Nihilism

Anton Chigurh’s flippant attitude towards human existence is perhaps best underpinned by the symbolism that can be inferred through the coin flip. Anton leaves a perfectly innocent man’s fate up to a 50/50 chance, reinforcing his nihilistic belief that human life is meaningless and arbitrary. After the owner argues that he didn’t put anything up to win on the coin flip, Anton informs the man that “you’ve been putting it up your whole life, you just didn’t know it”, suggesting that the end of the man’s meaningless existence has already been decided.

The scene’s soundscape is almost entirely diegetic, being made up of the two men’s dialogue. However, Burwell’s subtle non-diegetic score briefly enters the mix, heightening the tension that continues to build over the course of the scene. The Coens’ employ a tight shot/reverse shot sequence throughout, during which the camera gradually pushes in towards the two, further increasing the suspense.

The scene ultimately subverts the viewer’s expectations after Anton lets the man live after he correctly calls the coin, coldly informing him “well done”. Ultimately, the fact of whether the man lived or died has no bearing on the events of the film, but instead elicits the viewer to question their own moral code and views towards existence.

Anton flips the coin to decide the petrol station owner’s fate

No Country For Old Men Close-Up (Opening Sequence)

Overview

The opening sequence of No Country For Old Men establishes the film’s setting and three main characters, beginning with a narrated monologue by Sheriff Ed Tom Bell which accompanies a series of bleak stills of Texas. We are then introduced to Anton Chigurh, who brutally murders a policeman with a pair of handcuffs in his first scene. Afterwards, we follow Llewelyn Moss, a man who stumbles upon a drug deal gone wrong – finding a brief case containing $2 million. The sequence serves to establish the bleak, nihilistic tone that pervades the film, introducing the viewer to the gritty world inhabited by the characters. Viewing the sequence through the lens of a nihilistic ideological approach, the opening sequence could be considered a commentary on the futility of human existence.

Ideological Analysis: Nihilism

The opening sequence begins with a series of bleak yet breathtaking aerial wide shots of the landscape of West Texas. These barren shots serve to establish the inexplicability and meaninglessness of humanity. The absence of human activity and the desolation of the terrain reinforce the film’s nihilistic worldview. The landscape is stark and unforgiving, with no signs of life or hope. This imagery suggests that the world is a cold and indifferent place, where human existence is inconsequential.

The shots are accompanied by a monologue narrated by Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, in which he reminisces upon the senseless crimes that he has dealt with throughout his career, reflecting upon the violence that permeates the world. He notes that a man who killed a 14-year-old girl told him that “there wasn’t any passion to it” and that “he’d do it again” if they let him out. This serves to reinforce the nihilism towards human existence that dominates the conscience of the region. The sheriff’s disillusionment towards his own traditional beliefs reflects the broader disillusionment of society towards the status quo.

The barren landscapes in the opening sequence reinforce the unforgiving, desolate world in which the film is set

“I was Sheriff of this county when I was 25 years old. Hard to believe. My grandfather was a lawman, father too. Me and him was sheriffs at the same time, him up in Plano and me out here. I think he’s pretty proud of that. I know I was. Some of the old time Sheriffs never even wore a gun. A lotta folks find that hard to believe. Jim Scarborough never carried one. That’s the younger Jim. Gaston Borkins wouldn’t wear one up in Comanche County. I always liked to hear about the old-timers. Never missed a chance to do so. You can’t help but compare yourself against the old-timers. Can’t help but wonder how they’d have operated in these times. There was this boy I sent to the electric chair at Huntsville here awhile back, my arrest and my testimony. He killed a 14 year-old girl. Papers said it was a crime of passion but he told me there wasn’t any passion to it. Told me that he’d been plannin’ to kill somebody for about as long as he could remember. Said that if they turned him out, he’d do it again. Said he knew he was going to hell, be there in about fifteen minutes. I don’t know what to make of that. I surely don’t. The crime you see now, it’s hard to even take its measure. It’s not that I’m afraid of it. I always knew you had to be willin’ to die to even do this job. but I don’t want to push my chips forward and go out and meet somethin’ I don’t understand. A man would have to put his soul at hazard. He’d have to say: ‘Okay, I’ll be part of this world.’”

Sheriff Ed Tom Bell’s opening monologue

Afterwards, we are introduced to the character of Anton Chigurh – a ruthless hitman – who has just been arrested. A series of birds-eye-view and mid closeups display Anton mercilessly strangling the policeman that arrested him with a pair of handcuffs. This display of graphic violence reinforces Anton’s disregard towards human existence, also acting in stark juxtaposition to the pensive opening scene of the film. We then immediately bear witness to a second murder committed by Anton, in which he dupes a truck driver into believing he is a policeman before killing him with a highly unconventional weapon: a cattle gun, suggesting that he views humans as mere animals whose existence is futile. He displays no remorse towards extinguishing two human lives in quick succession, reinforcing his character as a symbol of nihilism.

Anton Chigurh is displayed performing two merciless murders in the opening sequence, reinforcing his nihilistic ideology

The final portion of the opening sequence introduces us to the film’s heroic protagonist, Llewelyn Moss. These scenes are also pensive, with dialogue sparsely implemented to reinforce the barrenness of the setting. Moss is also often filmed from extreme long shots to further reinforce this.

He soon stumbles upon the drug deal gone wrong, after which he remains stoic and unfazed towards the array of dead bodies. He shows no empathy towards the dying man begging for water, implying that he has been desensitised to human suffering – a hallmark of a nihilism.

After locating the briefcase full of money, the film’s determinist chain of events are set in motion – Llewelyn’s fate is sealed from the beginning, reinforcing the nihilistic ideology that the film adheres to. Llewelyn’s choice to take the money is indicative of his disregard for traditional morals and societal norms.

Llewelyn discovers the money-filled briefcase, the McGuffin that allows the events of the film to be set in motion

Ideology Brainstormed

Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik, 2010) is a film that distinctly adheres to a feminist ideology. Feminism is an ideological approach that seeks to critique how women are represented throughout film, examining the oppression women face by a dogmatically patriarchal society. Applying a feminist ideological approach to Winter’s Bone reveals the film’s underlying message concerning gender and how it affects power dynamics within society.

Throughout the film, the role of women within a patriarchal, impoverished society is explored. The film’s protagonist, Ree, defies the expectations of women within a male-dominated society. She provides for her siblings and catatonic mother, whilst also uncovering the mystery of her father in order to protect her home. Ree performs actions that typically associated with both maternal and paternal duties, such as cooking, nurturing, alongside tree chopping and hunting.

Ree’s uncle, Teardrop, serves to represent the toxic masculinity that exists with the patriarchal community that pervades the Ozarks. He initially serves as a hostile force inhibiting Ree’s quest to find her father, but gradually begins to support her actions as the film progresses.

---

Conversely, No Country For Old Men (Ethan and Joel Coen, 2007) is an ideologically ambiguous film that can be viewed through a plethora of ideological approaches. My chosen ideological approach to view the film through is nihilism.

Applying a nihilistic approach involves considering the viewpoint that denies the existence of any inherent meaning or value in life, instead emphasising the absurdity of existence. Nihilism holds that traditional moral values, religious beliefs and social norms are mere illusions that mask the fundamental emptiness of existence. No Country For Old Men explores this idea in a variety of ways throughout the film.

The film’s primary antagonist, Anton Chigurh, is the film’s embodiment of nihilism. His motivations and philosophies are notably enigmatic, rejecting traditional moral values and inferably believing instead in the inherent meaningless of human existence. He acts indifferently to human life, being a hitman who kills without remorse or emotion, often letting the roll of a coin determine the fate of his victims. Chigurh’s worldview presented throughout the film ultimately reflects a fundamental belief in the meaningless of existence, with his repugnant actions being justified by his conviction in the fact that he believes nothing in life has inherent value or worth.

Another of the three primary characters, Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, serves to juxtapose Chigurh’s nihilistic ideology. He holds a strong moral code based upon his traditional values concerning the importance of human life. Bell’s strong morals are challenged by the seemingly senseless and inexplicable violence that pervades Texas.

The setting of the film itself, the barren and desolate landscapes of the film serve to reinforce the theme of nihilism. The desolation represents the absence of life and meaning within the world. It also highlights Chigurh’s belief in the futility of human endeavour and the insignificance of human existence. The Coens’ decision to implement a mere 16 minutes of non-diegetic composed score throughout the film also serves to accentuate this idea.

A mind map of potential ideologies to take into account when analysing No Country For Old Men

No Country For Old Men Contextualised

No Country for Old Men (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2007) is a neo-Western crime thriller adapted from Cormac McCarthy’s 2005 novel of the same name. Premiering at the 2007 Cannes Film Festival, the film was received to positive acclaim, soon being nominated for eight Academy Awards, and ultimately winning four including the coveted Best Picture award.

Brothers Joel and Ethan Coen are a prolific American filmmaking duo, of which whose films are made up of an eclectic mix of genres and styles, known for subverting the conventions of genre in a tasteful and nuanced manner. The brothers write, direct, and produce their films together with Joel typically taking screen credit for directing, and Ethan producing. The two also jointly edit, assuming the pseudonym Roderick Jaynes for screen credit. The duo have collectively been nominated for 13 Academy Awards, for films such as Barton Fink (1991), Fargo (1996), and Inside Llewyn Davis (2013).

Producer Scott Rudin initially bought the rights to the novel, suggesting that the Coen brothers should adapt it for the screen. The brothers were instantly enamoured with the book’s unconventional approach to narrative, one the subverted the Western genre – the story did not end with a typical showdown between good and evil. The title of the novel is taken from the opening line of Irish poet William Butler Yeats’ poem Sailing to Byzantium (1928), being “that is no country for old men”. The film remained mostly faithful to the source material, with the main removal being Sheriff Ed Tom Bell’s backstory.

Joel (left) and Ethan (right) Coen

The film’s cinematography was conducted by the esteemed Roger Deakins, arguably one of the greatest cinematographers of the 21st Century. Deakins has worked on cinematographic masterpieces such as The Shawshank Redemption (Frank Darabont, 1994), and has also had a long-standing relationship with the Coens, working on films such as The Big Lebowski (1998) and O Brother, Where Art Thou (2000).

Roger Deakins pictured with Joel Coen

Deakins’ cinematography in No Country for Old Men is widely considered one of the film‘s stand-out aspects. Throughout the film, he masterfully captures the bleakness of West Texas, making apt use of natural lighting and shadow to bring a breathtaking sense of cinematic realism to the film. Deakins noted that it was a challenge to deviate from his typical stylised visual flair, having to make it “very realistic to match the story”.

A wide shot from the opening sequence displaying a visually striking sunrise, emblematic of Deakins’ cinematic grandeur

No Country for Old Men’s score was composed by Carter Burwell, who has scored numerous films for the Coen brothers. The score is notably minimalist, with the film containing a mere 16 minutes of music. This idea was suggested to Joel by Ethan, who was persuaded to go along with the idea after initially being skeptical towards it. The sparse score that is utilised throughout the film is mostly made up of obscure instruments such as standing bells that are typically found within Buddhist meditation. This, alongside, a innumerable number of ambient sound effects and foley serves to create a pensive atmosphere throughout the film.

The film’s composer, Carter Burwell

No Country For Old Men (Joel Coen, Ethan Coen, 2007)

No Country for Old Men (Coen Brothers, 2007) is an American neo-Western crime thriller based on the 2005 novel of the same name. Set in West Texas during 1980, the film follows three main characters: Llewelyn Moss, a war veteran who stumbles upon a bag containing $2 million at the scene of a drug deal gone wrong; Anton Chigurh, a psychopathic hitman who is hunting down the whereabouts of the money; and Ed Tom Bell, the local sheriff tasked with investigating the crime.

Anton Chigurh, a hitman trying to track down the $2 million

The film is widely regarded as one of the greatest within directorial duo, Joel and Ethan Coen’s filmography. The gripping neo-Western narrative from multiple perspectives in tandem with a showcase of stunning cinematography courtesy of Roger Deakins culminates in an enthralling viewing experience. Despite the film excelling in characterising each of the three main characters, particularly Chigurh, it is also filled with pensive sequences with little to no dialogue. This convention typical of the Western genre serves to create an apt level of suspense and tension, further immersing the viewer into the world of the film. The film’s underlying themes are also particularly ambiguous, which can be seen most notably within Chigurh’s enigmatic motivations. He often leaves the fate of his victims up to a coin flip, perhaps implying that he is driven by nihilism. The film does not shy away from its depiction of graphic violence, with an early scene of Chigurh strangling a man with a pair of handcuffs immediately establishing the brutal tone of the film.

Upon watching the film for the first time, I was initially disillusioned by the ending, finding it particularly unsatisfying. However, I found the film generally, alongside the ending to be much more encapsulating upon second viewing – its subversive brilliance was truly cemented. However, I did still feel slightly disengaged during the scenes involving Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, finding his character to be the least compelling.

Overall, I would rate No Country For Old Men ★★★★.

Component 1b: US Film Since 2005

The next component we are studying is Component 1b: US Film Since 2005. This section of the course entails two films of study, Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik, 2010), an independent film and No Country for Old Men (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2007), a mainstream film. Throughout this component, the areas of study are the core study areas (including the key elements, contexts, aesthetics and representation) as well as two new specialist study areas – Ideology and Spectatorship. This component also involves a direct comparison between the two studied films, akin to Component 1a.

Component 1b mind map