Today I can say with confidence that Cormac McCarthy’s novels receive the best film adaptations. A movie based on his books not only transfers the atmosphere he created to the screen, but complements and enhances the understanding of his works. The film of the same name based on his novel “The Road” became for me a discovery and a standard for how books should be filmed. When my eyes fell on his novel No Country for Old Men, which was filmed by the Coen brothers, I was hoping that a film would come out that would not disgrace this magnificent book, and I am glad that my hopes were justified. I’ve got second proof that books can be made into great movies.

Two of the best film adaptations for me today.

Of course, it all depends on the works and how the film is made. First of all, as the Coens themselves note, the book itself begs to be shown on the screen and when you read it, you get the feeling that this is a rough draft of a script. McCarthy’s peculiarity – the refusal of punctuation marks – played a role here. It only uses periods and, in extreme cases, commas. Do you think this makes it difficult to read and understand?? Yes, but only at the beginning. After reading a couple of pages, you already fully understand the essence of what was written and you don’t have to constantly re-read. This technique gives some sense of the reality of what is happening, speech becomes more tangible, since we do not use punctuation marks when speaking, and all our remarks can be divided into semantic parts.

The story told in “No Country for Old Men” is quite simple at its core. Llewellyn Moss, an ordinary worker from West Texas, finds a case with a huge amount of money in the steppe, among a gang of shot Mexicans and a large quantity of heroin. In order to return the case, the assassin Anton Chigurh is sent after him. Sheriff Bell follows the trail of corpses left behind them, trying to understand the situation and save Moss. Briefly the story goes like this, but Cormac’s talent lies in details and memorable images.

The three main characters Stakezone-top.co.uk are the three key figures to be revealed, which the Coens approached with care and respect for the original.

I’ll start with the character who resonated with me the most. Anton Chigurh. He is the man whose existence is impossible to believe. On the one hand, it is difficult to trace his motivation. He pursues his own goals, is absolutely uncontrollable and unpredictable. He is the personification of the inevitability of death, although it would be more accurate to say that he is death itself. In psychology, there is a point of view that the driving force of a man is “Thanatos”, the desire for death. That is, a man’s nature initially contains a tendency towards violence. Anton is a person for whom this desire is elevated to absolute. The fact of killing itself does not bring him pleasure, it is simply inherent in him, an integral part of him. This is his integrity, he does not stop for anyone who stands in his way. Moreover, its goal can be formulated,
like limitless control over life. In the book, this moment is revealed when at the end he comes to the leader of one of the criminal groups, and becomes his partner as a result of a short dialogue. In general, the dialogues in the novel are the highlight of the work, which also decorates the film. The characters’ dialogues with Chigurh especially stand out. His detachment and confidence in his own worldview cause fear and despair among his interlocutors. They clearly begin to realize that they are dealing with uncontrollable animal force. However, Chigurh has a sense of his own justice when he gives his victim a chance to give in to chance by tossing a coin. Thus, he emphasizes the power of fate over his opponent.

Javier Bardem is incredible as Chigurh. Bardem showed the mystery and enigma of Anton Chigurh with his performance. Both in the book and in the film, we learn very little about him about his past, the image is sterile in terms of backstory. The only bit of his life we ​​learn about is that he served in Vietnam, but unlike other characters, both major and minor, we don’t know the unit he served in or his rank. Everyone knows about Chigurh, but no one knows who he is. Thanks to Javier Bardem’s acting, Chigurh on screen and Chigurh in the book are mirror copies of each other.

Sheriff Bell, played by Tommy Lee Jones, is a completely different character. The opposite of Chigurh, the sheriff is far from old, but he is already starting to age. He is that old man who doesn’t belong here. He no longer has the vital energy that he had before. He is the embodiment of experience, wisdom. It’s not for nothing that every chapter in the book is accompanied by his thoughts. When you get older, you think more about the past, about what has already been done, what you have lived through. Evaluate your life by how you lived it. In contrast to other characters who act more based on instinct, the sheriff speaks of caution and rationality. He can’t handle a criminal like Chigurh. During his career, Tommy Lee Jones has already played sheriffs in Texas, where he was born and raised, so he is harmonious in this role.

The sheriff is no longer ready to risk himself.

Between these contrasting characters stands Llewellyn Moss. The dynamics of this character are manifested not only in the context of his actions, but also in his soul. In my opinion, the character played by Josh Brolin in the film is not fully developed. He is a little short of the image from the original source. More precisely, the absence of a scene with a young hitchhiker interrupts his development. Moss transforms throughout the book, at the beginning having that energy of Chigurh, primitive instinctiveness, at the end he becomes closer to the character of Tommy Lee Jones. This is exactly what is not in the film. Therefore, his death becomes more like the result of a random coincidence
circumstances.

Overall, the film is a blood-filled chase through 1980s Texas. Both the book and the film devote significant space to weapons. Cormac describes exactly who is shooting what. This helped a lot when making the film. I can say that after reading and watching I have an interest in firearms.

The Coen Brothers’ Approach to Violence Is Impressive. Already from the first scene of the film, which is almost a direct retelling of the book, one can see the respect for the original and the care with which they show death and blood on the screen. The book is a cruel novel, but it does not slide into “black stuff”. The same can be said about the film.

As a result, I decided to rate the film adaptations of books. On the one hand, to put some point in my attitude towards the film adaptation, and on the other, to build on something in the future when comparing other works. Therefore, my assessment of the film adaptation of the novel “No Country for Old Men”: 10/10.