Filed under: Uncategorized
Oh, No Country for Old Men. I look back on this review and recall I began nodding off during the final scene. Tommy Lee Jones is owns the Guiness World Record for ‘oldest living human.’ Fortunately Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem are vamping at each other in every scene, in a seriously smoldering way. I look forward to the YouTube recut of this movie where they can just take Catherine Zeta-Jones’ scenes from Intolerable Cruelty and cut them randomly in what we will call “the diegesis.” I am unable to watch movies without women; showing the Lindsay NY Mag Photoset of the Year via Picture-In-Picture would be another alternative. At least the next Coen brothers movie actually looks watchable. Tomorrow: Michael Clayton.

There Will Be Masculinity
by Alex Carnevale
No Country for Old Men
dir. Joel & Ethan Coen
112 minutes
It is an old canard that every society is obsessed with the possibility that it is ending, and is subsequently taken over by nostalgia. The next generation belies this assumption merely by existing.
In the case of masculinity, it has been perpetually on the verge of eradication even before there was a women’s movement concerned with ending its reign of terror.
The utility of the strength and aggression of men has long been only used profitably in war, which is probably why we insist on making so much of it. And those who can’t go to war, write pseudo-westerns set in the 1980s.

From the Time interview with Cormac McCarthy and Ethan Coen and Joel Coen:
C.M. I don’t know, you’re somewhat constrained in writing a novel, I think. Like, I’m not a fan of some of the Latin American writers, magical realism. You know, it’s hard enough to get people to believe what you’re telling them without making it impossible. It has to be vaguely plausible.
E.C. So it’s not an impulse that you even have.
C.M. No, not really. Because I think that’s misdirected. In films you can do outrageous stuff, because hey, you can’t argue with it; there it is. But I don’t know. There’s lots of stuff that you would like to do, you know. As your future gets shorter, you have to …
J.C. Prioritize?
C.M. Yeah. Somewhat. A friend of mine, who’s slightly older than me, told me, “I don’t even buy green bananas anymore.” [He laughs.] I’m not quite there yet, but I understood what he was saying.
“It has to be vaguely plausible”! That’s a laugh, Cormac.
One of the most overrated literary writers in history, McCarthy’s tale of a maddened assassin with no conscience hunting a man with big bucks is about the furthest thing from actual realism out there. The rest of his westerns, likewise. Borges himself is far more concerned with reality that McCarthy ever is. McCarthy, if we can say it honestly, is concerned with nostalgia.
And to an extent, so too have the Coen brothers been.

Joel Coen
“It immediately seemed like the kind of thing we could make a movie out of, largely by virtue of what kind of story it is, which for Cormac is a little anomalous compared to his other things,” Ethan Coen, 50, told The Associated Press during an interview with his brother. “I don’t know what to call it – pulpier, more of a chase-action thing.”
“On one level,” continued Joel Coen, 52, “it’s a very straightforward crime story, and on another level, it’s not that at all. Without sort of giving away the ending, he does certain things in terms of the structure of the story, the way the story moves, and what happens sort of three-quarters of the way through, which are quite unexpected and unusual and probably unique in terms of what one would expect from this kind of story. There’s nothing predictable about this.”
On the contrary. After a more-than-promising beginning, the Coens have been extremely predictable in the subject material they’ve approached. This decade has been less than kind to them.
After the magical realist genius of the stoner epic The Big Lebowski, they turned to harder stuff, and were oodles less successful with it. Joel has always excelled behind the camera, and 2001’s The Man Who Wasn’t There was no exception. A fine script, excellent direction, and…nothing.
Upon the arrival of their latest, No Country for Old Men, some critics have squared the circle here by suggesting that the film is cold, and lacks heart. “Heart” = sentimentality in this construction, and it is true that NCFOM is devoid of that.

Brolin & wife Diane Lane
Like The Big Lebowski, the film begins with voiceover and the images of the American wilderness the film’s characters will seek to reclaim from the world’s villains – as if this were what men are needed for! Lebowski makes a joke of that, and having already taken that development at face value, it is even harder to take Tommy Lee Jones’ terrible voiceover seriously.
In fact, we can barely even pay attention to what he is saying after a stark title card, just as we lose him in his final monologue near the end. They are the ramblings of an old man we don’t care about, the man that the film wants us to care about despite its title.

Gore, Jones, Michael Barker, Jones’ wife, Tipper
I find it strange that the most talented male writers and directors have largely concerned themselves with old stories about male heroes using wits or smarts to show off for the women whose portrayals they so conveniently omit.
If I were a woman, I would find these films even more difficult to watch. They exclude female agency, and at the expense of what? At least they allow women to be happy–see the funny character of Tommy Lee Jones’ wife–but they aren’t concerned with them. At all.
There Will Be Blood, Paul Thomas Anderson’s latest foray into late masculinity, seems even more bizarre. Could he find no stories worth telling in the contemporary climate, to the point where had to go back to Upton Sinclair and the oil industry?
The film will be masterful, as No Country for Old Men masters its subject. But mastery of form is something short of the ideal function of art.

More McCarthy and the Coens:
C.M. There are a lot of good American movies, you know. I’m not that big a fan of exotic foreign films. I think Five Easy Pieces is just a really good movie.
J.C. It’s fantastic.
C.M. Days of Heaven is an awfully good movie.
J.C. Yeah. Well, he is great, Terry Malick. Really interesting.
C.M. It’s so strange; I never knew what happened to him. I saw Richard Gere in New Orleans one time, and I said, “What ever happened to Terry Malick?” And he said, “Everybody asks me that.” He said, “I have no idea.”

Josh Brolin, as the open shell for our everyman empathy, is smolderingly hot and terrifically enjoyable here, even though he is given about as much character as Donny in Lebowski. Casting has always been a strong point for the Coens.
It is Bardem, potentially the most charismatic actor of his generation now that Benicio Del Toro has descended into making out with the locals on every movie set, who of course steals the show with his dapper haircut and even more badass soundless killing cattle gun.
As usually happens, the most charismatic character becomes the real hero of the film. Bardem gets the screen time to shine–he’s funny, ethical, and beautiful, so he wins.

Kelly MacDonald, don’t go in there girl!
I won’t give away the ending, but the last scene featuring Bardem is particularly damning when it comes to the Coens’ and McCarthy’s inability to find something for the female character of this drama to do.
Tarantino had a bright idea in his Kill Bill series–if man is dying and has no agency (see Bill), then maybe woman is the better agent.
But then, I can see why these filmmakers (and there are many more of them, most of whom have talent, who succumb to this) are writing mannered eulogies for the death of being a man.

Good god that’s one handsome man. He’s dating P. Cruz. More of Bardem here.
Younger filmmakers obsessed with film history will continue to parrot the empty shells of a masculinity they see perpetually vanishing. The pseudo-warrior brand of heroism that these movies brandish as a badge of honor shows no sign of abating.
This is the way the battle of the sexes spirals onward: revisited, both hurtfully and harmlessly, as nostalgia.
Alex Carnevale is the editor of This Recording.
TOMMY LEE JONES IS THE MOST BORING MAN IN THE WORLD
“Get Over It” – Guillemots (mp3)
“My Heart Is Leaking” – Cracklin Moth (mp3)
“Atlantic City (live)” – Pearl Jam (mp3)

benzos myspace
“Glass Souls” – Benzos (mp3)
“Car Song” – Elastica (mp3)
PREVIOUSLY ON THIS RECORDING
Blogs lost to the winds of time blossom elsewhere.
Links for both boys and girls.
Some of our current reading material.

10 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
























A profoundly stupid review, grossly inattentive to its putative subject to the point of being an almost unrelated diatribe. The factual error that seems to lead the author to ramble insensibly about gender politics instead of actually reviewing the movie is
“The utility of the strength and aggression of men has long been only used profitably in war, which is probably why we insist on making so much of it. And those who can’t go to war, write pseudo-westerns set in the 1980s.”
This is quite far from the truth. Truly ingenious insights and achievements, not only in war but also science, mathematics, film, sports, crime, technology, business, music, poetry, prose, painting and sculpture are made by young men. To paraphrase Einstein said, if you haven’t distinguished yourself by 30 your won’t ever. This is not to say Women lack any talent in these fields or never contribute major advances, but their output tends to be much lower than that of a man at the peak of his powers, although Womens’ output is much more stable through the course of their lives.
“The magical realist genius of the stoner epic The Big Lebowski.” There is nothing about Lebowski that is magical realist, and this is just the kind of telling error expected from ideologically motivated buzzword wielders who don’t actually read books (or don’t understand them). Lebowski and No Country have plotlines which the reviewer considers unlikely or implausible, a departure from the colloquial usage of realistic. But this departure is confused with the departure of magical realism (which consists mainly in physically impossible or illogical scenarios in an otherwise realistic and plausible situations). Thus the interview quote about magical realism appears in a nonsensical context, and the reviewer’s outrage at McCarthy’s demand for plausibility results from misunderstanding. As for the claim that the plot is not realistic, I don’t think anyone without experience in the very real world of Texan drug trafficking described in the film is qualified to make that statement. And McCarthy’s “plausibility” is not the same as realism in a documentary — the fact that the settings and characters are dramatized does not indict this film any more than it does the more realistic bits of Godard, Shakespeare, or Homer.
“I find it strange that the most talented male writers and directors have largely concerned themselves with old stories about male heroes using wits or smarts to show off for the women whose portrayals they so conveniently omit.” The males are not portrayed as heroes, and they are not showing off for women. Did we watch the same film? I do agree that the film is largely about masculinity. The hitman is pure masculinity, follows his own rules independently from society, people, etc. Other major characters have attachments to women, families, moralities, money, ideals, while minor characters are basically cattle. The bourgeois world of comfort and security is stripped away as a serious option for a man over the course of the film, and the characters are forced to define themselves as fate finds them. The same comfortable bubble also makes possible film criticisms based on lack of agency for women or an excess of nostalgia, as these smug self-congratulations for enlightenment and awareness work best when one does not stray too far from Starbucks into the real world where knowledge and power get made, as opposed to name-dropped.
“Won’t give away the ending, but the last scene featuring Bardem is particularly damning when it comes to the Coens’ and McCarthy’s inability to find something for the female character of this drama to do.” Ha, take that filmmakers! You didn’t make your film have important women who do important stuff! You probably couldn’t even if you tried! Well, no starbucks for you!
“Late masculinity.” Just like Jameson’s “late capitalism,” this term tries in an embarrassingly charlatan way to imply that the thing in question won’t be around much longer, and that it has no new and interesting forms to evolve into in the future. In other words, it’s stuck around a lot longer than it ought to, so maybe if we keep reminding it that it’s late for its next appointment, it’ll pick up and leave.
“Younger filmmakers obsessed with film history will continue to parrot the empty shells of a masculinity they see perpetually vanishing. The pseudo-warrior brand of heroism that these movies brandish as a badge of honor shows no sign of abating.” Masculinity doest not appear as perpetually vanishing in the film. The pseudo-warrior or anti-hero brand of heroism also does not make an appearance, and comparisons to westerns are tenuous at best.
For a nice comparison to another film in which characters are confronted by fate and forced to define themseleves, which is also mainly about men with decidedly minor roles for women, see Bergmann’s The Seventh Seal. Finally for a much better review of this film written by a woman, see :
http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=13960&IBLOCK_ID=35&PAGE=1
Comment by anon February 21, 2008 @ 9:12 am[...] In Which He Said I Wanna Shine In The Eye of Orion But I Drove My Soul Through a Black Hole [...]
Pingback by In Which It Should Win For Best Haircut But Probably Nothing Else « This Recording February 21, 2008 @ 10:40 amThis guy just tried to Mike Burbig you! “Late capitalism” is a retarded phrase, I’m glad you didn’t employ it.
Comment by daziz February 21, 2008 @ 1:38 pmMike Burbig wtf?
And is “late masculinity” supposed to be any better?
Comment by anon February 21, 2008 @ 10:54 pmKudos on the new Guillemots track. It’s most delightful!
Comment by Becky C February 25, 2008 @ 3:21 pmI just saw the movie. I liked it more than you, but this was definitely a great review.
Comment by Molly Lambert March 11, 2008 @ 6:13 amjust saw no country for old men; it’s unassumingly unconventional and yet (thankfully) never over the top. morally dumbfounding, but that can be a good thing… all in all the Coen brothers deserve their oscars, well done indeed.
Comment by patrick March 12, 2008 @ 4:53 pm[...] The Coen Brothers [...]
Pingback by In Which Señor Spielbergo Delivers Los Hobbits « This Recording June 11, 2008 @ 12:32 amI definitely like that the title is a Bell X1 song, but same song is not given in mp3 form!
Comment by Hannah November 6, 2008 @ 1:16 pmThe title is taken for Bell X1 song Rocky took a lover, very clever song
Comment by steve March 10, 2009 @ 5:19 pm