This is one disturbing movie.
However, as a movie, it "works" on several levels. Do not, under any circumstances,
think of it as a thriller. It is, but it is as far removed from the
"thriller" category as "Unforgiven" was removed from the "Cowboy
Western".
Essentially it is a reversion to the form of Great Tragedy.
It aspires to the ranks of a modern Hamlet or Macbeth or something from
Aeschylus. At the heart is the question of Evil and the possibility of Justice. Evil's prevalence and
especially its persistence is the dominant theme. The heart of man yearns for justice to prevail but the common man who fights against it (in the person of the sheriff, played by Jones) is ultimately torn and
defeated by it. Jones ponder his heritage, the long line of evil-fighters
(Sheriffs) from whom he descends and whom he represents. He reflects on those who have been wounded and killed in the fight but his despair is that they
never win. Evil returns, it isn't defeated, and God doesn't answer.
That's a lot to chew on but it is the only way to profit from the
ending.
I think it is clear why this movie is not a "thriller." The
personification of Evil (played exquisitely by Javier Bardem) is
unstoppable and omniscient. He knows where his prey is at all times, he
knows who has been sent against him (Harrelson), he is unstoppable and
unflappable. He is not Satan... Satan has personality... he is the
inexorable Presence of Evil itself.
I think the cinematography is over done. The director
makes it too choppy. It is the right technique but it is over used and
actually works against the main purpose. There are points in the movement where the viewer falls behind in the development because he is too busy trying to figure out what just happened. Overall though the direction is excellent.
This whole idea of "evil" is vitally important however and one that is not often addressed head on in today's ostrich like culture. We prefer to seek "explanations" for behavior, hoping thereby to move motivations from the realm of the moral to the realm of the objective, fixable, quantifiable, statistically verifiable analysis. Evil resists all such movement and only voluntary blindness persists in attempting it.
Essentially, without all the caveats that have to be made in precise
argumentation, I tend to believe that the concept of "evil" only has
meaning with reference to (and in opposition to) the Person of God. As
such it shows up in human beings in deviation from the image of God in
which they were created and which continues at some level to
distinguish them from other creatures. Sharks and wolves, etc. cannot
be "evil" because they do not bear the image of God as man does. Man is
evil in any manner in which he diminishes or subverts or
mis-characterizes God in his actions, thoughts, conversation or other
such "stuff." Thus, fundamentally, since the essence of humanity is to
reflect accurately the image of God, any deviation from the accuracy of
that reflection is a slur or caricature of God and as such, constitutes
slander.
Implicit
in this idea is that a truly "human" person is one in whom there is no
evil. As a Christian I confess only one such Person has ever lived. The
rest of us struggle, with varying levels of attainment, to do the best
we can. Chigurgh seems to portray the end toward which the tendency to
evil in our humanity inclines. He is devoid of all truly "human" moral
traits and is therefore a thoroughly slanderous representation of the
image of God.
OK - back to the review - it's a good movie... Adults only... do not subject young and
impressionable minds or especially kids at risk to this movie until
they are mature enough to discuss it and learn from it.
Recent Comments