No Country For Old Men

1118 Words5 Pages
Post Modern and Modern film have some similarities as well as some differences between the two. A post modern film has no clearly defined protagonist or antagonist with an ambiguous narrative and has an open ending. While a modern film also has no defined hero or villain with a complicated narrative and open ending. Two films that can represent each of the categories would be Primer (2004) for post modern and No Country for Old Men (2007) representing the modern genre. Primer is clearly a post modern due to the extremely confusing narrative of time paradox that the main characters Abe (David Sullivan) and Aaron (Shane Carruth) had with multiple versions of themselves. As for the hero and villains in the film they were not as clearly defined and can change depending on which point of view of either Abe or Aaron the audience would take.…show more content…
But in the film effects of time travel is seen to have cause consequences to the characters lives so much so they had to produce a plan to appear multiple times and fix as many of the mistakes that they possibly can. In the case for No Country for Old men there was no main villain or hero in the movie because through out the film the perceptive changes between the which characters point of view is being represented. For example Chigurh (Javier Bardem) views Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) as person who is a thief therefore he is the guy who is his villain. While Moss can also view Chigurh in the opposite way since Chigurh is trying to kill his family and him. The narrative is complex because it is shown three different view points being played out on film. Each of these view point comes with a reason that the character believes that they are right. Whether it is greed, principle or just doing their job. Lastly because their was no clear ending of to story ending has been left to the audiences
Open Document