Character of Chigurh from No Country for Old Men - Essay Example

No Country for Old Men The film, No country for Old Men, is a western drama thriller adapted from a 2005 novel by Cormac McCarthy. The story revolvesaround the money left over after a drug-deal massacre and the violence that follows. It involved three main characters; Llewelyn Moss, a Vietnam veteran and welder, who happened upon the money at the drug-deal site while hunting and chose to keep it, Anton Chigurh, who was a hired psychopathic hitman tracking the whereabouts of the money, and the Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, who was investigating the brutal events related to the windfall. With an engaging story and stunning performances, several instances in the film relied on open interpretation for deduction of general meaning (Schwarzbaum). This essay aims at analyzing the Anton Chigurh character by means of the Pentad terms as suggested by Kenneth Burke. He states that, "who is obviously covered by agent. Scene covers the where and the when. The why is purpose. How and by what means fall under agency. All that is left to take care of is act in our terms and what in the scholastic formula" (Burke, 228). Chigurh, played by Javier Bardem, was a tall, strong, dark, awkward-looking and middle-aged male character, who was portrayed in the film as a brutal, amoral, ruthless, remorseless, emotionless and terrifying villain. He was introduced in the film as a prisoner who had no respect for law, and killed the deputy sheriff with his handcuffs. From then onwards till the end, the sole purpose of his life was to kill. He killed mercilessly without any discrimination whether it was the poor or the rich, young or elderly, man or woman. Another sheriff referred to him as a “homicidal lunatic”. His brutality and criminal nature was also very well explained by another key character, Carson Wells, who described him as a “crazy” person, a “psychopathic killer” and even compared him to “bubonic plaque” (“No Country”). He carried a captive bolt pistol to kill people and punch out door locks, which was probably to prevent evidence, avoid public attention while moving and/or kill people without them being frightened. The later was evident from the scene where he asked the man to come out of his car, reached up his forehead with the opening end of the tube and requested, “would you hold still please, sir” (“No Country”). However, later in the film, he replaced his preferred weapon of choice with a shotgun to tackle similar response from Moss in which he got injured. It become obvious for a while at that point and at the end of the film, when portrayed in a car accident, that no matter how invincible he looked, he was also vulnerable to the very rules of fate he applied to other people and different instruments had a unique role depending on the person’s intentions and abilities. He changed vehicles too often and apparently it was that rule of chance which led him to the accident. Another key instrument Chigurh often used was a coin toss, which determined the fate of people he encountered. This shows that he believed in fate and also regarded himself as an instrument of fate. He was depicted to believe that future of a person was dependant on his previous deeds (Emerson). For instance, while talking to Moss on the phone he asked Moss, “You know how this is going to turn out, dont you?” (“No Country”). He offered Moss a deal that he will not harm him or his wife if he gave him the money. He also told the old man at the gas station that the coin he tossed was travelling for twenty-two years to be at that particular place. When Moss’ wife, Carla Jean, told Chigurh that it was him and not the coin who had to decide, he replied, “I got here the same way the coin did” (“No Country”). His actions also implied the triviality of life itself. At times, however, the coin lost its depicted value and gained material value instead, where it was used to unscrew the ventilation windows and once for escape when Sheriff Bell entered a crime scene in which Moss was killed. While it seemed that Chigurh was a compassionless man who did not believe in commonly held beliefs and values of a society, he sometimes turned out to be a man of his own principles. He firmly believed in the rule of chance, but applied the rule to certain people only based on his own judgment. For instance, he did not kill the old man who won the toss. He even killed his employers but did not harm the clerk or the accountant. He told Jean that he was there to kill her because of the word he gave to her husband (“No Country”). However, he was still inclined to give her a chance by coin toss. Here, it can also be inferred that he was somewhat confused with overlapping principles and battling his own emotions while making a decision. However, these principles also acted as tools for avoiding responsibility of crimes. The rationale to Chigurh’s killings sometimes remained obscure and unexplained. However, the overall portrayal did not imply that he killed aimlessly at random. Hunting was a recurring theme which was strongly portrayed throughout the film. Chigurh was a hunter and quarry at the same time. While Moss was shown hunting an antelope at start of the film, sooner he was being hunted by Chigurh who himself was being hunted by law enforcement personnel (“No Country”). Rules of nature such as, survival of the fittest and chance, were at play simultaneously. Chigurh was depicted as person well-adapted to the game of hunting. The film failed to portray how he tracked down his victims with such an ease. Despite his formidable hunting ability, he too was vulnerable and became injured when shot at by Moss. The manner in which Chigurh hunted, his swiftness, his ability to hide, control situations, tend his wounds, and the ease with which he used different tools for killing indicate that either he was well-trained in these arts or learned them some other way during the course of his life. Possibly, some past events might have threatened or hurt him internally, which created a monster in him for purposes of survival. However, since his past was not revealed, it remained unclear what circumstances led to his current situation. Although Chigurh did not talk much, his hatred towards ordinary human motives and desires was evident when he asked Wells before killing him, “If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" (“No Country”). This also revealed the insignificance of the rule of law in his eyes. It can also be theorized that Chigurh and Bell were two sides of the same coin. Bell saw in him a reflection of everything he could not have ever accomplished and implies powerlessness and irrelevance of law and lawmen against such a monster repetitively. Chigurh as a self-employed hand of fate utilized a number of tools to decide destiny of people. This also pointed to the gradual deterioration of moral values in society, where tools such as money and weapons decided the path ahead rather than people themselves. The shift becomes obvious when Sheriff Bells, who originally did not carry a gun, showed up carrying a pistol later in the film. He also told Jean that Moss could have saved her, but instead he preferred to use her as a tool to protect himself (“No Country”). Chigurh and the associated horrors remained dominant as compared to any good throughout the film. It also signified that a balance of power between good and evil is crucial for the system to sustain itself. All the amoral characteristics associated with Chigurh helped bring out the underlying moral that the trend of lust and hate derived by love for drugs and money at the expense of others only led to the path of death and destruction. Although the complex malevolent moral principles governing the Chigurh character were shattered along with his car in the accident, but they were existent in society in one form or another. The coin toss employed at some occasions pointed towards the somewhat meager chance of salvation humanity still has. To Chigurh, life was so unimportant that he tried to prevent his boots twice from the blood of victims (“No Country”). This action again implied that fate (Chigurh) itself has nothing to do with killing, but it was people’s own choices which determined their future. Overall, the Chigurh character succeeded in delivering the originally intended meanings in the story including evil, fate, desire, lust, hatred, probability, hunting, survival and hopelessness etc. Javier Bardem’s brilliant performance in this role also added to the significance of the character. Along with exclusive entertainment, the film offered insight into the emptiness, amorality and underlying themes haunting the American society in a western countryside at that point in time, and even today. However, many ambiguities could have been avoided if the film included a little focus on Chigurh’s past circumstances rather than emphasizing too much on the Sheriff Bell character. References Emerson, Jim. “No Country for Old Men: Out in All That Dark”. Rogerebert.com. Ebert Digital LLC, 27 Nov 2007. Web. 24 Apr 2015 Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. Berkley: University of California Press, 1969. Print. “No Country for Old Men”. Novel Adaptation. Dir. Joel Coen and Ethan Coen. White Production Draft (2006). Print. Schwarzbaum, Lisa. “No Country for Old Men”. Entertainment Weekly, 17 Jan 2015. Web. 24 Apr 2015 Read More