[jester710]

I agree that the similarities to Fargo are there: the vicious psychopath, vast empty landscapes, a cop who can't fathom the depth of the ongoing depravity. I think the main difference is this is kind of a continuation of the theme; the crimes in Fargo were an anomaly, the type of things that just don't happen in those kinds of places. In NCFOM, however, the senseless crimes are more a harbinger of what's to come, of an area that's going to be riddled with violence because of the drug menace. The events of Fargo happened because of one man's greed, and they ended when the few agents responsible were stopped; the events of this movie will continue to happen because of the greed of many, most of whom will never be stopped, or even known.

I think Bardem was supposed to be robotic. He was a man who was so committed to his twisted principles that he couldn't allow any deviation from them. He was like Hannibal Lecter in that Hannibal had a very strange sense of etiquette that he followed religiously, and expected others to do the same. Anton Chigurh had his code, and he followed it even when there was no gain in it for him (example/spoiler: <font color="white">the scene where he went out of his way to murder the wife, for instance </font>).

And I agree that Woody was the weak link of the film, but I don't know that I'd go so far as to call him awful. He had more of a purpose in the book, as he revealed a little about Chigurh's character and placed the events of the story in a bigger picture.

When you say you didn't understand the last two scenes, are you speaking of the ones at Tommy Lee Jones's house and that of his uncle or whomever that was?