so from what I understand, you are basically arguing that the subject matter or style of a movie is not nearly as important as the execution of that movie, purtaining to direction, acting, effects, etc. If this is what you meant, then for sure I agree.
But in the case of NCfOM, the fact that the filmmakers ‘bucked tradition’ is really not even emphasized by them at all, it really is just the story, or rather an important theme in the story (as adapted from whoever wrote it - cant remember who) and to change it into a more traditional, predictible format would completely ruin the integrity of the film.
Furthermore, I have barely heard anyone praise it for being different and unpredictible; in fact the only references I’ve heard to that aspect of it have been negative - such as your response to it.
I would agree that a lot of artists, especially pretentious ones, do indeed try to be different for the sake of shock value. I just don’t think that’s the case in this particular movie - although I wouldn’t doubt that the Coen bros are in fact pretentious…meh whatever they make fucking good movies.

I hate it how just because someone defies established conventions, they’re “great” or “brilliant.” Doing the opposite of what has been done before just for the shock value requires no more skill than doing exactly what has been done before and doing it well. You recognize the conventions, then choose to follow or not follow them successfully.

I don’t think movies like No Country should get all this high status praise just because they went down the road less traveled (and not really that less traveled; there are plenty of films that play at undermining action tropes…and most are considered “failures” for the same reasons this one is considered “brilliant.” Just because it’s the Coen Brothers and Cormack McCarthy and shot and acted and directed amazingly, all those flaws are seen as deliberate, mastermind artistic choices).

I feel like we should give just as much credit to a story that uses the conventions in a technically masterful way (like “There Will be Blood”) as we do to ones that like being rebellious just for shits and giggles. In the end, I didn’t get as much from it because it was just an exercise in “being different.” “Life isn’t fair” or “life is hard” is just as hackneyed a message as anything, so that doesn’t win it any points in my book.

For the record, I’m not sure I believe any of that. Half of me wants to reply to this post with virulent counter-arguments and death threats, because part of me loved this movie. I am, in the end, totally and irrevocably undecided as to whether it was incredible or terrible. I know that’s not a ballsy opinion, but there you have it.