In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:
> The chirurrgh character was entirely unbelievable, more like an unkillable supervillain than a real person
>
> Which would be fair enough, but when the film appears to be about the banality and iniquity of evil and the impotence of tommy lee Jones in the face of that, having an antagonist who would be more at home in the dark knight kind of undermined the films message to me,
Like most Cormac McCarthy stuff you can understand it or read it in different ways. Everyone was impotent in the face of Chiririrughg. Some think he represents death. Modern, mechanised, mass death - he uses a bolt gun rather than a scythe - but death nonetheless. You can't escape him and despite what all the characters think you can't outsmart him or kill him. But, intersetingly, right there at the end, we see he can be wounded. Go figure.
Of course, you can just see him as a human bean in which case it's a kind of dark joke. He's the ultimate anti-hero. Think about all the characters he chews through: the lone cowboy, the grizzled old sheriff, the innocent young girl, as well as all the others. He lines up the archetypes (and peoples expectations) then casually swats them aside. If you root for Chighgigighgur the book's quite enjoyable.