True Grit (2010)

Quote from Paula

he's up against a National Monument in the form of John Wayne, who is so singular and iconic a presence that there's just no way he can top Wayne's performance, or make Rooster as memorable by going in another direction. Plus Wayne, in playing Rooster, was playfully subverting an image he'd inhabited for decades and brought a huge amount of subtext to the role simply by being who he was. That's not there with Bridges simply because he's never been THE western hero that Wayne was.

This says it all - well said, Paula.

The Coen Brothers have been major players for a long time. They live in NYC and don't play the Hollywood fame game. They make small personal films that mean something to them not $100 million dollar films filled with special effects. Remaking a 40-year old films doesn't impress Hollywood.

They have no reason to lie about why they made the film of if they rewatched the original.

No one is going to hate Jeff Bridges for playing Rooster Cogburn.

The 2010 True Grit is not going to damage the 1969 True Grit or chip into the "monument" that is John Wayne.

One of the Coens said in an interview that the original is an iconic film for people his age but not for 18-year old film goers of today.

I worked at a college bookstore. College kids are idiots. One day the name John Wayne came up and a girl I worked with had no idea who he was, so we had a poll that day and asked every customer who John Wayne was. About a third of them had no clue or they thought he was a Vegas entertainer.

The 2010 True Grit is going to make people aware of the 1969 True Grit. They'll seek it out, watch it and some of them will become John Wayne fans because of it.

TCM never would have run a day of Wayne films 3 day before Xmas if the new True Grit hadn't been released that day.

The new movie is a good film and it's good for John Wayne.

TCM runs John Wayne movie marathons quite often & generally around the holidays. But, I do agree with your assessment that most college kids are idiots in that they are painfully unaware of anything which has happened in the past & we all know that those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

True Grit was originally supposed to open Xmas day. They changed the release date in early November. I don't think that day was originally planned.

Michael Wilmington on the movie

http://moviecitynews.com/2010/12/mw-on-movies-true-grit/

May2 refuses to see the forest for all the trees in the way...

There was an article in my local newspaper that reviewed TG. I don't know who wrote this review, but what was told about this movie was if you've seen the OTG many times over the years, you may want to wait until it comes out on cable. If you have never seen the OTG, or seen it many years ago, then you should see it.

The reviewer in my opinion is suggesting that if you are a follower of Duke then you will never accept this new version. You will be better off not spending your money. They did rate the movie three out of four stars. Still debating about seeing it but it will be after Christmas.

By the way, I bought the book and started to reading it. It has been a long time since I read it, so having fun reading this again. I am remembering some of the things in the book. Very interesting book, the OTG seems to follow it real close from what I have read so far.

Cheers Hondo

My wife and I planed to see it next week,but when I see the clips on tv and hear the dialog. It is so hard not to compare to the Dukes. It has gotten good reviews ,but I think I'm to bias to enjoy it with out saying something negative in the theater. But I do love westerns.

I don't like Coen brothers...
The girl point of view? What means? A feminist vision?
Rubbish..
That's all...

Merry Christmas to all friends here.

My wife and I went to it last night. I have to admit, it was quite good. It seems to follow the Duke's version for the most part except for a few differences. The main one being the ending, which both my wife and I didn't like. I will not talk to much about the film as I would like to hear what the rest of you think once you see it. It is not your typical Coen brothers movie, not lot of weird, over the top things going on. The acting was good and the movie was not too violent, except for maybe 1 scene but it is PG-13, which I would agree with. As a fan of western's I would go see it and try to hold back your judgement until you do. I like Duke's version alittle better probably because of the ending but they did do a good job with the remake.

I would not recommend waiting until cable to see the new True Grit. I think a TV viewing would diminish it a lot, especially that nighttime sequence in longshot at the cabin where Cogburn et al. first encounter Ned and his gang, or the sequence where Rooster desperately gallops Little Blackie full out through the night to take an injured Mattie back to where she can be tended to. In fact, this latter sequence is much more drawn out and emotionally fraught than in the first film and, er, I actually liked it better in the remake.

Stumpy, I'm glad you like what I said about the Duke and True Grit, but I do want to add that I've been a big fan of Jeff Bridges for literally decades -- pretty much since he first began making films -- and his Rooster is an interesting alternative take on the character.

But nobody can step into Duke's boots and expect to fill them the same way.

Well, we took the whole family (a group of 12) to see the movie today (and met another family there).

We all enjoyed it. Our kids watched JW's True Grit last night with friends, in anticipation of going to the theater today.

While I may not be a particular fan of the Coen brothers, I have to say they really did a good job with this movie. Hailee Steinfeld did an outstanding job as the never-say-a-contraction Mattie Ross (as much as I love the OTG, Kim Darby's portrayal was so annoying!). Matt Damon's portrayal of LeBoeuf was understated, and very different from Glen Campbell's. Jeff Bridges did a credible job of playing Rooster Cogburn - different than JW's, but well done. The cinematography is excellent.

Yes, it is definitely gorier than the original. Yes, the endings are quite different, and the new TG's ending is more closely aligned with the original novel. Some of the minor characters (Col. Stonehill and Ned Pepper, for example) who also appear in the OTG, are excellent (especially if you are familiar with the original). It's difficult to believe the Coens have NOT seen JW's version, when you see those characters in particular. Their voices and mannerisms seem almost identical to the original movie's characters.

The bottom line here is - we liked the movie! It doesn't cause JW's True Grit to diminish in our estimation one tiny bit, it just means the Coens did a good job with their version of the story.

Chester

Quote from chester7777

Well, we took the whole family (a group of 12) to see the movie today (and met another family there).

We all enjoyed it. Our kids watched JW's True Grit last night with friends, in anticipation of going to the theater today.

While I may not be a particular fan of the Coen brothers, I have to say they really did a good job with this movie. Hailee Steinfeld did an outstanding job as the never-say-a-contraction Mattie Ross (as much as I love the OTG, Kim Darby's portrayal was so annoying!). Matt Damon's portrayal of LeBoeuf was understated, and very different from Glen Campbell's. Jeff Bridges did a credible job of playing Rooster Cogburn - different than JW's, but well done. The cinematography is excellent.

Yes, it is definitely gorier than the original. Yes, the endings are quite different, and the new TG's ending is more closely aligned with the original novel. Some of the minor characters (Col. Stonehill and Ned Pepper, for example) who also appear in the OTG, are excellent (especially if you are familiar with the original). It's difficult to believe the Coens have NOT seen JW's version, when you see those characters in particular. Their voices and mannerisms seem almost identical to the original movie's characters.

The bottom line here is - we liked the movie! It doesn't cause JW's True Grit to diminish in our estimation one tiny bit, it just means the Coens did a good job with their version of the story.

Chester

Display More

Well said Chester, and like I stated above, if you are a western film fan you have to go see it. We rarely get new films and this is one not to miss.

And I also wanted to reiterate what Chester said, it doesn't, in my eyes, diminish Duke's version at all.

Hello All I find it hard to comment not having seen the film, and may reconsider ( Not ) going, after reading the reviews of respected fellow members.

Weekend BO,

2. True Grit (Paramount) NEW [3,047 Theaters]
Wednesday $5.5M, Thursday $5.6M, Friday $4.7M, Saturday $10.4M
3-Day Weekend $25.6M, Cume $36.8M

Given that Christmas Eve is more of an adult moviegoing time, it's not surprising that the writer/director Coen Brothers' Oscar-touted 2D Western take on the Charles Portis novel (and they claim not to have watched the first movie that won John Wayne his Oscar in 1969) jumped into the No. 2 spot Friday. But it stayed there Saturday, which was a shock.

Turns out this is the biggest opener for a Coen Brothers film (passing Burn After Reading's $19.1M) and bigger even than that other Oscar-touted pic The Social Network's $22.5M weekend opener. "It almost doubled people's expectations and it beat Tron: Legacy 3D for 2nd which no one saw coming," a Paramount exec gushed.

With only a $38M budget and a big 95% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, plus great acting and quirky dialogue, this pic has a good shot of making coin. Not bad for a movie that no one could understand why anyone would want to remake in the first place. (And, yes, I consider this a remake.)

http://www.deadline.com/2010/1…-fockers-opens-with-7-2m/

Quote from chester7777

Kim Darby's portrayal was so annoying
Chester

Several other folks have expressed this or a similar opinion, which I just can't understand. I've always thought Kim did an excellent job as Mattie. I even liked Glenn Campbell as the Ranger. Guess I'm just easy to please when it comes to Westerns.

Quote from Stumpy

Several other folks have expressed this or a similar opinion, which I just can't understand. I've always thought Kim did an excellent job as Mattie. I even liked Glenn Campbell as the Ranger. .

I agree. Kim was great, and as for Campbell I never had a problem with him either.

Just saw the new version, and liked it a lot! I can't add anything new....Chester's review pretty much covers my thoughts about the movie.

The John Wayne/Henry Hathaway version is still my favorite, but there's not a thing wrong with this one. Very good movie!

A short review!
I saw the film on the other day, and any fans of westerns will want to see this fine version. This is a good retelling of Charles Portis novel.
I think the key to this movie is the young actress (Hattie Seinfeld)she is the strong minded Mattie Ross that Mr. Portis envisioned.
Matt Damon is a good actor and Glen Campbell is a good singer. No more said. Bridges gives a fine account of himself as Rooster.But nobody could out play DUKE in a western. The supporting cast is very good.
I would have liked a longer version as this is 20 mintues shorter.
The Coens do differ from the book at parts in the middle. (which I did not care for) But from the point when Mattie meets Chaney at the creek, it's all taken from the book.
The Coens do a fine job for a old style western.
When it comes to watching either one, Duke first this one second. But second not bad.
PS. I don't think Duke would have a problem with this film. As he had no ego.

Quote from chester7777

Kim Darby's portrayal was so annoying!

Quote from Stumpy

Several other folks have expressed this or a similar opinion, which I just can't understand. I've always thought Kim did an excellent job as Mattie.

Actually, you're quite right - Kim did do an excellent job. The fact of the matter is that the character Mattie in the book (and in both movies) was a very strong-willed but smug, self-satisfied, "always right" person, and probably annoying to almost anyone whose path she crossed. Somehow, Hailee was easier to watch. She also came off as appropriately annoying, just not as much as Kim Darby. She also was more believable as a fourteen-year old (I believe the actress is 13).

Quote from BILL OF PA

I don't think Duke would have a problem with this film. As he had no ego.

Bill, glad to see you chime in on this! I couldn't agree more with your assessment of how John Wayne would have seen this movie.

Quote from BILL OF PA

I think the key to this movie is the young actress (Hattie Seinfeld)she is the strong minded Mattie Ross that Mr. Portis envisioned.

I just can't imagine the new girl portraying a stronger-willed Mattie than Kim did. Kim/Mattie definitely had grit. I think that's why the Duke was so taken with her. Like he said, "she reminds me of me".

Stumpy. Watch the film first then tell me what you think. I agree with Chester . This girl is Mattie to a tee.
But if you think Kim is better so be it.