Saw "True Grit" yesterday. In a word: wow

[Taverner]

What a great movie! I read the book in Peace Corps, and this movie is a much closer adaptation than the Wayne vehicle. Cogburn in the book is much more amoral than Wayne's portrayal. In the 69 film, Wayne just plays an "aw shucks" friendly uncle character.

Also Hailee Steinfeld is AMAZING and totally steals the show.

It's darker, but not without hope.

It's meaner, but not without mercy.

And, unlike the Wayne movie, this film was shot in the badlands of Texas and Oklahoma, where the book took place, not in the National Parks of Colorado, where everything was beautiful. This movie really gave insight into how sparse the population was back then, and how everywhere had the look of a barren wasteland.

[siligut]

1. I liked it better than the original too

Hailee Steinfeld is perfect and I much preferred Matt Damon to Glenn Campbell, Glenn was just a little creepy. The Coen brothers rarely disappoint. There was a post here, that told of a man who walked out after a few minutes, proclaiming that Jeff Bridges was no John Wayne, to which an audience member retorted, "John Wayne was a pussy", that post almost had me in tears, it was so funny.

[Lex]

2. This True Grit is superior to the Wayne one.

No offense to the 1969 film, which is a fine film, but I agree with you, the Cohen brothers' version is great. Hailee Steinfeld is remarkable.

[AngryOldDem]

3. I've yet to see a bad Coen brothers movie.

I'm really not into Westerns but this was very well done. AMC has aired the John Wayne version, which I keep missing -- I'd like to see that to compare the two.

Hailee Steinfeld -- for a kid picked out of thousands to play the role -- is amazing. A star is born. If she doesn't win the Oscar then something is terribly wrong.

[Highway61]

4. Excellent wasn't it?

The bond of friendship between those two reminded me of the bond between Tommy Lee Jones and Robert Duval in the end of Lonesome Dove.

Another good one. The King's Speech. Seriously amazing acting.

[krispos42]

5. It was a really great movie! n/t

[mix]

6. It was shot around Santa Fe, NM and in a few places in TX. nt

[Swede]

7. I enjoyed the film very much.

Coen brothers know how to make great movies.

[Yavin4]

8. You Know What I Loved The Most About Hailee

She looked and talked like a smart teenage girl. Not a fucking 24 year model posing as a teen. She was a real teen.

[Taverner]

9. What was Kim Darby in '68? 23?..24...?

[Yavin4]

12. I Meant More Modern Versions of Teen Life

Have you seen the new 90210? Or Gossip Girl?

[TreasonousBastard]

15. She was 21, and I just watched her in the old one and...

she was the best thing in it. I think the new one is a lot better for a lot of reasons, but she's not one of them.

No question this new Hailee girl did a great job, just not THAT much better than Darby, if indeed better at all.

[MrMickeysMom]

10. You actually made me want to go see it

I thought I'd really like it, but what I admire is the salute to make a movie like a book, for crying out loud.

[bluesbassman]

11. I think Jeff Bridges crossed the line into the Great Actor category with this role IMO.

Always enjoyed his work, but this effort was outstanding. Excellent film in all respects. Thoughly enjoyed it.

[Kat45]

13. I found it boring & also had a problem with Jeff Bridges. SPOILERS

I will admit that I never cared for westerns but I thought I'd see it because it was getting such raves, as well as Oscar nominations. (I did see the original movie when it was out and I read the book when I was in junior high; I don't remember either of them.)

As I watched it, I was thinking that westerns tend to be meandering and perhaps that's part of the reason I don't like them. I got bored because it was so slow moving, with nothing much happening. I didn't get interested until the girl encountered the man she was looking for. I did like the girl's character. I was extremely annoyed with Jeff Bridges because I could hardly understand a word he said. I understand him talking that way in the context of the character, but I found it a lot of work to decipher what he said, often having no luck understanding him. This ruined any enjoyment of the movie for me.

Sorry, I know many loved this movie; I'm just sharing my opinion.

[fishwax]

14. Hailee Steinfeld was great, as most of the performers were

Bridges was outstanding. But then again his talent is well known. Steinfeld, as you said, steals the show.

I haven't read the book, but I watched the John Wayne version again to refresh my memory. I found this one superior in pretty much every way. John Wayne was actually pretty good in parts, but merely passable in others. Matt Damon is a huge improvement over Glenn Campbell. The music in this one is much better, drawing clearly on and building variations of 19th century hymns. (The music in the original, aside from the Glenn Campbell theme song, was very Magnificent-Sevenish.) I thought the construction of the story was better in the remake as well, first meeting Maddie in her time of crisis rather than getting the glimpse of the happy, in-tact family at the beginning.

I agree with you that the landscape was about perfect in the Coen Brothers version, but I think that the striking peaks and majestic beauty of Colorado was also appropriate for the slightly different story being told in the 60s version. Though it was certainly distracting to see Colorado Rockies in the background when they're talking about going 70 miles to Fort Smith. (I guess if they'd simply changed the place names in the 60s film that wouldn't have been an issue. Even so, a distinct flexibility with geography is a characteristic of Western settings from the 50s and 60s, where the drama of the landscape was considered more important than realism.)

But, yeah, I thought the remake was absolutely outstanding. :applause:

[JCMach1]

16. I looked at the credits and saw New Mexico and Texas...