Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The new True Grit movie
me ^ | 10/4/11 | mirk

Posted on 10/03/2011 9:53:58 PM PDT by mirkwood

I just watched the remake of True Grit and I was disapointed to say the least. The kid did well, but the whole movie seemed to be a lukewarmed version of the original. This movie had all the stuff, just like a c on a term paper. Blah. When you watch the original you get involved in the movie. This is a sad satire of a classic.


TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: dukewayne; johnwayne; theduke; truegrit; wayne
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
I think this remake stunk. The kid did an adequate job, but...
1 posted on 10/03/2011 9:54:04 PM PDT by mirkwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I was disappointed by the early acting of rooster, and then the ranger disappeared. WTH?


2 posted on 10/03/2011 9:56:34 PM PDT by mirkwood (obama-the fresh prince of bill ayers (attackwatch))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I loved the movie. A great work of art and you’re quite a few months late.


3 posted on 10/03/2011 9:57:36 PM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I loved the movie. A great work of art and you’re quite a few months late.


4 posted on 10/03/2011 9:57:36 PM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

Nobody can top the Duke. The one and only Rooster.


5 posted on 10/03/2011 9:58:10 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (If you always tell the truth, you won't have to remember what you said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

The raid of the camp along the river....totally screwed up. The original movie is still the best. All in all I rate this one: go buy the John Wayne dvd.


6 posted on 10/03/2011 10:01:19 PM PDT by mirkwood (obama-the fresh prince of bill ayers (attackwatch))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

Kim Darby was twice the actress the new girl was.. the rest of the movie was pretty good.


7 posted on 10/03/2011 10:06:18 PM PDT by Lib-Lickers 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I liked the movie and in any event, it’s a lot better than the standard hollyweird films. That said, producers are addicted to remakes and sequels.


8 posted on 10/03/2011 10:12:15 PM PDT by jimnm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lib-Lickers 2

The old movie was superior in many ways. The only thing better in the new version was the actor’s hairstyles.

I hated Darby and Glenn Campbell’s hair.....and it always took me awhile to get past their hairstyles. The new girl with pigtails was so much better.


9 posted on 10/03/2011 10:12:36 PM PDT by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Williams

More than a few months late. I just did not like the way they took a classic movie and then made it stupid. The accents were embarrassing. The story line got confused after 16 minutes. Rooster Cogburn was a pathetic attempt at acting. There is only one man that can do that role. He has passed. God Bless.


10 posted on 10/03/2011 10:13:25 PM PDT by mirkwood (obama-the fresh prince of bill ayers (attackwatch))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

That is funny as heck. The hair. I noticed it but didn’t ........


11 posted on 10/03/2011 10:15:36 PM PDT by mirkwood (obama-the fresh prince of bill ayers (attackwatch))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

Different tastes I suppose. I loved the remake.


12 posted on 10/03/2011 10:17:23 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I hated how the new Rooster used a captive bolt pistol instead of a real gun.


13 posted on 10/03/2011 10:22:13 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I can like them both.

It bothered me for a bit that somebody was going to re-make the movie, until I found out it was the Coen brothers. If anybody can be trusted with a story, and strong characters, it’s the Coen brothers. They are ~all~ about characters in their movies. I loved the original, and I love this one too. No violence was done to The Duke. If anything, it was an homage to John Wayne.


14 posted on 10/03/2011 10:22:18 PM PDT by Ramius (personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lib-Lickers 2

Kim Darby..Thank you..She was perfect for that role. I was so disappointed when the new one was haggling about the horses. The original was so much more real.


15 posted on 10/03/2011 10:22:33 PM PDT by mirkwood (obama-the fresh prince of bill ayers (attackwatch))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I prefer this one to the original (with all due respect to the Duke). And I am old enough to have seen the original in the theater. Come on, the rhinestone cowboy (Glenn Campbell) was just that, and Damon did much better even though the part was a little thin. I always thought Kim Darby’s acting was insipid, Hailee Steinfeld is the hands-down winner. The Duke defined the role, but I really believe Bridges more than did it justice.

So in case you couldn’t tell, I loved the remake. But there were a few things to make fun of...

http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6383545/true-grit-with-subtitles


16 posted on 10/03/2011 10:23:47 PM PDT by newheart (When does policy become treason?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lib-Lickers 2
Kim Darby was twice the actress the new girl was...

I don't really agree. The girl in the new version was much closer to the girl in the book. The Duke's version had the girl a little too old, when she should've been younger. That was part of the whole point of the story.

17 posted on 10/03/2011 10:26:51 PM PDT by Ramius (personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood; FlingWingFlyer; savagesusie

From the beginning they expressed they weren’t attempting to “remake” John Wayne’s True Grit, they were making a whole new True Grit movie. As far as I know they used nothing of the old True Grit script, they always stated they were following the book itself.

Unfortunately everyone assumes, because of Hollywood’s infatuation with ‘remakes’ that this was only just a remake. Most people went to watch the movie expecting to see everyone attempt to do their best impression of the characters in John Wayne’s True Grit.

A lot of people got surprised when it was far from similar and seemed like a different movie altogether.....because it was an altogether different movie. John Wayne’s True Grit didn’t follow the book very much while the Coen Bros. used it as a roadmap for the whole script. Then there was Bridges’ portrayal of Rooster Cogburn, which wasn’t based off of Wayne’s portrayal but was his own construct.

Anyway, I like the new one better because if you’ve seen John Wayne in 1 western you’ve seen his range of acting for all his westerns. John Wayne was great in his own right, and no one can replace him as a king of the westerns. But John Wayne is always just John Wayne. People just need to realize that they weren’t trying to replace him with the 2010 True Grit.

Jeff Bridges was excellent, by the way. Not once did I ever try to compare him to John Wayne nor did I think I was watching Starman in a western. Jeff Bridges embodied the literary Rooster Cogburn, not the John Wayne Cogburn.

The young girl was excellent as well. The Coen Bros. really made an excellent movie.


18 posted on 10/03/2011 10:27:22 PM PDT by brent13a (Freerepublic is a great sight for conservative news, if you can stomach the cop hating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ramius

Where was the John Wayne salute? The fence?


19 posted on 10/03/2011 10:28:39 PM PDT by mirkwood (obama-the fresh prince of bill ayers (attackwatch))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Sorry, but the original stinks by comparison, and Wayne was part of the problem.


20 posted on 10/03/2011 10:31:12 PM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: newheart

I pretty much agree with your opinions of the movie, I also saw the original at a movie house...the new one is much much closer to the actual book (which is a small volume and a pretty quick read)...and that video at the link is truly hilarious!!!


21 posted on 10/03/2011 10:33:08 PM PDT by Tainan (Cogito, Ergo Conservitus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

You don’t have to be sorry. Everyone to their own tastes.


22 posted on 10/03/2011 10:34:36 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (If you always tell the truth, you won't have to remember what you said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: brent13a

That is a wonderful story, and for that I thank you. But....................................................................................When you remake a classic you should at least give a damn and not change the actual story line. I am pretty sure you need to be reported to attackwatch. It is for my own good.


23 posted on 10/03/2011 10:34:57 PM PDT by mirkwood (obama-the fresh prince of bill ayers (attackwatch))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood
The original was so much more real.,p> Yeah, it's always so much more realistic to get a 22 year old actress to play a 14 year old girl.
24 posted on 10/03/2011 10:36:35 PM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

Huh? Sorry... I don’t get the question.


25 posted on 10/03/2011 10:37:35 PM PDT by Ramius (personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood
I am pretty sure you need to be reported to attackwatch. It is for my own good.

I would be highly surprised (and disappointed) if this was the first time that I was reported to Obama's Sturmabteilung.
26 posted on 10/03/2011 10:39:54 PM PDT by brent13a (Freerepublic is a great sight for conservative news, if you can stomach the cop hating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I rarely watch any movie made in the last 20 years, but was pleasantly surprised. However, I watched it for what is was, not constantly comparing it to another movie from another age.


27 posted on 10/03/2011 10:52:04 PM PDT by expat1000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood
The new TG was almost an exact remake of the 1969 classic right down to the eye patch. The Coen Bros. ending was more true to the book. Otherwise, it broke no new ground. I enjoy most westerns but the original was better.

Sorry. The Dude ain't the Duke. It seemed like Bridges&Company were going through their paces. It was reported that no primary player watched the original version. I find that hard to believe. Besides, Wayne was more charming and likable as Rooster. Gritty realism doesn't make for a more entertaining movie either. And entertainment is what movies are all about. The Coen’s like to make dark, off beat, artsy fartsy films. They succeeded with TG 2010.

28 posted on 10/03/2011 10:55:20 PM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I hear the book was better than either movie. A masterpiece. Has anyone read it?


29 posted on 10/03/2011 10:56:07 PM PDT by spyone (ridiculum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brent13a

The day after my family saw the new True Grit...they were playing the old John Wayne one on cable. My brother was watching it....I walked in and watched it for awhile and my brother said.....”Boy, they are saying the exact same lines....and the scenes are just the same.” I noticed the same similarities (albeit-limited time) and was “shocked” because I read how “different” it was going to be.


30 posted on 10/03/2011 10:56:36 PM PDT by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Oh well there you have it.


31 posted on 10/03/2011 11:02:24 PM PDT by brent13a (Freerepublic is a great sight for conservative news, if you can stomach the cop hating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

The “remake” as you call it was based on the novel which is different that John Wayne’s version. I own both moves on DVD.


32 posted on 10/03/2011 11:11:31 PM PDT by I Drive Too Fast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

She was the lone star of the movie. Bridges sucked and I effing hate Matt Damon. And I don’t believe what the Coen Bros. actually said they “have never seen the original movie” ...


33 posted on 10/03/2011 11:26:16 PM PDT by max americana (FUBO NATION 2012 FK BARAK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I fell asleep several times through the movie. There was too much superficial dialog. Jeff Bridges’ salt of the earth accent was too heavy and hard to follow. The original with John Wayne was far more entertaining.


34 posted on 10/03/2011 11:49:40 PM PDT by jonrick46 (2012 can't come soon enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

Other way around. To my amazement, the new movie completely eclipsed the old. Horses for courses.


35 posted on 10/03/2011 11:50:33 PM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans: Don't read their lips - watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newheart

IMHO, the latest version was far better than the version with John Wayne. It is much, much closer to the book.

Kim Darby’s performance was nowhere near the one delivered by Hailee Steinfeld.


36 posted on 10/04/2011 12:25:44 AM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: brent13a
they always stated they were following the book itself.

They may have stated that but they didn't follow the book, up to a point they did but when the Ranger split from them was NOT from the book, neither were many other things in the movie. The original was more true to the book than this frickin' phony a**ed remake. The biggest deviation in the original was where the Ranger died and at the end where Rooster showed up and talked to the girl.

37 posted on 10/04/2011 1:30:06 AM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

It was more realistic. They used period garb and talked like they actually talked at that time.

Do not, instead of Dont, Can not, instead of cant. etc.

But, nobody can beat the Duke.


38 posted on 10/04/2011 2:11:14 AM PDT by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

The kid was a total robot.

If you watch the two films - one after another - you will notice that almost half of the kid’s dialogue is removed. Why? Because she could not handle it. Kim Darby - whatever her failings - was a young adult and was able to shoulder tons of exposition and dialogue. She was a trained actress (although I am still not overly fond of her performance, she’s Duse compared to the other one) and the kid was just used as stunt casting. (Hey! I’ve got an idea! Let’s use a 14 year old to play a 14 year old.)

Her one accomplishment is that she appeared to be a very good horsewoman.


39 posted on 10/04/2011 2:13:05 AM PDT by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

When Pepper gave Rooster the 5 minutes to go over the top of that hill. And when Rooster shoots in the air, you see the shot and then the report later. In the old movies you would see the shot and the report at the same time.

Way more realistic than the old one.


40 posted on 10/04/2011 2:15:11 AM PDT by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Glenn Campbell’s hair is hilarious in the movie. The character is famous for his cowlick and Campbell had it in spades. One of the funniest lines in Margarite Younger’s original screenplay is Mattie’s remark to La Boeuf that men in Yell County do not have hair that grows like lettuce.

Campbell is a weak link in the movie, undoubtedly, but I didn’t even understand why Matt Damon was in the remake.


41 posted on 10/04/2011 2:17:23 AM PDT by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: calex59

You’re right. The original is FAR closer to the book. There are so many weird changes in the remake that define it as far more a Coen Brothers creepfest than a movie made from Charles Portises’ wonderful novel.

You’ve pointed out the one big change in the original: Campbell’s death.


42 posted on 10/04/2011 2:21:38 AM PDT by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: spyone
I hear the book was better than either movie. A masterpiece. Has anyone read it?

I read the book. I usually read the books on which movies are based. Especially if I really liked the movie. I can recommend the book to you.

My brother sent us the remake DVD. Everyone has watched it but me.

I can also recommend 'The Rebel Outlaw: Josey Wales/Gone To Texas' by Forrest Carter.

43 posted on 10/04/2011 2:26:07 AM PDT by Daaave (Crunchy on the outside, chewy on the inside.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

I don’t recall the ending of the original. (I liked both movies). But I do recall being very gripped by the ending of the remake in Rooster’s attempt to save the girl. Running his horse to death like a madman, then running himself like a madman. It was a good juxtaposition (sp?) of him being mean and ornery and his compassion for this young girl.

And I liked the new girl as well, and IIRC she had an interesting story on her getting the part - but I forget what it is now.


44 posted on 10/04/2011 2:30:53 AM PDT by 21twelve (Obama Recreating the New Deal: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

> I think this remake stunk. The kid did an adequate job, but...
I’ve got to agree with you.
They went through the motions and they read the script but, except for a scene or two, the move was flat and hollow.


45 posted on 10/04/2011 3:49:06 AM PDT by BuffaloJack (Defeat Obama. End Obama's War On Freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

> I think this remake stunk. The kid did an adequate job, but...
I’ve got to agree with you.
They went through the motions and they read the script but, except for a scene or two, the movie was flat and hollow.


46 posted on 10/04/2011 3:49:19 AM PDT by BuffaloJack (Defeat Obama. End Obama's War On Freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 21twelve

The climax is the same in both movies. In the original, Rooster takes her all the way back to Fort Smith - as it is in the book (although she doesn’t lose her arm). I believe, in the remake, she’s taken to a farm house on the way to Fort Smith. Small difference.


47 posted on 10/04/2011 4:13:53 AM PDT by miss marmelstein
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

movies were way different...Wayne wore the eye-patch on the left eye...Bridges on the right eye.


48 posted on 10/04/2011 4:23:17 AM PDT by stylin19a (obama..."Fredo-Smart")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood

I think part of the problem is that the remake was about 20 minutes shorter than the original. Made it choppier and harder to follow.


49 posted on 10/04/2011 4:26:10 AM PDT by SoJoCo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Is there no creativity left in Hollywood? Obviously not, all they can do is remake movies, brain dead idiots. Watch any of the old movies and the dialog alone would be over the heads of the average Hollywood producer. Any Cary Grant movie would make my point.


50 posted on 10/04/2011 6:15:04 AM PDT by usnadad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson