I took notice of that as well, saw it yesterday and liked it enough to recommend to friends.
True Grit...
- Thread starter chad1043
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Saw the new version and think the 3 main characters did a much better job than the original. The story is good enough to stand on it's own no matter who the actors. Interesting to read everyone's opinions. I have followed this on at least 3 boards now and all seem to be split over which version is better. I've stopped comparing now each is the same story, but we have changed. I wonder how the answers would look if we could play the new version for the original audience the week after the original came out. You know, go back in time and play the latest version when the Duke was still alive.
Just a thought...
Just a thought...
montanatim
36 Cl.
Just saw it last night after reading all the posts here.
My two cents; The costuming was probably more historically accurate then the original, but the delivery of lines was absolutely flat, emotionless, lacking passion.
How many people actually speak in such cheerless monotones when in situations that the characters find themselves in? Something that tickled me about this version was when Rooster pulls out Mattie's' pistol and makes the semi famous remark "by God girl, that's a Colts dragoon..." This time around it actually is a dragoon and not a Walker as in the original. For some reason that has always bugged me about the J.W. version.
This one was OK in my book but the flat passionless acting detracted from what could have been a Great movie. Mattie is supposed to be annoying as Coyote Joe said, this girl was drab and flat, all of them being this way may have been the director's intent but I can't imagine why. I don't see any of the actors receiving any awards for this body of work.
For sheer colorful story telling the J.W. version can't be beat. All the characters in that version brought some passion and emotion to the delivery of their lines including the maligned Glenn Campbell.
All in all I think John Wayne sold this movie. I believe that alot to most folks went because they wanted to see the differences, I did. If this movie came out fresh today I believe it would be a flop like Heavens gate was. Word would get around and slow it to a stop. John Wayne was a charismatic showman that could associate himself with those who could make a movie entertaining and fun.
My two cents; The costuming was probably more historically accurate then the original, but the delivery of lines was absolutely flat, emotionless, lacking passion.
How many people actually speak in such cheerless monotones when in situations that the characters find themselves in? Something that tickled me about this version was when Rooster pulls out Mattie's' pistol and makes the semi famous remark "by God girl, that's a Colts dragoon..." This time around it actually is a dragoon and not a Walker as in the original. For some reason that has always bugged me about the J.W. version.
This one was OK in my book but the flat passionless acting detracted from what could have been a Great movie. Mattie is supposed to be annoying as Coyote Joe said, this girl was drab and flat, all of them being this way may have been the director's intent but I can't imagine why. I don't see any of the actors receiving any awards for this body of work.
For sheer colorful story telling the J.W. version can't be beat. All the characters in that version brought some passion and emotion to the delivery of their lines including the maligned Glenn Campbell.
All in all I think John Wayne sold this movie. I believe that alot to most folks went because they wanted to see the differences, I did. If this movie came out fresh today I believe it would be a flop like Heavens gate was. Word would get around and slow it to a stop. John Wayne was a charismatic showman that could associate himself with those who could make a movie entertaining and fun.
sequoia
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2005
- Messages
- 266
- Reaction score
- 27
I saw the movie and while I enjoyed it, I still liked the JW version better, just because of JW. Then I read the book, It was interesting what they used, what they left out, and what they added. Adding things like the dead man and the bear man, changing the shootout at the cabin, and leaving out some of the dialog. It was interesting that some things like the pepperbox pistol and shooting at the corndodgers made it into "Rooster Cogburn" but not into the original TG
CaptainKirk
54 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2010
- Messages
- 2,250
- Reaction score
- 886
Most of the people I talk to say, "Sorry you didn't like the movie". To that I say.....I never said that! I tell people I give it 3 to 3-1/2 stars...OUT OF FOUR...simply because I built it up (in my own mind) to be better than it was before I saw it, based on the book and the trailers. But it was still a good movie. I'll need to watch it several times, of course, to really nail it down. What I felt was, with the Coens directing and the caliber of actors involved, they missed a golden opportunity not just to remake a classic western, but rather, to re-awaken the whole western genre and generate a new-found interest for movie-goers in black powder guns.(a la "The Patriot") They did a good job sailing about the bay, but they could have circumnavigated the world, if they'd played their cards right.
Oh well, just my opinion, anyway...for what it's worth. :wink:
Oh well, just my opinion, anyway...for what it's worth. :wink:
michael dismukes
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2008
- Messages
- 211
- Reaction score
- 2
Saw it last week with my family. I loved the original... and loved this one too. One of the few movies I could take my 9 year old to see with little reservation.
Jeff Bridges was nominated today for an Oscar... If he wins he should simply say what the Duke said.."If I'd known this I would have put that eye-patch on 30 years ago!"
Jeff Bridges was nominated today for an Oscar... If he wins he should simply say what the Duke said.."If I'd known this I would have put that eye-patch on 30 years ago!"
CaptainKirk
54 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2010
- Messages
- 2,250
- Reaction score
- 886
Know what? I watched the original on AMC yesterday (first time in 20+ years!) and it really wasn't that bad! Of course, I'm a sucker for The Duke, so...
But I had remembered Campbell being a terrible actor. Now, t'warn't Oscar material, but not as bad as I remembered.
And don't throw things at me, but frankly I enjoyed Kim Darby's role better than Hailee's in the new version. She played a right sassy little brat!
But I had remembered Campbell being a terrible actor. Now, t'warn't Oscar material, but not as bad as I remembered.
And don't throw things at me, but frankly I enjoyed Kim Darby's role better than Hailee's in the new version. She played a right sassy little brat!
Yep.
The credits said something about a Santa Fe crew.
I grew up in Dewey, but my mother's side is from Antlers, in the Kiamichis. When I was a kid in the 50s and 60s, the hitching posts were still on the streets and were still occasionally used. Some of the old farmers used buckboards and went around selling watermelons for a nickel. I spent a fair bit of time there. Took my first deer there when I was 13. That's not a bad story either.
If you're a native Okie, then you caught a few other things. Like when Mattie fell into the cave.
But judging it based on the inaccuracies, isn't worth much as it was purely fine entertainment and will buy it when it comes out.
I grew up with my grandparents. They used some of the old language you heard in there. My Grandpa was born in the late 1880s and my Grandma in 1894. They were a product of their times.
Now, at this point in my life, i truly regret not soaking up everything they knew. I don't think they had 12 years of schooling between them. But what they knew would fill several very fine books.
The credits said something about a Santa Fe crew.
I grew up in Dewey, but my mother's side is from Antlers, in the Kiamichis. When I was a kid in the 50s and 60s, the hitching posts were still on the streets and were still occasionally used. Some of the old farmers used buckboards and went around selling watermelons for a nickel. I spent a fair bit of time there. Took my first deer there when I was 13. That's not a bad story either.
If you're a native Okie, then you caught a few other things. Like when Mattie fell into the cave.
But judging it based on the inaccuracies, isn't worth much as it was purely fine entertainment and will buy it when it comes out.
I grew up with my grandparents. They used some of the old language you heard in there. My Grandpa was born in the late 1880s and my Grandma in 1894. They were a product of their times.
Now, at this point in my life, i truly regret not soaking up everything they knew. I don't think they had 12 years of schooling between them. But what they knew would fill several very fine books.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 1,673
- Reaction score
- 39
rubincam said:
There ya go.
http://wherearetheynow.gophercentral.com/Kim_Darby.aspxrubincam said:
Last edited by a moderator:
I finally got to see this movie last weekend and I really enjoyed it. However, it was my understanding from the press releases that the Cohen bros were going to be more faithful to the book than the original. All I can say is FAIL. The stupid dugout fight scene, leaving the bodies at the dugout, the whole deal with the hanging man, and what was with the guy in the bear skin, it added nothing to the story what so ever. I've read this book at least three times and I believe the John Wayne movie is truer to the book except for the ending. Leaving out the rat writ scene was a disappointment. The whole movie to me felt rushed, like they were in a hurry to get it done. I agree that they missed a golden opportunity to make a really great movie. It would have been neat to see cameo appearances by Robert Duvall, Glenn Campbell, and Kim Darby. They could have cut out the BS, added 30 mins and done an excellent job of telling the story as written. All in all it was a great western movie and I thought the actors did a fantastic job. They should have named the movie "Almost True Grit".
Don't beat me up, just my 2 cents. :hatsoff: :surrender:
Don't beat me up, just my 2 cents. :hatsoff: :surrender:
Rusty Spur 82
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 1
I seen the original True Grit at least 6 times and will probably see it another 6 times.No body can replace John Wayne.With that said,my wife and I enjoyed every minute of the new True Grit and have no complaints.We left the movie feeling very satisfied and I am sure we will see that about 6 times also.
Guest
What is it with six? :rotf:Rusty Spur said:
Rusty Spur 82
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 1
Good one. I guess my brain got stuck on six.That happens when you get old. :idunno:
Rusty Spur 82
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 1
I haven't heard when the DVD will be out but if it holds to the norm of other movies,my guess is that it will be available in the summer.
akapennypincher
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2005
- Messages
- 1,146
- Reaction score
- 2
bull3540 said:
IMHO True Grit without the DUKE, is like not the real deal. I honestly wish Hollywood would leave the "classics". Cool Hand Luke is another classic, I see ZERO REASON to remake.
