True Grit (2010)

[MacGuffin]

[Derek]

Saw this tonight. Keep it short, it was very funny, as good as you would expect as far as performances, photography, music, etc.. It moves at a pretty good clip too, no wasted moments or lingering too long in one space.(Possible minor spoiler) Brolin is played for more comedic effect and less menace than I had expected.

I was surpised how much Bridge's Cogburn sounded like Billy Bob in Sling Blade and Brolin seemed to channel Jame Gumb.

[Reel]

I'm watching the original on TCM and am so looking forward to this. It just has to better in every single way.

[modage]

I haven't seen the original but the new one was kinda tepid. Minor Coens. Full review shortly.

[john]

If this is "minor", it's a gloriously shot and constantly engaging film that can trump most director's "major" efforts.

Their films have always had a streak of formalism to them, adhering to a traditionalist approach to story and character that wouldn't be out of place in within the studio system eighty years ago. And, in that regard, this might be their best success. I certainly don't mean it's their finest effort yet, but it does prove that - as storytellers - they become more masterful with every film.

It's a wholly admirable testament to their ability to filter everything unnecessary from a story. Nothing in this film is superfluous or distracting.

There are certainly some faults, but it's strengths are far more prevalent.

(Possible minor spoiler) Brolin is played for more comedic effect and less menace than I had expected.

I agree. I'm pleased that I didn't read this comment before seeing the film. Brolin's demeanor was so unguarded and unexpectedly light that it made the inevitable inclusion of his character so much more interesting and more surprising than I had anticipated. In fact, everyone in his gang was played with beautifully unexpected details... all of which were delivered pretty commendably by the consistently solid motherfucker Barry Pepper.

[Pozer]

it was alright. not a strikeout, nuttin to overwrite home about. i kinda wish they made an original western.

full review never.


edit: you know what i hate being a de-hyper. it was better than just alright. listen more to john, tho i kinda disagree about their unfiltering abilities a little bit. that's what i mean about wishing they'd done an original, a lot of times it feels like they try to stick TOO true in their adaptings. but they certainly have nice touches with stuff they add, dog chase in NCFOM for example.

winner: True Grit on blu-ray

[modage]

This is not the western I would have expected from The Coen Bros.  Who would have predicted such an earnest film from filmmakers known for their arch irony?  Most of this is due to 2 factors: they've adapted the story from a book and the lead character is a precocious headstrong 14 year old girl in search of her fathers killer.  The cast includes Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon as a US Marhshall and Texas Ranger, respectively, both on the hunt for the girl's fathers killer.  Bridges accent is thick, bordering on Sling Blade slurries and seems to be in competition with Damon and Josh Brolin for most indecipherable speech.  The heart of the film, and standout performance, is Hailey Steinfeld, as 14 year old Mattie Ross who seems every bit as smart as her character.  

I'm not sure what's happened to the Coens in recent years, after a 20 year career of writing original material they've started to turn increasingly toward adaptations.  Anyone expecting the dark ambiguity of No Country For Old Men will be disappointed here.  With the exception of a few particularly sharp lines of dialogue (and 1 bit of physical comedy), it's hard to see much of the Coens in this film.  It's clear they were attracted to the dialogue, but the formalism of the storytelling, (down to some Old West-y piano score), wouldn't have been out place coming out 4 decades ago.  It's certainly an entertaining film but feels slight compared to the Coen's best work.  

[modage]

(Possible minor spoiler) Brolin is played for more comedic effect and less menace than I had expected.

This reminds me. Do you know what I hated?  I watched that trailer with the O Brothery gospel score and that was fine but when I went to see Black Swan or something they showed a different trailer that gave away the whole fucking movie!  Including a serious bit of plot from the last 30 min. That. Was. The. Worst. I tried to turn away and actually did so when I saw the trailer again before some other movie but the damage was done.

[Reel]

Loved it! Bridges made John Wayne's Rooster look like a Nancy boy in comparison. It was so funny too, I'll have to see it again though, at times I didn't know what anyone was talking about, plus I dozed off a bit towards the end.

[samsong]

loved it too.  the coens at their best are compulsively watchable with thematic weight to boot and this certainly is the former.  the latter may come more from the source material and while not as "ambiguous" as they've been lately and at times in the past, it's deeply felt and as classic as it gets.  that this film feels like it could've come from decades prior is a testament to its quality.  rooted in the tradition of the most american of genres, rife with coen-isms (namely the scene with the trader in bearskin and the comedic timing in general), acting is uniformly excellent even by their standards, and it flaunts the night of the hunter as its main reference/influence.  what's slight about any of this?

[Gold Trumpet]

I enjoyed it, but I wonder if I should compliment the original author more than the Coens. Their finest moment in the film was the first shot and then they didn't even try a shot afterward to contend with the beauty or interest of that shot. It's a showmanship movie for exaggerated dialogue. Peckinpah used to say the biggest hindrance against Westerns was their dialogue and inability to align itself with how people talked. Generally, Westerns were too stiff. Here they are too expressive. I'm a fan of Westerns in good films and literature, but nobody has talked as vividly about everything in such a consistent manner as they do in this film. It's mainly due to the lead girl in this film, but it reminds me of a Tarantino approach to have characters constantly be able to talk around any situation. It can be enjoyable, but it can also be intrusive. The intrusion here is that the top heavy focus on dialogue keeps the movie from developing a pedigree for themes or other elements of story which allude to more than what's on the surface.

When I started to watch the movie, I was reminded of one of my favorite Westerns, Hombre, with the tone and simplicity of the story. I was very happy, but the film never extended itself out to be revelatory about anything interesting as it developed. Hombre managed to keep a naturalistic tone and also be reflective. True Grit managed to stay interesting for dialogue but make me feel that I enjoyed the movie without finding it to be very memorable. The dialogue is good for style sake, but it acts as if it's catering to a full realistic evaluation of a situation. It's not.

[RegularKarate]

I really liked this.  Maybe not as much as, say "No Country", but I still really enjoyed it.

I disagree with Mod completely and feel this has a VERY Coen feel to it and would easily fit in with their older ventures.  It's a great mix of humor and drama.

I also don't know if GT realizes that a large part of the dialog is lifted directly from the book/original movie.  I know that's not the point of his argument, but I can't tell if he's aware.

[Ghostboy]

I liked the entire thing, but the last 20 minutes were AWESOME.

[Gold Trumpet]

I also don't know if GT realizes that a large part of the dialog is lifted directly from the book/original movie.  I know that's not the point of his argument, but I can't tell if he's aware.

Yes. Look at my first sentence and notice how I don't reference the writing handiwork as being the Coens doing at all. I just talk about the writing in the film.

[RegularKarate]

I also don't know if GT realizes that a large part of the dialog is lifted directly from the book/original movie.  I know that's not the point of his argument, but I can't tell if he's aware.

Yes. Look at my first sentence and notice how I don't reference the writing handiwork as being the Coens doing at all. I just talk about the writing in the film.

Ha... completely missed that first sentence.  Sorry.