Has Anyone Seen the New "True Grit"?
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
December 25, 2010 1:02am CST
I've seen and heard nothing but good reviews for this remake but I've gone one record for a long time basically against remakes, especially of "classic" films so I don't want to seem to be a hypocrite. This version does have an excellent cast, that can't be denied, but I suppose it would be hard to step into John Wayne's boots, don't you think? This was the film that won him his only Oscar.
One thing I've read is that the 2010 version is more faithful to the book than the one from 1969. That should be something that makes purists happy since one complaint often heard about movies based on novels is that they stray too much from the novel. My personal observation has been that most people prefer whatever they see or read first; if they read the book before seeing the movie, the movie's bound to disappoint them but if they see the movie first the book is going to dissatisfying.
My husband is probably John Wayne's biggest fan ever so he's said he absolutely refuses to see the new True Grit. I've tried to tell him he needs to separate the character from the personal of John Wayne. Jeff Bridges wasn't trying to BE John Wayne, he was trying to portray Rooster Cogburn believably, which I have no doubt he managed to do since he's a very talented and versatile actor; the latter is something Wayne really wasn't, in my opinion, but don't tell my hubby or any other die-hard John Wayne fanatics...lol!
Annie
5 responses
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
25 Dec 10
I must start off with that I have yet to watch the movie, I am only going by clips, trailers, and reviews. That said I think the new True Grit, dare I say, will be better than the old True Grit. In my humble opinion Jeff Bridges is just as good as John Wayne, Matt Damon is better than Glenn Campbell, and Josh Brolin is better than Jeff Corey. I know that I just committed heresy by daring to say that Jeff Bridges is as good as John Wayne, but he is. So the movie should be better, but I will need to see it to be absolutely sure of it.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
26 Dec 10
Gewcew, I must agree with you on all counts as far as the cast goes. I also agree that conventional wisdom says this one should be better but I also need to see it to judge for myself.
Thumper, welcome to myLot! Here's a bit of friendly advice to a new member: instead of commenting under someone else's response you're better of posting your own response. I mean, if you want to comment on what someone else has posted, here is the place to do it but your post was basically your own response and not a comment about what gewcew had written.
Annie
@Thumper66 (9)
• United States
26 Dec 10
I am definately not a John Wayne fan, and have never really been a huge fan of Westerns in general. That being said, I actually think I may go see this one. I have never seen the original, and have no interest in watching John Wayne strut across the movie screen (not to mention his voice annoys me to no end). Jeff Bridges really seems made for this part from what I have seen so far, and I look forward to watching.
1 person likes this
@lrdl3535 (149)
• United States
31 Jul 12
I didn't think I would watch it either. But I ran across it on Netflix and had to take some time to check it out. I really wasn't impressed with it at all. Your right when you say nobody can fit into John Wayne's boots. It was to much like the original movie for me. It just had actors that just didn't seem to work well together. The original actors seem to glide through their rolls. But in the new movie it is like they are reading a script. It just didn't work for me.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
2 Aug 12
I STILL haven't seen it, all this time later. I guess I AM a bit surprised by your take on the actors. I mean, a cast doesn't get much better than Jeff Bridges, Matt Damon and Josh Brolin. I guess it's just hard replacing someone else in something that was SO successful the first time around.
Annie
@coffeebreak (17798)
• United States
25 Dec 10
only the previews and it is a disgrace. There are just some movies they shouldn't remake or at least not remake them until the generation that loved them have gone. THese days they put so much violence and cussing in movies that it just takes away from the storyline. I haven't seen the new one, and won't. I liked the first one and don't want it messed with! But the impression I get from the previews is it is very violent and that isn't what the story was about. Yeah, the girl was out to get the man that killed her father and Rooster and the bunch were helping/hindering her, but all movies have gone overly violent these days so I figure this willl to and that is what the previews give impression of.
But they just shouldn't change some of the classics. I think they have just run out of things to write about! Do you realize how many movies have been made since the beginning of "the movie"? I have yet to see a remake that was as good as the original.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
26 Dec 10
I generally tend to agree with your last sentence, remakes are rarely as good as the original. Right now I'm trying to think of an exception but I'm coming up blank. However, from what I've heard and read, the remake of "True Grit" is actually more like the novel on which it was based than the original one was. 0
Annie
@Shellyann36 (11385)
• United States
25 Dec 10
I have seen the commercials for it and I am interested in watching it. I have not seen the John Wayne version so I think before I watch the new one I will want to see the original version. From all of the commercials I see Jeff Bridges does a great job of playing the part. I was also very happy to see that Matt Damon has a part in the movie as well.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
26 Dec 10
That's what I try to do before seeing a movie that's been done before if I haven't already seen the original. In fact, even if I have seen the original I sometimes try to see it again before seeing the remake.
This new version certainly has an excellent cast and that alone makes me interested in seeing it.
Annie
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
25 Dec 10
I'm not really much on John Wayne. If Jeff Bridges was going to fill Clint Eastwood's shoes, then I'd be all types of PO'd.
This movie is on my #1 to-see list. Other than the "Dude" in Lebowski, the only other movie I really liked Bridges in (on a level I thought he was a great actor) was Crazy Heart - and even that took me an hour to get into, because I thought he was just ripping off on Waylon Jennings' style.
John Wayne was to versatile acting what the "robot" is to dance - stiff and predictable.
But hey, I don't like being the proverbial basement-dwelling critic on all this stuff, solely because it's for entertainment purposes and not some schmuckosaurus looking to make a political play or plea through cheesy dialogue and worse acting posing as "art."
I remember my dad didn't want to watch 3:10 to Yuma because it was a remake, and he claims he hated I am Legend. I'm not that harsh on remakes. And being born in the 1980s, I definitely prefer today's movies over the movies of the 1950s and 60s. Everything's just better!
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
26 Dec 10
I liked some of John Wayne's movies but he was definitely a "man's man" and I think he was somewhat overrated as an actor by some. He was about as far from versatile as one can get, wasn't he? Westerns and war movies...that was IT from what I can recall.
I guess it stands to reason that since I was born in the 1950s I kind of take issue over "everything" just being better today. Of course, the technology is much further advanced so the special effects are amazing and make those from even two decades ago or less look ridiculous but it's not always about that. I think there are fantastic movies being made today and there were equally fantastic movies made years ago.
Annie
