True Grit review from Will Carry

Will Carry

Will Carry

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
762
Reaction score
599
Location
North Carolina
When I heard that the Coen brothers were going to do a remake of True Grit, I got excited. I thought the Coen brothers had seen something lacking in the original 1969 classic or that they had some new twist. I thought this movie was going to be great. Maybe it would spur Hollywood to start making westerns again. I was very disappointed. There are so many great stories about the old west that have never been told, stories that would make a great western but they had to remake True Grit?
Now Jeff Bridges is a great actor, better than John Wayne by far but John Wayne IS Rooster Cogburn. Jeff Bridges is just a great actor. In 1969, when Rooster Cogburn put his reigns in his teeth and said "Fill your hands, you son of a bitch!", the crowd cheered! In the 2010 version, the crowd was looking for the exits. The Coen brothers did nothing to improve True Grit. Rest easy Duke.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
I believe that first and foremost this is most likely an affectation. Possibly an attempt to get attention. Possibly they want someone to be concerned that they aren't well. If this is the case, I would talk to them at least in passing and ask why they say that. Another one could be that they have self-acknowledgement issues. Possibly guilt/shame/embarassment. Possibly low self-esteem. They may feel like an outsider as this would be a symbolic way to represent the self in a disasociated manner. People who do this may be coping with some issues that need to be brought into light. I would look at other aspects of their behavior. If it is deliberated towards some and not others, those who they direct this impersonal self-reference towards may be people who they feel neglected by. They may be sanely trying to say, in an oblique manner, "You don't acknowledge me, and so now neither do I." Possible Passive-aggressive tendacies? I would say these are most likely only because I have personally done this in my youth for reasons stated herein.

Why do you ask?
 
Seems to me that it was Mark Twain who said that referring to oneself in the third person was only appropriate for royalty and persons with tapeworms...

That's what we think, anyway...
 
Sipowicz I see you badge icon, are you the a forum grammer police? 'Cuase if you is then you gonna love me. I actually put my name on the title field to differentiate it form all the other True Grit posts. I does appear that I'm talking in third person, but it is an isolated incident. Of course now, when ever I respond you any of your posts, I'll do in third person. :D
 
Will Carry said:
I believe that first and foremost this is most likely an affectation. Possibly an attempt to get attention. Possibly they want someone to be concerned that they aren't well. If this is the case, I would talk to them at least in passing and ask why they say that. Another one could be that they have self-acknowledgement issues. Possibly guilt/shame/embarassment. Possibly low self-esteem. They may feel like an outsider as this would be a symbolic way to represent the self in a disasociated manner. People who do this may be coping with some issues that need to be brought into light. I would look at other aspects of their behavior. If it is deliberated towards some and not others, those who they direct this impersonal self-reference towards may be people who they feel neglected by. They may be sanely trying to say, in an oblique manner, "You don't acknowledge me, and so now neither do I." Possible Passive-aggressive tendacies? I would say these are most likely only because I have personally done this in my youth for reasons stated herein.

Why do you ask?
Click to expand...
:D:D I am belly laughing.;)
 
JcMack said:
Maurice says that judging by this thread a lot of folks got fire water for Christmas.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, and if so, many tapeworms are, no doubt, figuratively, if not literally, applauding, or whatever may be the tapeworm equivalent...

We are as yet unaware of any unwelcome outcomes of this possibility...
 
Back to the subject, I saw the movie last night and thought it was great. Now, I've never seen the original, so I can't compare, but I never was a huge John Wayne fan anyway. I just liked the chacter of Rooster, and I thought Bridges gave it justice. I want to read the book and see how close the movie followed it. I think remakes of old films are a great idea, mostly because the crap coming out of Hollywood makes NO sense to me for the most part. The last movie I saw in a theater was "No Country for Old Men." I haven't seen anything come out since that I thought was worth paying my money for before it comes out on video. I thought Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger were great in the remake of the old Steve McQueen flick "The Getaway." I don't care about the actors politics, or their gun views either for that matter. If it's entertaining, which "True Grit" certainly was, that's really all that matters. It sure as hell beat sitting at home and watching some dumb reality show, or hearing about all the bad crap happening all over the world on one of the 24 hour news channels. Great acting, great film, and VERY well cast in my opinion. Good show.
 
Just got home from seeing it, and while I read the book and saw the original I went into with as clear a mind as I could. Even though I was prone to try to remember the book, I never tried to compare it to John Wayne.
The movie did follow the book pretty good...especially the dialogue which I remember to be somewhat confusing when I read at about 7 or 8.
I think it was a great movie. I think all the actors were great in their parts. I dont think it was any better or worse than the original...I rank them as equals.
John Wayne will always be my hero not because he was a good actor, but because he was a great American who stood up for what he believed and no one will ever take that away.
 
jframe said:
I don't care about the actors politics, or their gun views either for that matter.
Click to expand...

I agree for the most part...but I will not watch anything with Sean Penn or Jane Fonda in it. I think they are traitors who have betrayed America, and American servicemen in particular. I won't add to their bank accounts!

As for True Grit, we saw it last night. I like the movie, and actually like Matt Damon better than Glen Campbell. I read somewhere that "Prior to True Grit, Glen Campbell had never acted in a movie. After True Grit, his record remains unchanged." :D

I like and admire John Wayne, and he is my most favorite actor...but I did like the new version better. Except for the ending, that is...I liked the ending of the original much better.
 
I am a huge John Wayne fan, my Dad took me to see "The Green Berets" when I was 7 or 8 (did not go over well with my mother, she thought we were going to see a Jerry Lewis movie). The thought of anyone playing the role of Rooster Cogburn other than the Duke makes me shudder, it would be like doing a remake of "Casablanca" with Kid Rock playing the part of Ricky, or having Britney Spears play the role of Scarlett in "Gone with the Wind". There are simply some classics you don't screw with in my books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NYlakesider
house stolen, true or false!
2
Replies
30
Views
868
soFlaNative
soFlaNative
B
My True Love Gave to Me
Replies
17
Views
709
Skeet 028
S
DARE
Will Rogers Said....
Replies
12
Views
495
DARE
DARE
F
Twisters movie review
Replies
12
Views
537
sheepdawg
sheepdawg
LVSteve
Never mind, done the math now: I knew it was too good to be true
Replies
7
Views
689
GaryS
GaryS

Latest posts

Back
Top