Movie True Grit

[RobbyRoy]

How'd Barry Pepper go?

Might go see this tomorrow or Friday, provided my flu clears up.

 

[hawkheart]

The Pep was great in a small role. Film is good without being anything like the 'masterpiece' it's touted as. Solid western, nothing more.

 

[___ccroo___]

Haven't seen anywhere "touted as masterpiece", great flick, waaaaaay better than the originaly same titled, dated, inferior version.

 

[champswon]

The Dude does the Duke!

It was superb!

 

[Crimson Azure]

Saw it, was good.

The girls acting was strong for her age & so was MD & JB.

Other than that not much else to say.

 

[Dry Rot]

More than a few poor reflections on John Wayne here.

I used to totally agree with all that, until I saw The Searchers on the big screen. And more recently, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence.

The Searchers is a terrific film, and so is Wayne in it.

 

[Allbetsroff]

Lol at the hilarity of using the word fighting in the same sentence of John Wayne. More accurate would be draft dodger.

 

[callas]

for me it was just an average film. great cinematography and good acting (although you have to really concentrate on what the hell jeff bridges is mumbling about and also the rattlesnakes saved this film from being a total snorefest !)... if this film was directed by any one else but the coen brothers do you think it would be showered with so much acclaim and oscar nominations?

 

[Rooface]

Brilliant movie. Jeff Bridges was, as always, fantastic. Thought Matt Damon was really good too. Would've liked to see him with more of a role, but I suppose that's the way the book was written.

Hailee Steinfeld was brilliant as well. Incredibly performance for someone so young. And I really enjoyed Josh Brolins brief appearance, he never disappoints.

Well said, the girl is a star in this movie.
Brolin was great in the recent Jonah Hex, with Malkovich.

Wayne and Bridges are worlds apart in acting ability and well, everything else. Remake craps over the original.

 

[Rooface]

... if this film was directed by any one else but the coen brothers do you think it would be showered with so much acclaim and oscar nominations?

No because other than maybe Clint Eastwood it would not have been as well directed

 

[Paranoid]

for me it was just an average film. great cinematography and good acting (although you have to really concentrate on what the hell jeff bridges is mumbling about and also the rattlesnakes saved this film from being a total snorefest !)... if this film was directed by any one else but the coen brothers do you think it would be showered with so much acclaim and oscar nominations?

I was just about to say how dull the movie was. Very dissapointing for a Coen film. I recently saw a film called Shotgun Stories, something that garnered critical acclaim, something that I found terribly boring. I don't find movies entertaining when nothing happens.

 

[Magpiespower]

Really enjoyed it.

Coen brothers rarely disappoint.

Master craftsmen.

However, polished as all their films are, none have ever really kicked me in the guts...

 

[RobbyRoy]

Saw it and loved it. In some ways it was a standard western with the revenge storyline and scenery (though Deakins photography was beyond the standard), but also quite untypical with the Coens/Portis dialogue and the unconventional screenplay. Interesting that people found it dull. I was expecting duller but found myself even thrilled or humoured all the way through.

 

[Righteo]

I can understand how people see it as slow-paced, but disagree with those who reckon it's boring. I expect most Westerns to be relatively slow-paced, but as long as the characters are engaging and the plot is sound along with captivating scenery then s'all good; this movie ticked all those boxes.

The only issues I had were Bridges sometimes hard to understand (the heavy doses of Old West lingo didn't help but luckily I've played Red Dead Redemption)

Enjoyed Damon in his very self-serious Texas Ranger role.

 

[Firebat]

The movie seemed to travel at a nice, comfortable pace until the end, when it's almost like the Coens were like ''oh dang, we gotta finish this up!' I thought the end was quite rushed.

Good movie though. Barry Pepper was a bit of a stand out despite his limited screen time.

 

[Righteo]

The movie seemed to travel at a nice, comfortable pace until the end, when it's almost like the Coens were like ''oh dang, we gotta finish this up!' I thought the end was quite rushed.

Good movie though. Barry Pepper was a bit of a stand out despite his limited screen time.

Yeah it would have been nice for him and Brolin to score a bit more screen time, but I guess in most pursuits/chases you don't see the villains till the end.

 

[Dry Rot]

for me it was just an average film. great cinematography and good acting (although you have to really concentrate on what the hell jeff bridges is mumbling about and also the rattlesnakes saved this film from being a total snorefest !)... if this film was directed by any one else but the coen brothers do you think it would be showered with so much acclaim and oscar nominations?

+1.

Beautifully shot, desperately ordinary film.

And an ordinary western. And an ordinary re-make.

 

[hawkheart]

Test test

 

[Kirby]

I thought it was very very good.

 

[wally funk]

saw it tonight. went into it with fairly high expectations, being a fan of bridges and the coens, and still thoroughly enjoyed it. ludicrous that hailee steinfeld was nominated for best supporting actress rather than actress - she's in every scene! deserving of the nomination, though. she does very well.

 

[chesson]

ludicrous that hailee steinfeld was nominated for best supporting actress rather than actress - she's in every scene! deserving of the nomination, though. she does very well.

Indeed, she is great in it.

And Bridges>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Wayne.

 

[d33my]

Have to say I was disappointed with it. The story never really grabbed me, a few times I was looking at my watch...it dragged a bit.

Some good acting, without being stunning. Visually the film looked awesome. But I'm of the school that a good story should be focussed on before visual brilliance, and always should.

I know the story is not the Coen brothers fault, but can anybody tell me why they thought a remake was in order? Can someone who has seen both tell me what the Coens add? Because from what I've heard the original is a good film in its own right.