CTF
Sr Member
"I'm your huckleberry..."
I always loved Tombstone, but I haven't seen it in years.
Anyway, I can't wait to see True Grit.
True Grit remake
- Thread starter Wes R
- Start date
"I'm your huckleberry..."
I always loved Tombstone, but I haven't seen it in years.
Anyway, I can't wait to see True Grit.
Qui-Gonzalez
Master Member
A name, the same plot, same characters, same settings. I guess that is why. I still cannot wrap my head around killing off Leboeuf in the Wayne version.
I haven't seen Tombstone in years either, but I don't think it can hang with the new True Grit.
From what I remember, it was pretty laughable except for Val Kilmer's great performance.
Jeff Bridges sure showed a ton of emotion with one eye covered for the whole film. I really loved it.
Of course just one man's opinion...
happy new year!
brad
From what I remember, it was pretty laughable except for Val Kilmer's great performance.
Jeff Bridges sure showed a ton of emotion with one eye covered for the whole film. I really loved it.
Of course just one man's opinion...
happy new year!
brad
wuher da brewer
Sr Member
I think the original ending and LaBeouf's original ending were superior to the Coens' ending. Am I the only one?
I will agree that Tombstone was a fun and loose movie that was certainly very "popcorn" in nature, but the thing is, it wasn't trying to be anything else. I think Wyatt Earp was trying so hard to be another Dances with Wolves and while it had its moments (none of which I can specifically remember, which should tell you something) I think it mostly fell into the typical Costner long-winded drivel with little to no payoff. I LOVE Tombstone. I wanted to love Wyatt Earp and while I did like it, it was pretty forgettable compared to Tombstone.
I am in FULL agreement that Open Range was vastly underrated and missed by many. GREAT film and a Costner film that DID pay off!
wuher da brewer
Sr Member
The end was supposed to be 25 years later, but the actress looked 40 maybe 50 years older. She didn't much resemble the girl either.
JD
Master Member
I saw it last night. It had a lot of hype to live up to from all the reviews I've read.
I'm not really a western fan, I've never seen the Unforgiven and I really don't think I've seen a John Wayne flick all the way through - I do have fond memories of The Lone Ranger televsion program as a kid (and did see that ambomination of Lone Ranger movie more years ago than I care to remember). I love Tombstone - and much of that has to do with Kilmer's performance than anything else. I love me some spaghetti westerns, but usually those come in small doses, never saw Dances with Wolves, I did see Costner's Wyatt Earp, which got lost in some quest to be something more than it was. I do appreciate a good film, but I really don't go out of my way for western's. I do realize there are some westerns I do need to see - Unforgiven is probably at the top of that list.
All that said in done, I started to get worried about a quarter way in True Grit. Where the Coen's too worried about mood, setting up and the characters (caricatures?) than the story. We have some great performances here but they seemed to revel a little too much in showcasing and allowing the plot to plod along. Maybe it dragged a little too much - maybe it could've used a little trimming here and there. I never really got the sense they were ever really close to catching Chaney - maybe I missed something.
Despite it dragging that little bit, once it got going everything paid off. Everything clicked and everything worked. It wasn't until into probably a little halfway through True Grit did I think Jeff Bridges truly stole the film... I think he lost a bit during the drunk scenes where Lebouf bails on them only to recover gloriously at the final gunfight.
Not the best film that I saw from 2010, I still give that to Let Me In. But, True Grit ranks pretty highly with the best of 2010 - much, much better than Inception (which I don't get people's fascination with).
Jeff Bridges, while always a decent actor has really recreated himself and become someone to truly watch. I'm not sure if this performance is Oscar worthy - but its worth some consideration - sometimes it seemed a little too forced and a little too over the top. But, that's acting - ain't it?
(Why do I always confuse Jeff Bridges and Jeff Daniels!?!?)
I'm not really a western fan, I've never seen the Unforgiven and I really don't think I've seen a John Wayne flick all the way through - I do have fond memories of The Lone Ranger televsion program as a kid (and did see that ambomination of Lone Ranger movie more years ago than I care to remember). I love Tombstone - and much of that has to do with Kilmer's performance than anything else. I love me some spaghetti westerns, but usually those come in small doses, never saw Dances with Wolves, I did see Costner's Wyatt Earp, which got lost in some quest to be something more than it was. I do appreciate a good film, but I really don't go out of my way for western's. I do realize there are some westerns I do need to see - Unforgiven is probably at the top of that list.
All that said in done, I started to get worried about a quarter way in True Grit. Where the Coen's too worried about mood, setting up and the characters (caricatures?) than the story. We have some great performances here but they seemed to revel a little too much in showcasing and allowing the plot to plod along. Maybe it dragged a little too much - maybe it could've used a little trimming here and there. I never really got the sense they were ever really close to catching Chaney - maybe I missed something.
Despite it dragging that little bit, once it got going everything paid off. Everything clicked and everything worked. It wasn't until into probably a little halfway through True Grit did I think Jeff Bridges truly stole the film... I think he lost a bit during the drunk scenes where Lebouf bails on them only to recover gloriously at the final gunfight.
Not the best film that I saw from 2010, I still give that to Let Me In. But, True Grit ranks pretty highly with the best of 2010 - much, much better than Inception (which I don't get people's fascination with).
Jeff Bridges, while always a decent actor has really recreated himself and become someone to truly watch. I'm not sure if this performance is Oscar worthy - but its worth some consideration - sometimes it seemed a little too forced and a little too over the top. But, that's acting - ain't it?
(Why do I always confuse Jeff Bridges and Jeff Daniels!?!?)
Qui-Gonzalez
Master Member
I thought they showed her at two different ages. On the train to meet Rooster, she seemed younger than she did standing over his grave at her family plot. That could just be me though.
rocketeer25
Sr Member
Hadn't planned on seeing the movie, but I'm out of town on business and had an evening to kill. SO GLAD I saw this! Great performances from everyone, loved the dialogue especially.
I do have to say that it was hard to make out Rooster and the girl at some points. I tried hard to catch everything, but eventually realized that most of what I missed was not pertinent to the story, but was there as part of the the character's character.
I do have to say that it was hard to make out Rooster and the girl at some points. I tried hard to catch everything, but eventually realized that most of what I missed was not pertinent to the story, but was there as part of the the character's character.
Jedi2016
Sr Member
Yes, there were two parts to the epilogue. One when Mattie goes to meet Rooster, which was probably indeed around 25 years after the main story, and then there's another sequence of her about twenty years after that. IMDB only has a listing for the first one, as "40-year old Mattie", probably because the older older one didn't have any dialog.
Ghostsoldier
Sr Member
If you remember, at Rooster's graveside, Mattie mentions LaBoeuf probably now being around 75, or closer to 80...to me, that makes that scene many years later, because he looked to only be in his late 20's to mid-30's in the movie...
And yes, an excellent movie...this, and 3:10 to Yuma being two of my favorite recent remakes...:thumbsup
Rob
El Duderino
Sr Member
I just watched it today, loved it.
Saw it, loved it, but I've just gotta come out and say it.
The MPAA is BROKEN! Seriously, how did this film escape with a PG-13 rating and a movie with no violence, no sex nor even really bad manners like "The King's Speech" get an R rating just for language used in a medicinal sense?
True Grit features three on-screen hangings, fingers getting chopped off, guns and knives used at minors, point blank shots to the face complete with splattering red blood (always a baddie), animal cruelty and dead rotting corpses.
What does the King's Speech have? A scene where his speech helper tells him to say fu** because he's never uttered the word freely before. This is the movie that they deemed to be inappropriate for audiences more than True Grit?
Sorry, just had to lay that out there.
The MPAA is BROKEN! Seriously, how did this film escape with a PG-13 rating and a movie with no violence, no sex nor even really bad manners like "The King's Speech" get an R rating just for language used in a medicinal sense?
True Grit features three on-screen hangings, fingers getting chopped off, guns and knives used at minors, point blank shots to the face complete with splattering red blood (always a baddie), animal cruelty and dead rotting corpses.
What does the King's Speech have? A scene where his speech helper tells him to say fu** because he's never uttered the word freely before. This is the movie that they deemed to be inappropriate for audiences more than True Grit?
Sorry, just had to lay that out there.
Ghostsoldier
Sr Member
Don't forget "Indian children abuse".....:lol
Rob
Yeah, my wife almost wet herself when Moon lost his fingers....and Quincy took the shot to the face! :confused
Rob
El Duderino
Sr Member
I laughed so hard at the "Indian Child Abuse" scene, despite being Native American myself I thought it was funny. I'm surprised this movie was PG-13 as well, it could of easily of been Rated R.
Sad story. During the opening part of the movie where the three men are about to be hanged, I laughed so loudly when the Native American was interrupted when he was about to give his speech and than immediately hanged the next second. The problem? I was the only person in a packed theater that laughed. I felt miserable throughout the rest of the film because now I was thinking that everyone thinks I hate Native Americans.
One of the things that really makes the animal abusing children scene stand out for me is that it sets up a character arch for Rooster. This guy cares for animals and does not tolerate cruelty towards them even if it's done by kids who probably don't know any better. Than in the end
when he's carrying Mattie on her horse in order to save her from a snake bite, he really shows his dedication and care to her when he forces her horse to the breaking point of exhaustion by stabbing it in order to keep moving. This is a guy who went simply wanting to ignore this girl to doing what ever is necessary to save her, and thinking back to that scene with the indian kids I thought helped to reinforce that.
