Author Topic: True Grit 1969 vs. 2010  (Read 1404 times)

Offline GSyren

  • Heavy Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1083
  • Country: se
    • View Profile
True Grit 1969 vs. 2010
« on: May 22, 2014, 11:42:13 AM »
Yesterday I rewatched the 1969 True Grit with John Wayne, immediately followed by the 2010 version by the Coen brothers. I liked both films, but for me the original has the edge.

John Wayne vs. Jeff Bridges as Rooster Cogburn. Well, I think it's safe to say the Bridges is the more versatile actor. But this role is just so perfect for John Wayne that I cannot in all honesty say that I think Jeff Bridges could match it.

Glen Campbell vs. Matt Damon as La Boeuf. Well, no contest. Campbell is a singer, not an actor.

Kim Darby vs. Haillee Steinfeld as Mattie Ross. Tough call. Haillee is too cute, in my opinion. But she is the right age, and Kim was 22, playing 14.

Robert Duvall vs. Barry Pepper as Ned Pepper. Again, no contest. I wouldn't say that Barry Pepper is a bad actor, but he is no Robert Duvall.

Jeff Corey vs. Josh Brolin as Tom Chaney. Two good actors. Personally I found Corey more believable as a low down character that would shoot the person that had helped him. But Brolin was good, too.

Henry Hathaway vs. Joel & Ethan Coen as director. The Coens don't have nearly as many directorial credits as Hathaway. But their films are much more consistently good. Hathaway has some hits and some clunkers. He is usually good with Westerns, though. The Coens' film has a darker tone.

The main reason I liked the 1969 version better is undoubtedly John Wayne. I love John Wayne when he does what he does best. And he does it here. Then there may be a question of a generation gap. I'm not sure that the younger generation gets how good Wayne was.

Anyway, these are both very good films. If you haven't seen any of them, pick one. If you've seen one, try the other one too.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 11:44:18 AM by GSyren »

Offline DSig

  • Heavy Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
    • View Profile
Re: True Grit 1969 vs. 2010
« Reply #1 on: May 22, 2014, 07:18:06 PM »
I totally agree with almost everything you said.  I do like Jeff Bridges very much and Coen Brothers have it all over Henry Hathaway ... but in this instance it is John Wayne that this film is about.  When John Wayne was on he was ON.  Never a great actor (or good at picking what he played) he could bring it when the character fit him.  Both are great films and should be watched for what they are.  I love them both very much.
Thank you
David

Mustrum_Ridcully

  • Guest
Re: True Grit 1969 vs. 2010
« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2014, 07:23:40 PM »
Will watch the original tonight.

I'm sure that I have already watched it on TV a looong time ago, but watching the remake didn't ring a bell ... I'm getting extremely forgetfull lately.

Mustrum_Ridcully

  • Guest
Re: True Grit 1969 vs. 2010
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2014, 12:09:43 AM »
OK, finished.

I prefer the remake, but mostly for the darker mood and the more convincing end.
Almost completely agree with your comparison, except in two items:

John Wayne vs. Jeff Bridges: They both give us their cynic, old-age roles with certain amount of self-irony. Both show us more of how THEY want to be seen, and they do so brilliantly. Tie

Kim Darby vs. Hailee Steinfield: Much more convincing role-play by Hailee, and the Make-Up artist removed a lot of her cuteness.

Both are great movies, but I like the remake slightly better.
If I'd award 1/4 stars it would be 4.25 : 4.5.
I don't, so it's 4 : 4.5

Offline Dragonfire

  • Mega Heavy Poster
  • *******
  • Posts: 6911
    • View Profile
    • Dragonfire88 Pbwiki
Re: True Grit 1969 vs. 2010
« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2014, 03:54:24 AM »
I have seen them both and read the book.  The remake is closer to book - including the ending.