True Grit - the Dude redo the Duke

[Salty O'Rourke]

Some consider it sacrilege, others believe this is one of the greatest westerns of our times (and there are very few I might add). I fall with the later crowd. I saw True Grit two nights ago, and I was immersed by every minute of it. Jeff "The Dude" Bridges sure did a good job portraying the role of Rooster Cogburn, although I'm not sure just how well John Wayne himself pulled it off. You see, I've yet to see the 1969 version of True Grit. I guess I'll have to rent it through Netflix soon. Then I can decide for myself which version I liked better.

I definitely recommend you see the original. Take note of how Wayne uses his "good eye" - from the way he cocks his head and rolls his eye around, you feel as if he's truly been absent the eye for years. Actually, his patch was made so he could see through it (so as not to mess up his depth perception). Stuff like that (along with his hand movements while talking and the way his body language changed depending on which characters were in the scene) is what won him the Oscar. Jeff Bridges seems like a guy who just put on a patch to go to work that day.

 

[The Ringneck]

To me Jeff had the character down. I saw the original first, then read the book. Wayne, with few exceptions, plays John Wayne---and has made some really enjoyable movies and may be "the" movie cowboy. But after book I saw Rooster as a far more miserable old drunk, kind of like relatives I have would behave. Honestly, Jack Elam might have made a better Rooster in '69. Bridges seems like someone who lives like Rooster every day, Wayne is Wayne with scenes of Roosterisms.

 

[ukali1066]

I'm a big Western film and Western history buff.....but I've never been a John Wayne fan.... I was raised on Eastwood...
So I saw this film with an open mind and loved it !
I like my Westerns bleak and with the characters looking/speaking the part....and this film delivers
I found the girl to be very funny with her smartmouth comments... Leboeuf was full of himself but noble....Cogburn a crusty old degenerate with a heart...
The screenplay was a joy [ due to the book, which I have not read ]
One to add to my select and very snobbish DVD collection

 

[Salty O'Rourke]

To me Jeff had the character down. I saw the original first, then read the book. Wayne, with few exceptions, plays John Wayne---and has made some really enjoyable movies and may be "the" movie cowboy. But after book I saw Rooster as a far more miserable old drunk, kind of like relatives I have would behave. Honestly, Jack Elam might have made a better Rooster in '69. Bridges seems like someone who lives like Rooster every day, Wayne is Wayne with scenes of Roosterisms.

Part of the problem I have with Bridges' interpretation lies in the Coen's re-imaging of Rooster from "mean" to "sadistic". The bit with LeBoeuf's tongue is a Coen invention, and it makes Cogburn seem malevolent in the extreme. Marquerite Roberts' Rooster was as Portis created him, a mean drunk, and I can believe her Rooster would make that cross-country dash to save Mattie. I can't see the Coens' Rooster doing any thing but using Little Blackie to round up the scattered horses, packing the bodies of Pepper, Chaney, et al off to collect the various rewards and leaving Mattie to her own devices. I still can't figure out why the Coens re-wrote the whole Cogburn/LeBoeuf partnership - it does nothing to advance the story; it actually makes the last half of the film fall apart. All it does is put the Coen Brothers stamp on the whole project....I guess I answered my own question.

 

[wildturkey8]

I thought Jeff Bridges knocked it out of the park. I actually liked it better than the original. I did, however, sorely miss Rooster's cat General Sterling Price.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

Went and saw the remake last week. It wasn't bad, you'll never top the duke, but I still think it was worth seeing.

 

[Scotus]

I thought it was worth seeing and is a better movie than the original. I watched the original after seeing this one and thought the original seemed corny in comparison.

 

[The Good]

I thought Jeff Bridges knocked it out of the park. I actually liked it better than the original. I did, however, sorely miss Rooster's cat General Sterling Price.

Thanks for mentioning that. Actually, I really don't like cats, so I'm personally glad that the Coen's omitted the inclusion.

Was there a cat in the original 1969 film, or just the novel?

 

[eveready]

I'll take the Dude over the Duke....Jeff Bridges is the better actor, hands down...........(in my opinion)

 

[Benzadmiral]

Thanks for mentioning that. Actually, I really don't like cats, so I'm personally glad that the Coen's omitted the inclusion.

Was there a cat in the original 1969 film, or just the novel?

Both. The cat lived in the back of the store where Rooster camped out (you can't really call it "lived"). In the film he was a red tabby.

That was one scene I missed them redoing from the original -- I can't recall if it was in the novel -- Rooster's drunken speech to Mattie as he waves his gun at a rat who's eating the store's grain: "This is a rat writ, a writ for a rat, and this is lawful service of same." To Mattie, as the rat ignores him: "See? They don't pay attention." BLAM! Rooster snaps off a shot, Mattie jumps three feet in the air, and the rat is quite dead.

Mattie picks it up by its tail and tosses it out, telling the cat, "That was your job!" So it wasn't a cutesy cat scene. It established Rooster as a decent shot even when drunk, and Mattie as not too squeamish to toss out the rat's corpse.

That said -- and this comes from someone who has been crazy about Kim Darby since 1969 -- I loved the new film.