I do have to agree, but not for the reasons you mentioned. I think that John Wayne's westerns have a lot to offer to modern audiences... the problem lies in trying to find someone to fill his boots. And that problem just might be insurmountable.
True Grit remake
- Thread starter A beaker full of death
- Start date
I do have to agree, but not for the reasons you mentioned. I think that John Wayne's westerns have a lot to offer to modern audiences... the problem lies in trying to find someone to fill his boots. And that problem just might be insurmountable.
^ There was a fellow on the In The Heat of the Night tv series who reminded me a little of the duke, though was not as good looking. Alan Autry - distantly related to Gene Autry, I think. He was mayor of Fresno for a while, too.
Too old now, of course.
Too old now, of course.
I've always felt Tom Selleck could have been a big Western actor given the right material. I think Quigley Down Under was a very enjoyable film and I wish we could have seen him in more vehicles like that. I thought he did well in The Sacketts and even more so in The Shadow Riders that were made for TV.
Indeed.
I just wanted to comment also that, even though he is gone also, I think that if things had gone just slightly differently in Brian Keith's life, he might have EASILY had the career John Wayne had. There was someone, I think, capable of filling the Duke's boots.
Well, to be fair, the western genre has been mostly on life support for most their careers. Although Ford has made one western, albeit a comedic one: THE FRISCO KID.
And Hanks has played a toy cowboy.
Yeah, I have to agree with an earlier post, it would be very tough to fill John Wayne's boots for many of his roles. I have had ideas about this, for years and never really had too many solutions. However, after seeing 3:10 to Yuma and more recently The Assassination of Jesse James, I think that maybe either Russell Crowe or Brad Pitt could fit the bill. I think that both have proved that they are solid enough actors to carry a movie, and I think both fit into the western genre well. They both seem tough enough and have the look. Definitely still young enough as well. I also, for a while, thought that David Keith might be able to be a stand in for the Duke.
TV spots
Three New ‘True Grit’ Television Spots And Posters http://screenrant.com/true-grit-tv-spots-posters-rothc-89597/
Three New ‘True Grit’ Television Spots And Posters http://screenrant.com/true-grit-tv-spots-posters-rothc-89597/
I have often been uninterested in westerns until I moved to Seoul. John Wayne's films are pretty cheap to buy here as he's quite unknown to the average movie goer under 40 here. I never really appreciated his work so much, and because of his iconic western image his ability as an actor is best seen in stuff like True Grit where he plays against type. I also like his sea pictures like Wake of the Red Witch and Sea Chase. Two other against type roles that he plays very well.
Just saw a screening of it today.
It's GREAT. Fantastic. Like Miller's Crossing good.
Jeff Bridges is stunning. Sometimes a little mumbly, but, well, he's drunk. Great, just great.
The girl, damn. True Grit that one.
And it's great to look at. It's beautifully shot, framed, it's a really good movie.
It's GREAT. Fantastic. Like Miller's Crossing good.
Jeff Bridges is stunning. Sometimes a little mumbly, but, well, he's drunk. Great, just great.
The girl, damn. True Grit that one.
And it's great to look at. It's beautifully shot, framed, it's a really good movie.
Or, is it Hello, cowhands... ?
I've never seen the first movie actually. And after this... I feel like after this... it would look silly.
I don't think this movie will disappoint.
Exactly! Gettin a little tired of the "no remake!!" comments. It's not a remake.
Well, I have now seen the new True Grit for the second time (not because it was so great, just a "You're going? Yeah I'll go again" sort of thing). And it is a good movie, very good. I thought it would blow me away and the '69 version would pale in comparison, but I have to say, the old movie still holds up very well. The ending is totally different, of course, and good for the Coens on that point. And the grittier, more authentic look is more in keeping with out modern expectations. But if you can look past the moviemaking conventions of 40 years ago and focus on the characters and the story, the first True Grit is still a fine film, and not silly at all.
The Duke or the Dude? It's hard to say. So much of Wayne's performance was great because he was playing with his larger-than-life, movie superstar image. Bridges is wonderful, gruff and mushmouthed, but it's not a revelation, we all know he can do that stuff. I can't choose, both are great. I will say, though, that I'll take Wayne's affronted reading of the immortal "Fill your hand" line over Bridges's.
Hailee Steinfield is terrific. Kim Darby was excellent, too, but she was over 20 years old, while this Mattie was really 14. Very impressive.
I didn't think True Grit was "sublime" Coen Bros, like No Country For Old Men or Blood Simple or Fargo, but it's a damn good movie and better than most. It's better than the '69 movie, overall, but not that much better. And the novel is truly great, and not straying too far from it is really why both movies succeed.
--Justin
It's a very good movie (and much funnier than I was expecting). Steinfeld was particularly impressive.
I thought the ending was unsatisfactory; while there's not a lot of buildup between Ned Pepper and Rooster, their confrontation was reasonably well-done, but James Brolin is completely wasted in his role, and the epilogue in the future adds absolutely nothing.
I thought the ending was unsatisfactory; while there's not a lot of buildup between Ned Pepper and Rooster, their confrontation was reasonably well-done, but James Brolin is completely wasted in his role, and the epilogue in the future adds absolutely nothing.
I saw it tonight, and while I'm usually against remakes, I really liked this one. Which kind of surprised me because I'm such a HUGE John Wayne fan. And while I realize that this was not a remake in the true sense of the word, I think a lot of Hollywood types could learn from this adaptation (I'm looking at you, producers of Hawaii 5-0).
What struck me is how some parts were so different from Wayne's version, but yet several scenes were almost verbatim the old film. I agree with the sentiment that the epilogue didn't really add anything. That was the one part of the movie that I truly disliked.
So the bottom line is, if a anti-remake, big John Wayne fan like myself can enjoy this movie, it says a lot about how good the movie was.
What struck me is how some parts were so different from Wayne's version, but yet several scenes were almost verbatim the old film. I agree with the sentiment that the epilogue didn't really add anything. That was the one part of the movie that I truly disliked.
So the bottom line is, if a anti-remake, big John Wayne fan like myself can enjoy this movie, it says a lot about how good the movie was.
I saw it a few days ago and I thought it was good, not great. It took me a while to get into it and Bridges' mumbling didn't help. Agreed that the ending was unsatisfactory and not big enough.
Still though, I did end up enjoying the film. I love the way they shoot westerns now and this one is no exception. For a PG-13 film, they don't shy away from the violence and the action is good. Totally agreed about Hailee Steinfield, who gave an Oscar nomination performance here and completely carries a film full of big-name, talented actors. Despite the mumbling, Bridges turns in a very good, entertaining, and funny performance. Same with Damon. Brolin is definitely underused but does a good job for the time he's in there.
Still though, I did end up enjoying the film. I love the way they shoot westerns now and this one is no exception. For a PG-13 film, they don't shy away from the violence and the action is good. Totally agreed about Hailee Steinfield, who gave an Oscar nomination performance here and completely carries a film full of big-name, talented actors. Despite the mumbling, Bridges turns in a very good, entertaining, and funny performance. Same with Damon. Brolin is definitely underused but does a good job for the time he's in there.
Yeah I'd have to agree with that. While I enjoyed his performance, there were a number of lines that I simply didn't understand what he said.
