True Grit (2010) User Reviews

Time just gets away from us.

[Hey_Sweden · 8/10 · 29 November 2017]

Jeff Bridges gets to put his own spin on the character of Reuben "Rooster" Cogburn, first portrayed by an Oscar-winning John Wayne in the 1969 film adaptation. Rooster is hired by a very plucky 14 year old girl, Mattie Ross (debuting Hailee Steinfeld), who wants to avenge her father. Dad was murdered by the cowardly Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), who made out for Indian territory and who may now be riding with an outlaw, Ned Pepper (Barry Pepper), and his gang. They are joined by a determined Texas Ranger, LaBoeuf (Matt Damon), who wants to arrest Chaney for a crime committed in the Lone Star state.

This new version of the Charles Portis novel was scripted and directed by the great filmmaking brothers Joel and Ethan Coen, who treat the material respectfully, even reverently. The dialogue is antiquated, yet quite literate, and it truly comes to life when spoken by this well-chosen cast. The story is straightforward and without filler, the pacing very efficient. Serious at times (and funny at other times), the film never veers too far into melodrama. It hits the ground running, with an older Mattie (Elizabeth Marvel) narrating and giving us the back story of Mr. Ross' killing. Two frequent Coen brothers collaborators work some real magic: cinematographer Roger Deakins, whose widescreen compositions are wonderful, and composer Carter Burwell, whose music is breathtaking.

Bridges completely disappears inside the role of the surly, tough, hard drinking marshal, while Damon gives one of his better performances. Brolin and Pepper don't show up until around the 80 minute mark, but do extremely effective work. As soon as you meet Chaney, you know you loathe him; he's that much of a heel. The strong supporting cast includes Dakin Matthews, Paul Rae, Domhnall Gleeson, and Leon Russom; it's also great to see Jarlath Conroy from George Romeros' "Day of the Dead" as the undertaker. But young Steinfeld leaves the greatest impression, giving us a heroine who is capable, determined, and very mature for her age, a girl who can hold her own dealing with a character like Stonehill (Matthews).

"True Grit" 2010 is sometimes violent (and strikingly so), but is basically just a good, solid example of impassioned storytelling that maintains viewer interest for the better part of two hours.

Eight out of 10.

Good ol' fashioned storytelling

[Monotreme02 · 8/10 · 23 December 2010]

As is to be expected, the film has all the classic Coen flourishes, first and foremost its use of language. The Coens have always been impeccably tuned in to language and accents, from the most creative use of swear words in The Big Lebowski and Burn After Reading to the colorful, stylized prose of The Hudsucker Proxy and The Man Who Wasn't There to the very distinct accents in Raising Arizona, Fargo, O Brother, Where Art Thou? and No Country for Old Men. In classic Coen fashion, the use of language is very much emphasized in True Grit. The characters have a very distinct use of words, lifted right out of the novel and, as it feels at least, right out of the time period the film takes place in. Unlike something like Deadwood which features a very modernized and stylized version of 18th century speak, the dialogue in True Grit sounds completely authentic and, along with the impeccable and accurate-feeling costume and set design, really adds to the realism of the world True Grit creates. Accents are also very important – the harsh Southern drawl that the Coens have always been attracted to is very prominent and plays a very large role in the film.

As has become expected of the brothers, especially in recent years, the film looks incredibly beautiful, mainly thanks to regular DP Roger Deakins' stunning cinematography. All of his trademarks are in place: harsh but very naturalistic lighting, washed-out colors, especially in the outdoor scenes, smooth camera movements, and just a generally beautiful palette he uses to paint the world of the film with. Also very prominent in the film is the beautiful score by Carter Burwell. It hearkens back to his more melodic work on the Coen brothers' earlier films, especially Miller's Crossing. Using themes from classic hymns from the time period of the film, the soundtrack, along with the language of the dialogue, helps add a very strong feeling of authenticity to the film. It is a beautiful piece of music: dramatic but not heavy- handed, whimsical but with a hint of darkness to it. These two long-time Coen collaborators, as well as the costume and set designers, with whom the Coens have also worked with many times before, all deliver top-notch work and show once again just how strong the power of long-term collaboration can be.

Other returning collaborators are a number of the cast members. The Coens seem to have grown distant from most of their long-time regular cast members (Jon Polito, John Turturro, John Goodman, Steven Buscemi, and others), but Coen regulars still make appearances in some of their recent work. In this case, it is "The Dude" Lebowski himself, Jeff Bridges, who makes his triumphant return in a Coen brothers film, filling the very large shoes of John Wayne, who gave an iconic performance as Rooster Cogburn in the first adaptation of True Grit, from 1969. Bridges brings his own unique style and sensibilities to the role, combining his drunken goofiness with the demeanor of a serious and very skilled hunter and lawman. It is a wonderful performance playing to all of Bridges' best abilities as an actor, and it is just a joy to watch. Also playing to his best qualities is Matt Damon, who delivers one of the loosest and most fun performances of his career as Texas Ranger LaBoeuf (or "La Beef", as he is referred to, by himself as well, in the film). Damon is clearly having fun with the role, although like Bridges, he, too, manages to find a very excellent balance between the humor and the seriousness and skill his character has. But the standout performance has to be newcomer Hailee Steinfeld, who beat out 15,000 other girls for the part. Open casting calls often provide disappointing results, as nonprofessional actors tend to be just that – not professional. 14-year-old Steinfeld proves she is a talent to watch, though – she totally commands the screen with her strong-willed, stubborn character, and manages to hold her own against Bridges, Damon and Josh Brolin, who makes a brief but memorable appearance later in the film. It is a fantastic, powerful performance that is an absolute joy to watch. I foresee great things from Steinfeld in the future.

Many people will be turned off by the straightforwardness of the storytelling in True Grit. I have already heard complaints that the film lacks poignancy. But that isn't what it lacks. What it lacks is irony. It's actually quite amazing to see a film so completely and utterly devoid of irony such as this one – it seems like most films these days, including the Coen brothers' recent output, all carry this air of cynicism about them. True Grit hearkens back to a more classic form of plot and character-driven storytelling, and in that sense, it succeeds immensely. Ultimately, True Grit is a piece of pure entertainment – and it is quite an entertaining film: thrilling, engaging, and very, very funny. I have read many opinions claiming that this "doesn't feel like a Coen brothers film," but its storytelling style and techniques actually remind me most of another classic Coen film, Miller's Crossing. That film was also completely stripped of irony and instead focused on telling a good old-fashioned yarn, nothing more, nothing less. So while True Grit is not one of the very best films in the Coen's oeuvre, it is still just a darn good film overall.

A remake that is every bit as good as the original

[Tweekums · 9/10 · 15 January 2017]

After her father is murdered fourteen year old Mattie Ross is determined to bring Tom Chaney, his killer, to justice; to this end she hires US Marshal Rooster Cogburn. Cogburn drinks and has a reputation for shooting the people he is meant to be arresting but Mattie believes he has 'true grit' and is the man for the job. A Texas Ranger named LaBoeuf is also looking for Chaney in regards to a murder in Texas; a murder with a larger reward… Mattie however is determined that Chaney will hang for the death of her father not for what he did in Texas. She insists on accompanying Cogburn, something he initially objects to but as they travel deeper into Indian Territory, where Chaney is riding with a group of outlaws. Before catching up with Chaney they come across other members of the gang and reunited with LaBoeuf.

All too often when a classic film is remade the new film is a disappointment; thankfully that is not the case here. The Coen brothers' take on the story is every bit as good as the original. Young Hailee Steinfeld does a brilliant job as Mattie Ross; making the viewer believe that she has the force of will to do what she does and persuade others to go along with her demands. Jeff Bridges is on fine form as the grizzly Rooster Cogburn and Matt Damen is solid enough as LaBoeuf although his role is noticeably smaller than Stienfeld and Bridges. The early part of the film provides some action but is mostly concerned with introducing our protagonists. Later on there is more action including shootouts, a nasty encounter with a rattlesnake and the inevitable confrontation with Chaney and the rest of the gang. Overall I'd certainly recommend this film to fans of the genre; I'm sure people who enjoyed the original will enjoy this too.

One of the most crowd-pleasing films I think the Coens have ever made, accessible, simple, mythic and finally beautiful

[Loving_Silence · 10/10 · 15 December 2010]

The Coen brothers are known for being one of the best filmmakers of our time. They both compliment each other perfectly. When I heard they were remaking the 1969, John Wayne classic True Grit, I was extremely excited and had incredibly high expectations of the film. Being a major fan of Western movies, I was really interested how it would turn out. I wanted the movie to be more faithful to it's original source material, Charles Portis novel, than the 1969 film had been. I was also hopeful that Jeff Bridges would fill the huge shoes of the classic, legendary John Wayne. I was hoping that they would blend the humor of the original 1969 film with some of the suspense or thrills from earlier Coen brothers films like No Country For Old Men or Fargo. But not become way too violent that it causes to stay completely unrecognizable to Charles Portis classic novel.

After seeing the Coen brothers new film, I have to say. My extremely high expectations were surpassed. The movie actually surprised all the hype I had, what an incredible film. The atmosphere, clothing, and the buildings reminded me of the old classic Hollywood westerns they used to make. I had a feeling of nostalgia watching the movie through the end. I felt transported to another time period of the old western. Hailee Steinfeld was amazing in the movie, I truly believe that this is her breakout performance. Matt Damon and Josh Brolin were as usual amazing. But the true star of the film has to be Jeff Bridges, in all respects ( I don't mean to offend John Wayne or anything), I think Jeff Bridges did a better job than John Wayne in portraying Rooster Cogburn. His performance showed much more experience, strength and power, the performance was pretty much unforgettable. Jeff Bridges handily reinvents the iconic role of Rooster Cogburn in the Coen brothers' back-to-the-book-remake. I congratulate the Coen for bringing back the western genre, that Hollywood has ignored so much the last decade or so. I can't stress enough how much I recommend this movie to people.

10/10 from a guy that does not like western movies

[gobeGT · 10/10 · 5 October 2011]

To be honest I was never a big fan of western movies... Somehow I made myself to watch True Grit - had big doubts about it, but after all it was Coen brothers movie and it got only positive reviews all over internet. When the movie had finished I was completely stunned by how the story got me into it, how interesting and absorbing it was from the very first minutes!!! The characters were so genuine and extraordinary in the same time. I guess each of them could have their own individual movie, but here we had 3 of them crossing their paths of faith. Acting was just PERFECT - honestly I think this is Bridges best role, not to mention fantastic Damon and brilliant Steinfeld! In addition to that scenography and photography was excellent. Everything gave the viewer almost 2 hours of an amazing story, told in the best possible manner. Thank you brothers Coen for this masterpiece!

The culmination of the movie doesn't give the satisfaction that you would expect.

[IleWieszOOsmiornicach · 7/10 · 25 February 2011]

Don't get me wrong, True Grit is a good movie. In a time when most films seen in cinemas are made for teenagers, it can appeal to anybody regardless of age. The gunfights (not much) and talking (a lot) give it a nice pace that keeps you on the edge of your seat while not being chaotic enough to confuse your father.

Mattie Ross is a 14-year old girl who gets a US Marshal Rouben "Rooster" Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to help her track down and bring to justice her fathers killer (Brolin). Tom Chaney is also pursued by a Texas Ranger by the name of LaBeouf (Matt Damon), who wants to punish him for the crimes committed by him back in Texas.

***Spoilers start here, i guess.*** While the movie starts at slow and a little bit annoying pace, it soon picks up after our unlikely team leaves town. The director was obviously well aware of the saying that chasing a hare isn't about catching it but about the chase itself. True Grit makes you want to catch Tom Chaney along with it's heroes, but when they do actually get him, it does not give you the expected satisfaction. That is weird, because the character was obviously supposed to be given a personality. When he talks to Mattie you might even reconsider thinking about him as the bad guy - The bandits have emotions and Tom gets desperate after his team leaves him. But then, he quickly reverts to his "I'm this pictures' villain!" pose, tries to kill the girl and gets shot. Boom, that's it. Not even any last words that would make him more human and less two-dimensional. Nope. He gets shot point blank with a rifle. That's it. The force of the bullet causes him to fall off a cliff (Not very naturally, too) and that is the last time you see him. Did he have a personality? Or was he just trying to get Mattie to lower her guard? We'll never know.

Then, suddenly, a plot hole appears! It seems Mattie and Rooster have to leave LaBeouf, because he DOESN'T HAVE A HORSE! Yup, that's right. It doesn't matter much that he just shot a bandit off a mount 400 yards away, and that the horse is still standing there, saddled and ready. No. Instead, Rooster and Mattie (now bitten by a handy plot device, rattlesnake!) ride her horse to death and end up in a middle of a field. Cogburn, a weak old man then proceeds to carry the girl in a scene that was surely envisioned as touching, but still makes you wonder about why exactly didn't they take the horse with them (or LaBeouf, for that matter).

If you can ignore some plot points that don't feel right and the general lack of soundtrack in most scenes, you will find yourself captivated by the plot of True Grit, a motion picture that is by no means mediocre. Great acting skills of not only the main characters but supporting cast (such small roles as Dakin Matthews who argues with Mattie about a price of a horse) make it a memorable experience that I will be happy to watch again some time. You will enjoy it as long, as your expectations aren't too high.

A Classic Western

[jrcj41 · 8/10 · 5 April 2011]

If there's something to be said for classicism, it's certainly proved in Joel and Ethan Coen's 2010 Western drama True Grit. The adventure begins in 19th century Arkansas, where 14 year old tough-as- nails cowgirl Maddie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) sets out to avenge her father's murder at the hands of outlaw Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin). With the most relentless local bounty hunter by her side in Reuben J. Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), she is determined to bring justice to her cause. Complications arise when the pair cross paths with the hotshot LaBoeuf (Matt Damon), a Texas Ranger who is confidently taking aim at the same man. After a series of alliances and realignments Maddie finds herself face-to-face with Chaney; her quivery hand clutching a silver pistol and her mind wrestling with the most important decision yet.

True Grit is a more than worthy successor to it's 1969 predecessor, as the Coen Brothers have followed more strictly the original 1968 novel by Charles Portis. The retention of the female narrator gives the plot an intimate personal aspect, encouraging the audience to root for Maddie throughout her adventure.

Hailee Steinfeld is a surprisingly mature newcomer to the screen, holding her own next to the incomparable talents of Bridges and Damon. With cowboys, outlaws, gun fights and plenty of hard boiled dialogue, True Grit is a classically made conventional western, whose brilliantly raw cinematography transports the audience to the dusty plains of the old west; a land of revenge, passion and grit.

Print the legend..

[chaos-rampant · 24 January 2011]

Few directors working today in America have mastered form like the Coens, I discover this with every new film they make. True Grit is a commercial film made to please but I don't see a compromise in the making and it's still a distinctly Coen film if you pay notice. Try to take out the Coen character from the film and the film breaks apart, it's that tightly woven in the fabric of it.

A Coen film works for me in the face of it, but I'm always on the lookout for what goes on behind, for the unseen cogs that grind out the fates of their characters. As with No Country, I came to this film looking to see is there a statement on violence, does it happen in a certain way and is the universe indifferent to it, is life worth a damn?

This one here works very much like the Henry Hathaway film from '69, except everyone's better, where John Wayne played a character, Jeff Bridges plays a man, and even Barry Pepper betters my beloved Robert Duvall's turn as Ned Pepper. This probably won't do it for Jeff Bridges because we've been accustomed to expect a certain degree of po-faced seriousness from a great performance (he snarled and staggered in Crazy Heart but he was serious about it), but he's one of the great actors of our times and I find this again in his Rooster Cogburn. Clint Eastwood also fell from a horse in Unforgiven and couldn't shoot a tin can to save his soul, but Munny "was" a scumbag, Cogburn still is and I like that. I like the courtroom scene where it's gradually revealed that he won't only bushwack those he needs to bring to justice, he will lie to make himself out to be the hero.

Another interesting aspect here is how the concept of the gunslinger and the western with it has evolved. When John Wayne played Cogburn in the Hathaway film the reward for the audience was the smirk of watching John Wayne be that drunken failure. The casting mattered in our appreciation. In the remake, most comments seem to point out that it's a fairly traditional/entertaining western. The dastardly revisit of something that was revisionist in the 70's oddly seems to give, in our day, a traditional western. We've been accustomed to heroes who are not heroes, and maybe the erosion of that heroic archetype says something about the way we view the world now, as opposed to 30-40 years ago. Then we were beginning to realize that wars are not gloriously, justly won but survived and endured, now we know there is no clear struggle between dual opposites and have grown disenchanted as that knowledge has failed to prevent the same wars. Now we know there is stuff about the legends that don't make the print, or we are suspicious enough about legends to imagine them.

Is this a traditional western then? Watching True Grit through the eyes of the brass 14yo girl reminded me of Winter's Bone, another film from the same year. In both cases a young girl is determined to plunge herself in a dark world of hurt and walk a path fraught with perils on all sides to achieve a moral purpose, both films maintain an appearance of realism, but what I get from them is a magical fantasy. This becomes more apparent when Mattie falls in the snakepit, but what about the hanged men who are really hanged high? The Hathaway film, ostensibly based on the same material, missed that note and played out a straight western. The Coen film unfolds as a hazy dream of that West. Although I wished for more open landscapes, it makes sense then that film narrows our gaze and clouds the margins. Perhaps we are even seeing the film as Mattie relives the experience in her old age, an affair shaped by memory and time.

This is the marvellous touch effected by the Coens on the material; the minute recreation of the Old West as a historical place and the odd, incongruous moments found within it annihilate any authority over the material.

The epilogue is important in that aspect.

It's not only that Mattie's revenge didn't accomplish anything, that it was for her merely another practical inconvenience to be bargained, paid for, and settled, like her father's ponies and saddle or the service of the US Marshall before, but that she clings to the memory of it so fiercely. What's horrifying then is not so much the violence of the West but the idealization of that violence. The film closes in a time around the turn of the century, people like Cogburn roosted in Wild West shows for a cheering audience, and Mattie is one of the people who lived to tell the tales. Out of those tales, the western of John Ford and Raoul Walsh emerged to print the legend. In a roundabout fantastic way, the Coens give us the true account, the creation myth behind the western.

Not a winner

[petsteph1 · 6/10 · 5 February 2011]

It seems that the consensus of opinion is that this is another masterful work by the Coen Bros, but it left me disappointed. In a nutshell it felt to me that they never got the movie together.

The story has some intriguing elements - the young girl seeking revenge, her character, her choice of Rooster as the hunter; Rooster himself; the Labouef character and his contrast with Rooster; the nature of the villain (before he is seen);and the usual thrill of a chase. But somehow all these fine elements didn't ever seem to come together - I kept waiting for it to happen and it never did except in the most slap-dash and corny way. Even the last scene failed to ring true: it was possible to suspend disbelief over Mattie's character for the sake of letting the young actress show her stuff and the director to add a curious dimension to the character, but in the end I didn't care about her at all.

There was a real tension being built up to the confrontation with the villain but from then on the move just seemed to run out of gas and depend on clichés to get it thru to the down-beat ending.

Cinematography was excellent, script was good, cast was good, but somewhere in there the directors lost interest and failed to do a professional job of making a movie.

The Coens Show Some True Class

[childsplayillustration · 10/10 · 1 December 2010]

Those of you who wonder why someone would remake a good film, need to withhold judgment until seeing this film. It was one of the most authentic westerns I've ever had the privilege of viewing, and I am a die-hard western aficionado, and true-west historian. The costumes, the buildings, the interiors, and the dialogue were so meticulously crafted that I felt entirely immersed in a world long since forgotten, and often misunderstood. The acting was unbelievable as you'd expect from such established, accomplished thespians, but Hailee Steinfeld was a revelation, holding her own, if not carrying the entire film on her relatively small shoulders. The Brothers Coen have justified their choice to adapt Charles Portis' novel, not remake the John Wayne classic. The impact, and visceral reality of life in such places and times, coupled with the abrupt, brutal violence is something you didn't fully grasp in the grandstanding, heroics of the 1969 version. I applaud the Coens for exercising restraint and understatement to allow the scenes and the situations to breathe and take there natural course. Overall, it was an amazing cinematic experience that truly transports the viewer to a very real and fully realized time and space that crackles with fire and true grit.

A nagging question and two wishes that alter my view of True Grit

[malcolmi · 6/10 · 9 January 2011]

Owning the original, and having looked forward to seeing the new version, I find myself wondering why the Coens rewrote the script to have LaBoeuf live, instead of following the original script and letting him die of the blow to the head administered by Chaney, after guiding his horse to pull Cogburn and Mattie from the snake pit. His death makes the outcome of the journey more bleak - the attempt to bring Chaney to justice costs yet another life - and makes Cogburn's rescue of Mattie especially urgent. It gave extra texture to what had seemed like amusing superficiality in Glenn Campbell's original performance. I wondered whether star-status made the Coens, or their money-men, think "we can't kill Damon off - his public wouldn't accept it." Result: LaBoeuf's presence becomes mere comic relief, and this version of the film is weakened.

I wish Tommy Lee Jones had been given the part rather than Jeff Bridges. Anyone who's seen Lonesome Dove or In the Valley of Elah (or No Country for Old Men) knows that Jones would have made a brilliant Cogburn, free of the Dude-ish baggage which burdens Bridges.

And I wish also that the Coens had used that boarding-house scene from the original in which Mattie, after all her pugnacious bravery, at the livery stable and with Cogburn, cradles her dead father's pocket watch and weeps, becoming a little girl again. Kim Darby made that moment real, and it lent extra power to her resolve when Cogburn and LaBoeuf tried later to ditch her. The Coens let Hailee Steinfeld look sad, but mere sadness isn't enough, and the opportunity was lost.

Much to appreciate and think about in the look of this version, but some sense of the opportunities missed.

A Must-See Film

[CinemaFrostedBetty · 8/10 · 16 May 2011]

Joel and Ethan Coen's True Grit (2010) is undoubtedly one of the best films I have seen all year. Westerns seemed to have fallen off the wagon in Hollywood these past few decades, but the Coen brothers have truly worked their magic, once again, to resuscitate this genre. In this beautifully constructed Western remake of Henry Hathaway's 1969 version, 14-year-old girl Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) sets out with an eye-for-an-eye attitude to capture Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), the man who has mercilessly killed her father. In order for justice to be served she teams up with Reuben J. "Rooster" Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), a man of "true grit" and Texas Ranger LaBoeuf (Matt Damon). True Grit is simple, straightforward (not words one would typically use to describe a Coen Brothers film), but as usual, it's an f-ing masterpiece. What struck me the most about this film was its skillfully crafted ambiance. Everything presented from the costumes to the settings to the dialogue— I felt completely immersed in the narrative. Thanks to cinematographer Roger Deakins for that visual thrill-ride! It's pretty apparent that Jeff Bridges had some major shoes to fill in his role originally played by John Wayne. It's safe to say it was a job well done. His style was completely powerful in this unforgettable performance. Every step he takes or word he speaks is done with thought. If there was an Oscar for 'baddest ass' Jeff Bridges would clearly hold the title, hands down. I was also quite impressed with Hailee Steinfeld's performance. As a newcomer to the Hollywood scene, she makes it pretty clear she means business. Even next to Damon, Bridges, and Brolin, she holds an extremely professional and talented composure. This is most definitely not the last time we will see her on the silver screen.

Maybe the most talented acting by a kid

[priyantha-bandara · 7/10 · 2 June 2011]

True Grit is the story of a man hunt which takes place in the back of the day in western US country side. When the stubborn 14 year old Mattie Ross is desperate to find her father's killer and bring him to justice, she decides to hire the best Marshall in town. After a brief recommendation she puts her dime on the 'old' Rooster Cogburn. She forcefully tags alone in to the hostile Indian Territory with Cogburn and another lawman LeBoeuf who is also tracking down the same man for different reasons. Soon the two man hunter's starts to find their differences and quarrel over stuff like children and the 14 year old finds it difficult to keep them both in the objective.

The strength of True Grit comes from two angles. The awesomely witty yet solemn script and the acting. The script and acting is so well knitted that you might actually wonder if it's really humor you're listen to or serious manly conversation. Some of the conversations happen between the men are downright funny but the actors pull it off with their most serious faces. Even the little girls get confused at time though she is well educated and brave for her age.

The wonderful cast includes Jeff Bridges, Hailee Steinfeld and Matt Damon. Jeff plays the veteran one eyed man hunter Cogburn who is partially a drunk. Hailee plays the stubborn 14 year old and hard headed Mattie. Born in 1996 and coming from California with 9 movie/TV titles under her belt she was nominated for Oscars for this role. And no wonder about that because her acting makes the whole flick a novel experience. Then comes LeBoeuf who's played by the good Matt Damon. He has one big serious face throughout the movie and seems like he has forgotten to smile. At one point he bites his own tongue and gets shot by Cogburn. And then hit hard by a rock on the head. Quite a serious character but hilarious at the same time played very well.

The story has a good flow and a neat ending. Worth watching! more at flickshout.tk

True Grit? Truly Overrated

[mercyah · 2/10 · 6 January 2011]

I consider myself a movie buff and have seen many a good western in my time . Sadly I feel this is not one of those movies . Instead of a long winded review, ill keep it brief. Bridges , you couldn't understand a damn thing that came out of his mouth. Brolin was on screen for the only ten good minutes of the film. Damon was laughable, and the girl had no character development so although her acting was good, her character was annoying. Now the story; you have the girl mouthing off the first half hour, then her and Bridges, and yes sometimes Damon frolicking across the desert for an hour and ten minutes. So that leaves about five minutes of the real story we've been waiting for. The ending leaves little or no closure. I found myself bored and restless during the movie. I also find myself wondering what drug everyone is on to find this movie so "amazing". Please save your money and go watch something else instead.

Don't Compare

[todd19591994 · 10/10 · 24 December 2010]

I am a fierce John Wayne fan. He was really great as Rooster in True Grit. The new version is not the same movie as John Wayne's. Don't compare the two. The story line's are similar, but that's it. This new version is a whole new story than the one written for John Wayne. This is a great movie, with truly great acting for all involved.

The 1969 movie was driven fully by Rooster Cogburn. This 2010 version is truly driven by Mattie Ross. The performances by Stienfeld, Bridges, and Damon shine. I would have liked to have seen Stienfeld and Damon against John Wayne. Bridges was terrific as Cogburn. The story was far better than I imagined it could have been.

I can't believe I said all this. I am one who absolutely hates re-makes. Like I said this is not the same movie.

Simply just a really solid piece of storytelling with good work across the board

[bob the moo · 15 February 2011]

I wasn't sure how to take the news that the Coen brothers were remaking the John Wayne film True Grit and I remained unsure even when it was clear that they were not so much remaking the film as making a different version of the original book. How would their humour and oddity sit in this story, how would their normal arch cynicism and cleverness work here? Well in reality it doesn't really come into play because they have made a film that is surprisingly free of that side of their work while also containing just enough in terms of characters and dialogue to make it their own. Mostly though what True Grit does is deliver an enjoyable story in an engaging and satisfying manner.

While I don't agree with IMDb observer-in-chief tedg's overall rating for the film, he is correct when he says that the western as a genre has really been thoroughly explored and it is hard to bring freshness to such a film. The Cohen's struggle with this a little bit because it doesn't feel like "their take" on a genre so much as it does just feel like a western full stop. This perhaps limits them in terms of their own style but it does mean that they are focused on the telling of the story rather than anything else they may have added for colour. The end result of this is that the film is actually a really solidly told story that perhaps doesn't soar or have flamboyance or colourful touches but it does still engage as a tale. The story will be known to those familiar with the Wayne film but the slant very much onto Mattie makes it feel like a different story, albeit with much familiar about it. It is well told though and I found myself engaged by it just as much as I was never really thrilled by it. It has heart in its main character, it has a forward motion and it has a nice touch of humour throughout.

The key to it is the performance from Steinfeld. She may well have been put forward for Supporting Actress in a political move by the studio but she is the heart and soul of this film. Her performance makes her Mattie a stubborn youth but one with juts enough vulnerability about her to suggest some of it is a front to cover herself in this regard. While she never struck me as a person that would exist within this story, she did convince me as a character and she was a delight to watch – this is her story and she makes it such. This puts Bridges in the supporting role and he is great there, having fun with the role and adding colour to things. Damon underplays wisely – sparking nicely off Bridges but letting these two having the light. Brolin, Pepper and others all deliver solid turns without stealing anything. Perhaps aware of what the genre is best known for (the landscapes) Deakins is restrained; where he made art with Jesse James, here he focuses on the smaller moments – the light from a campfire, the falling of snow – and he captures them excellently. At some point he will win his Oscar – maybe this is it but certainly his body of work cries out for it.

True Grit is not quite the brilliant piece of work that the "for your consideration" campaign would have you believe but it is a great piece of storytelling. The Coen brothers deliver some fine dialogue and colour but leave the telling free of cynicism or snideness (not a word, but you know what I mean). The story engaged me and is only made better by the strong pair of performances in the lead – but particularly Steinfeld, who makes this film in the same way that Portman made Black Swan this year.

The old west lives again

[moviemanMA · 10/10 · 4 January 2011]

True Grit is not a remake, but a re-imagining. Narrated by Mattie Ross, played by Hailee Steinfeld, who makes her feature film debut, we find Mattie picking up the pieces following the death of her father at the hands of Tom Chaney (Brolin). A headstrong girl, Mattie isn't looking for a handout; she's looking for justice. She is directed towards Rooster Cogburn (Bridges), a Federal Marshall whose reputation for shooting his prisoners makes him the right fit for Mattie's cause.

She is discovered soon after by LaBoeuf (Damon) who is also looking for Chaney for a crime committed in Texas. Mattie's plan of riding off with Rooster and LeBoeuf are short lived when LaBoeuf refuses to go out into Indian territory with a "girl." Rooster, though reluctant at first, escorts Mattie into the territory.

Though I am not familiar with the novel with which it is based on, I would say that the Coens have done the story justice. Though you can't replace John Wayne's take on Rooster, Bridges gives a different, more rugged approach to the character. It wasn't "The Dude" or Bad Blake from last year's Crazy Heart. He was Rooster Cogburn the way the Coens wrote it. He doesn't step on Wayne's toes, but rather makes the character his own.

One upgrade from the original film (one of several) was Damon's portrayal of LeBoeuf. In the original, Glen Campbell played a much more cooperative LaBoeuf than Damon. Damon is more independent and clashes with Rooster more often. They're chemistry is much more believable and enjoyable.

Another major upgrade is the music. Though the original has the classic, big, sweeping score by Elmer Bernstein that many westerns of the day were accustomed to, it just didn't fit the story. It made is much lighter than it needed to be. Carter Burwell, whose previous work for the Coens is simply sublime, gives yet another stellar score, creating just the right mood and tempo. Rooster's charge at the end is accompanied by a wonderful piece of music that brings you right in the saddle with Rooster, guns-a-blazing, hollering and rooting for the good guys. Burwell's sense of both the time period and the mood of the film couldn't have been better.

Where would a Coen Brother's film be without some stunning visuals. Roger Deakins, whose work is up there with the best of the day, does a fantastic job capturing the sights of the wild west, in a way that films of the 50s and 60s couldn't do. The way sunlight coats the landscape, snow falling through the trees, and the shadows of a flickering fire are just moments that stand out.

Lastly we come to Joel and Ethan, who might be the finest pair of filmmakers working today. They are gifted in telling a story with images and dialogue. Though not working with an original work, still springs off of the screen. Not to mention the performances they get out of their cast is second to none. Everyone is on board for this picture, and it shows.

True Grit is a better film than the '69 version. The photography, supporting cast, and all around production is better. Still, I have no doubt that Rooster Cogburn will be remembered as John Wayne, I have to hand it to Jeff and the Coens for putting on a spectacular film, both a delight for the eyes and ears.

Unnecessary Remake of a Great Film

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 21 February 2012]

The farmer Frank Ross heads with his employee Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin) to Fort Smith to buy some ponies. However, he is murdered by Chaney that steals his money and flees to the Indian Territory. Frank's teenager daughter and book keeper of the family business Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) travels with one employee to bring the body of her father back home. Before meeting the undertaker, they see the hanging of three men sentenced by the tough Judge Parker. The stubborn Mattie seeks out the sheriff that tells her that he does not have authority in the Indian Nation. She asks who the best Marshall is and the sheriff recommends Reuben J. "Rooster" Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), an old big fellow with eye pad that has grit to bring criminals from the Indian Territory. Mattie hires the drunken Rooster and he schedules to travel yearly in the morning with her.

When Mattie is ready to depart, she finds that the Texas Ranger LaBoeuf (Matt Damon) had visited Rooster and proposed to share a huge reward for Tom Chaney in Texas for the murder of a senator. LaBoeuf and Rooster cross the river and Mattie joins them, and the unlikely trio begins their dangerous journey seeking out Tom Chaney in the Indian Territory.

If I had never seen the 1969 "True Grit", I would have loved this remake. However, this film is basically the original film shot frame by frame with great cast and minor modifications. After the awful remake of "The Ladykillers", the Coen Brothers have finally made a good, but absolutely unnecessary remake of a great film. Probably the audition of the cast might have been watching the original film many times to follow practically the same screenplay. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Bravura Indômita" ("Untamed Bravery")

Get the comparisons out of the way, then give the film its due.

[winner55 · 8/10 · 26 December 2010]

Let's get the comparisons with Henry Hathaway's version of the Charles Portis novel out of the way. The Coen Brothers certainly knew that, however much they want to 'go back to the source material,' their film would play against Hathaway's version.

The Hathaway version, while tampering with details from the Portis original, remains strikingly true to its story and theme. This is most clear in the dialog - the decision not to tamper with Portis' language was decisive for the making of that film. The Coens' tampering with the novel is more subtle than Hathaway's film, but no less an interpretation.

Approaching the characters and composition of the Coens' version without reference to the Hathaway film apparently proved impossible. For instance, the shoot-out at the dug-out cabin was re-written for a night-scene, but the camera angles remain pretty much the high-elevation shots Lucien Ballard provided Hathaway, inter-cut with full body shots of people getting wounded and horses running (etc.)also similar to Ballard's.

Two performance stand out as striking examples of reference to the original film. Dakin Matthews seems to struggle mightily not to recreate Strother Martin's interpretation of the horse-trader Stonehill - and fails. Apparently Martin had the character down pat and there's nothing but to reproduce his interpretation. Far more to the point is Barry Pepper's interpretation of the desperate outlaw chief, Ned Pepper - it is pure Robert Duvall. Pepper can only match Duvall's self-aware determination - and he does - but he can't surpass it; nor can he find another interpretation to set off against Duvall's.

As for the Coens' own re-interpretation of the Portis novel, what was most noticeable to me were the minor points simply dropped out of the story telling. The most irritating to me were a pair of lapses that are interconnected and combine to make an important point about the characters. 1. We never get to see Mattie tell Rooster that Chaney has linked up with Ned Pepper (later Rooster does remark the fact, but how did he learn of it?); 2 We don't get to hear Rooster's remarking how he shot Pepper through the upper lip (because he was aiming at the lower lip). These two incidents combine to let the audience know that Cogburn's hidden agenda on the Chaney hunt is really Ned Pepper, he and Pepper have something of a feud going on - which information fills out the background detail for their final shoot-out. Except here we don't have that connection.

Finally, the whole Mattie - Rooster issue: many critics are saying that Mattie is more at the center here than in the Hathaway picture, which focused attention on John Wayne's Cogburn. Not true. When we add up screen time and lines of dialog, we discover that Mattie not only has as much time and dialog in the Hathaway film but it is in much the same proportion to Cogburn's as in this one. If most remember the Hathaway film as a 'John Wayne film,' that is due simply to Wayne's bravura performance.

Well, enough of the comparisons. Does the Coens' version measure up as film worth seeing on its own accord? Yes; we are presented here with a beautiful, frightening, amusing piece of 'Americana.' There are scenes approaching dream-like states, as in the meeting with the bear-man, and during Rooster's desperate drive to get Mattie to a doctor. Hailee Steinfeld is quite engaging, and Matt Damon develops an intriguing complexity that makes one wish he had more screen-time. Bridges' performance is the most problematic - Bridges plays Cogburn as a a kind of whimsical brute - as he rambles on with his life-story on the trail, we get the gnawing sense that, if we were not along for a dangerous manhunt and dependent on his abilities as a master man-hunter, Cogburn would be someone we would not like to know. This develops a distance between the audience and Cogburn that is actually rather on par for the Coens - there are no 'heros' in the Coen universe.

Perhaps that's a good thing here. Mattie in her experiences with the wild men of the old west has encountered something larger than her life on the farm could ever get her. These are men who make their own laws and are not bound to statutory codes or biblical decrees, and adapt their own law to the wilds of the frontier that surrounds them. Mattie is a confirmed church-goer with a good lawyer, and if she weren't so determined on her revenge, she would actually be impossibly small-minded and dull. This is a subtext to the novel that both films attempt to convey, but neither quite captures, because it's difficult for any film maker to admit that the central character of the story is the least interesting.

The age of such wild-men has passed. It is not that wild-men do not exist - wild-men show up quite frequently in Coen Brothers' films in contemporary settings - but now they are corrupted by moving outside the law and outside the commonplace, they grow sick and psychopathic. The killer in "Fargo" feeding the partner he's killed to a wood-chipper is as wild as one could get, but he is no longer larger than life, and evokes only the sickness at the heart of modernity, not any adaptation one would want to live with.

We look back at historical moments like those of the Old West because anything seemed possible to them, whereas very little is possible for us. But that might simply be a wishful delusion - and the Coens' clear suspicion that it is really determines the limits of what they accomplish here. They don't present the West as 'it really was,' nor do they present what we want from it, rather they present a disappointment with it. Rooster Cogburn is indeed 'larger than life,' but we wouldn't want to spend any more time with him than we do.

Remaking True Grit: The biggest mistake the Coen brothers ever made.

[HistoryJonah · 6/10 · 23 December 2010]

The 1969 True Grit ranks as one of the most iconic westerns in history. John Wayne's performance as Rooster Cogburn was both moving and memorable. The movie isn't exactly one of the greatest westerns of all time, the film had it's problems-Glen Campbell to name one-but it was John Wayne's legendary performance that made the film a classic. It seemed no one could even attempt to remake it-until the Coen Brothers stepped up to the challenge.

It is of my opinion that remaking True Grit was a mistake. Many of John Wayne's other films could be remade, but not one as iconic as True Grit. Admittedly, I admire the Coen brothers' courage, and, looking at their careers, they seem to be directors more than able to take on the challenge. But let's look at the breakdown:

Direction-The Direction for me was, surprisingly, disappointing. I heard the Coen Brothers were Oscar worthy directors, but I found the direction at times lazy. Scenes were narrated to save time, montages were put in when we should've seen live action, and worst of all was the editing. They cut far too much, the film easily could have been another half an hour longer. Scenes didn't flow together, we were simply thrown right into the middle of one scene and sent right into the middle of another. It was hard to become attached to the characters as character development was limited and simply relied on the ability of the actors. All in all, while the direction was fine at times, it was surprisingly bad for directors who've achieved critical acclaim.

Jeff Bridges-Jeff Bridges had a tough job ahead of him. He had to play Rooster Cogburn, a one eyed fat man that the love of decency did not abide in. He had to play a character that already received an Oscar win when played by John Wayne. But I have to admit, Jeff Bridges did put a lot of effort into the role. Unfortunately, his best effort wasn;t enough. His accent was weak, obviously fake and put on. He simply mumbled and talked with a gruff voice. It wasn't altogether convincing. The character lacked the emotion that John Wayne's character had, additionally you didn't care for his character as much, though that might be due to the direction. Let's face it: Jeff Bridges isn't John Wayne. He's a very good actor, but not necessarily a western actor. John Wayne gave the impression that he was a cowboy, even though he wasn't. John Wayne looked more natural as a cowboy then as a 20th century actor. To be honest, when I heard that he was going to play Rooster Cogburn, I thought that was rather bold talk for an actor like Jeff Bridges. In the end, he wasn't quite John Wayne, he didn't really have True Grit.

Hailee Steinfeld-Hailee Steinfeld played Mattie Ross, the girl who hires Rooster Cogburn to kill Tom Chaney. I'd say her performance was one of the parts of this film that was improved from the original. She gives an emotional portrayal in the film, and her acting is pretty good for a first film debut. Altogether she was one of the pleasant surprises of the film.

Matt Damon-Matt Damon plays Texas Ranger La Boeuf. Damon's good in the film, but altogether he's underused. I never really attach to him in the film. It's sad to see an Oscar winning actor like Damon being wasted in a good role.

Other Supporting cast members-The rest of the supporting cast was disappointing. It seemed that everyone was just trying to impersonate the actors of the first one in looks, accent and intonation. Josh Brolin seemed out of place as Tom Chaney and Barry Pepper was bland as Ned Pepper. It seemed he was simply impersonating Robert Duvall, who brilliantly portrayed Ned Pepper in one of his first films in the original True Grit.

Screenplay-The screenplay was very good, keeping in line with the original film's script. It was in fact one of the better parts of the film.

Story-I thought the story decreased in it's value with the remake. The changes they made caused it to be anti-climatic. You never felt like the characters were in danger. And additionally, the end completely fell flat. I was never really moved, touched or exhilarated in the entire film.

Production-Costumes and sound effects were good, though not spectacular.

Music-Bland and at times out of place.

Final Breakdown- Direction-6 (out of 10) Lead Acting-6.5 (out of 10) Supporting cast-6 (Out of 10) Script-4 (Out of 5) Story-2.5 (Out of 5) Music-2 (Out of 5) Production-3 (Out of 5)

Total score- 6.0 (Out of 10)

Closing Remarks-In the end, I thought it was a mistake to remake True Grit. There will only be one John Wayne. The film had potential, but the potential was wasted due to directorial decisions. I don't exactly see what the critics are seeing when they rate this film so high. Personally I thought it was an average film that couldn't live up to it's predecessor. In the end, I wouldn't recommend this film, I'd recommend the original.

So, come see the original True Grit sometime!

Surprisingly un-Hollywood. Unsurprisingly brilliant.

[Rockwell_Cronenberg · 8/10 · 27 May 2011]

The least "Coen" of all of the Coens films is also one of their finest. It has a few Coen inflections to it (Damon's twang of a voice, a few random mustached characters crossing paths with our heroes) but for the most part it's a lot more straight forward and less humored. Surprisingly this doesn't detract from the film at all, which is a riveting character journey in classic old school Hollywood fashion. And while generally "old school Hollywood fashion" would be something I would cringe and run away from, the Coens make it enjoyable, emotional and breathtaking. The technical qualities are all astounding; fantastic costumes, a beautiful score and some of the most exquisite cinematography I have ever seen, courtesy of the always reliable Roger Deakins. It's such an entertaining film, with some emotional power that resonates afterwards. There's a lot of twists that I didn't see it taking and none of the characters ended up being what I initially expected them to be. There's a real lack of obvious arcs for these people and that was a nice surprise. The Coens do what they can to avoid Hollywood conventions in what is, at it's core, a very Hollywood film.

Above all else, the film is a character piece and what a wonderful one it is. Unsurprisingly, these people are written very intelligently, given lots of depth and room to grow and surprise. There's a constant battle over what grit truly means and over the course of the film the balance shifts back and forth over which of the three has the truest grit. From the very opening, we see that Mattie Ross has a whole mess of it, this headstrong girl who won't back down to anyone, despite her small stature. Hailee Steinfeld is remarkable here, an actor with talent well beyond her years. She's entirely convincing, taking a character that could have been this annoying little brat and making her simultaneously strong, whip smart, endearing and adorable. I enjoyed watching her in every second. Jeff Bridges was different than I had expected, but I love his arc throughout the film. Maddie goes to him because she believes he has the most grit of all and that he is the right choice for her, but as the journey goes on she doubts her decision and Rooster Cogburn plays with our perception of him quite a few times. Bridges was my least favorite of the three, performance-wise, but that's not a huge slant given how highly I thought of the other two. Matt Damon gets arguably the most interesting role, a character who is detestable when we first meet him and then has the large task of making us realize that he just may have the truest grit of all. LaBoeuf is a silly man who thinks too highly of himself, but as the film progresses it becomes very hard not to care for him. He's a good man at his heart, as are Maddie and Rooster, and it makes it easy to root for all three of them to come out of this alright.

This is a film that I enjoyed even more than I thought I would, a Coen film in the most un-Coen of ways (which was a nice change of pace given that their previous effort, A Serious Man, is probably the most Coen film out there). I enjoyed living with these characters very much and wish that there had been more time to just be with them on their journey. The final confrontation with the men they are hunting is turns suspenseful, surprising and a little too short-lived. I didn't much care for the epilogue, but with the wildly entertaining journey that came before it, I can't fault the film that strongly for it. It's a real cinematic piece, surprisingly Hollywood for the Coens, but it doesn't fall into a lot of the traps that it could have. In fact, it does the opposite, jumping into holes where it could become clichéd and sentimental and then digging it's way out, surprising at every turn. I like that the story doesn't quite end after the basic plot is resolved, because it's not about hunting down the man that killed Maddie's father and hoping to bring him to justice. It's about so much more. It's about these characters and finding out who they really are when it all comes down to it.

Exactly What A Film Should Be!

[kriskoppy1961 · 10/10 · 22 December 2010]

Just came back from seeing "True Grit." Now this is the kind of film that the average person goes to the movies to see. It was amazing, highly entertaining, suspenseful, funny, and had a great story line. Jeff Bridges was fantastic, as was Matt Damon. Josh Brolin was good too, the only problem is I didn't get to see enough of him. He is definitely an up and coming actor that I hope to see more of. However, the best acting in the entire film was done by Hailee Steinfeld. Hailee plays the role of Mattie Ross and she is incredible. She really is 14 and held her own with the likes of Damon, Bridges, and Brolin. This film was an excellent western and comedy. There were several times that the theater was filled with laughter. I will definitely see this film again and may even purchase the DVD.

Storytelling and nothing more

[oobaizam · 7/10 · 28 December 2010]

One of the most misleading movies of the year. I had been waiting to see this movie once i saw the initial trailers which make you think this movie is actually about grit which it is not....at all. If you want to see a "classic western" talk fest then shell out your 13 bucks because there are about 2 scenes of actual "action." I could even sit still in my chair because I was so angry at what I was seeing. I am a Coen brothers fan and expected something worth my money. I told my entire family to come see this move the day after Christmas and they all fell asleep. Should have seen Black Swan but instead I looked like a complete idiot after the credits scrolled. Ending was also terrible...The most boring movie I have ever paid for (I saw the Good Shepard in theaters). Great acting cannot redeem a plot full of stories that have no basis in the arc of the movie, scenes so unnecessarily wrong I thought they were joking. Truly disappointing and actually quite frustrating to sit through. Critics can call this whatever they want, most people are going to despise this movie because its not what they thought it would be.

This is a Coen Brothers film?!

[jan-603 · 1/10 · 16 October 2011]

I'm a big Coen Brothers fan, but this film was a complete disappointment. I found it utterly boring, dull, and tedious right from the first moment. Scenes dragged on and on with hardly any action, and there was so little emotion in any of the actors' expressions and dialog, I wondered if this was just a test filming ("OK, everybody. This is just a walk-through for the camera guys, so no need to put any feeling into your lines!")

The Coen Brothers should get back to what they do best - wonderful quirky, entertaining films that no one else can do. I see no purpose in making this one.

Very enjoyable rendition of the "True Grit" story.

[TxMike · 8 June 2011]

Sadly I am one of the very few movie fans that never got around to seeing the John Wayne movie. But I will now remedy that, it will be in my BD player soon. (Edit: I saw it and to me the 1969 original is a better movie, mostly for John Wayne and, although not authentic, the scenes in the Rocky mountains.)

The Coen brothers are unique in that each of their movies seems to take a different look and a different tone. Two of my favorites are "Fargo" and "The Man Who Wasn't There." Now I will add this one to my list.

Arguably the focus of this movie is young Hailee Steinfeld, 13 during filming, as 14-yr-old Mattie Ross. It is 1878 and lawlessness still pervades the west, as defined by Missouri, Arkansas, Texas, and New Mexico. Mattie's dad is shot and killed by an outlaw, who also stole his horse and two California gold pieces.

Mattie is an unusual 14-yr-old, not one for "girlie" pursuits, and with an unusually high intellect, seemingly an expert in law, she takes off for the nearest town to find and hire a US Marshall who will bring the outlaw to justice.

There she encounters an unwilling Jeff Bridges as drunkard Rooster Cogburn, who has the reputation for killing the outlaws to avoid the trouble of bringing them in. But Mattie's promise of $100, a fortune back then, gets Rooster on board. She was told that he has "true grit" and that is the title reference.

Other main characters are Matt Damon as Texas Marshall LaBoeuf, who joins in the search in Arkansas. And the outlaw they seek is Josh Brolin as Tom Chaney, who has joined a gang led by Barry Pepper as Lucky Ned Pepper.

I can't praise the casting enough, every one is ideal for their roles, and young Hailee is superb, worthy of the Oscar nomination. The script and cinematography are also superb. Overall a very enjoyable movie.