True Grit (2010)

True Grit

The existence of True Grit is a surprise to me. Never in a million years would I have expected filmmakers as creatively fruitful as the Coen Brothers to attempt a remake of a beloved classic. Money-grubbing studios are the ones who focus on sequels and remakes, not auteurs. And yes, I know the Coens insisted that this was an adaptation of the original book and not a remake of the 1969 John Wayne film, but let's be honest here: there is no way to make this movie without comparing the two. So, with that said, how does True Grit hold up?

Following the murder of her father, 14-year old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfield) is determined to set out after the killer, Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin). She hires a drunk and mean marshal Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) because he is a man "with true grit" and the two set out into Indian territory after the killer. Along the way, they cross paths with the bragging Texas ranger LeBoeuf (Matt Damon) who is also tracking Chaney for the murders of a Senator and his dog.

I've heard some people complain that the film is dull because not much happens. They are right in that there isn't much to the plot itself, which could have been told in about a hour. But they are wrong about the boring part - the Coens understand that the dynamic of the film is not and should not be the manhunt for Chaney. What the film is really about is the interaction between the Rooster, LeBoeuf, and Mattie. The meat of the film is seeing who displays true grit and who doesn't. If the film is a bit slower paced, fine. It just gives us more time to enjoy the great characters onscreen.

The actors all do a fine job - Jeff Bridges is brilliant in a mumbling, bizarre performance that is distant from Wayne's Rooster, but is just as effective. Hailee Steinfield is a true find, delivering her dialogue with an emotional maturity beyond her years. Watching her negotiate with the respective characters is as exciting as most of the gunfights. The rest of the cast is just as good, from Damon's LeBoeuf to Brolin's Tom Chaney to Barry Pepper's maliciously noble take on the bandit leader Lucky Ned Pepper. Along the board, they all do a great job.

Other elements to applaud: The Coens script is odd, but brilliant. They tried to stay true to the dialogue in the book, which tried to stay true to how people spoke in the 19th century. This leads to a lot of strange biblical references in everyday sentences and a complete lack of contractions. To the modern ear, this could sound stilted, but I think it really adds a layer of authenticity. The Coens' script is backed up by the brothers' usual, terrific direction. The cinematography by Roger Deakins is utterly fantastic; Deakins deserves the Oscar for the opening shot of the movie alone.

With all this praise, I do have to admit that the film is not a home run. As the movie barrels to its climax in the final third, certain elements begin to unravel. At one point, LeBoeuf is severely injured, but they are inconsistent with it afterwards. Sometimes he acts hurt, sometimes he doesn't, and this is distracting. And the final gunfight is edited too quickly and is actually kind of confusing, which is a shame because it should have been the best part of the movie. I mean, one of the combatants literally seems to disappear from the scene altogether! And the less said about the bizarre gang member who has no lines, but just walks around making animal noises, the better.

So all in all, how does it compare to the original? The Coen Brothers certainly have no reason to be ashamed as they have created a film that is equal to the original and is even superior in some respects. I liked the original True Grit, but never loved it. John Wayne was good, but I don't think he deserved the Oscar for this role. He should have won for Red River, The Searchers or The Shootist. I think I actually prefer Bridges' take on the character. Kim Darby was fine as Mattie, but Steinfield is a revelation. And there is no comparing Glenn Campbell and Matt Damon. Campbell was the weak link in the original (of course, as my lovestruck mom said, "Who cares? It's Glenn Campbell!"). The way Damon plays the role, LeBoeuf is certainly a braggart, but there is always a sense that he has the toughness to back up his claims. That actually makes him the equal to his partners, whereas you got the sense that John Wayne could beat up Campbell with one arm tied behind his back (actually I even got the sense that Kim Darby could beat up Campbell with one arm tied behind her back). Where the original True Grit wins is that gunfight in the end. When John Wayne yells, "Fill your hands, you son of a bitch," throws the reins in his mouth, and charges with two guns blazing, we feel the rush of a icon storming into immortality. I miss that awesomeness in the new one. I feel they sort of dropped the ball.

But still, this is what a remake is supposed to be. This isn't just a cash grab, preying on our nostalgia for the original. The Coen Brothers thought that they had something new to bring to the table and they did, creating a fine film. It reminds us that we shouldn't dismiss remakes out-of-hand. When made in the proper spirit, you can end up with damn fine cinema. 

MVP: I have to give it to Jeff Bridges. He had the most difficult role, having to lift his Rooster Cogburn out from under John Wayne's formidable shadow. He succeeds by approaching the role in an almost entirely different way, and succeeds immeasurably because of it. It's a terrific performance.

OSCAR NOMINATIONS: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Bridges), Best Supporting Actress (Steinfield), Best Cinematography, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Art Direction, Best Editing, Best Costume Design, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing.  Wow.  That is 11 nominations without a single win.  That is not fair!

TRIVIA: In the book, Rooster Cogburn is said to be in his 40s. However, in both films, the character was played much older. John Wayne was 62 when he played the role and Jeff Bridges was 60.

BEST LINE: For comedy's sake, nothing competes with "I do not know this man."