"Well, then, we might just not get along”

- Glen Campbell as LaBoeuf, in the 1969 True Grit

This Wednesday will see the release of the new Coen brothers flick, True Grit. When I first read about the making of this movie, I was annoyed. For several reasons. First, there was nothing wrong with the original John Wayne version. I soon read articles about the Coen brothers’ insistence that this movie is not a remake of the 1969 one, but is more true to the book. I’ll discuss that more later, but even still – I couldn't understand how do you fill a role once played by John Wayne? Furthermore, I’m getting fairly tired of movie remakes. Here’s an idea, Hollywood – if you can’t think of something to make a movie about, don’t make another movie. I’ve never been a person to understand doing things for the sake of doing things. Don’t even get me started on the remake of Footloose – that is such a complete disgrace I can’t even deal with it. The same goes for useless sequels – unless there’s more story to tell, move on to something new, rather than beating the bejeezus out of a dead horse (I’m talking to you, Pirates of the Caribbean, much as I love that damn Jack Sparrow).

All that being said, and as annoyed as I was to begin with . . . I now find myself pretty excited to go see it. Much as I hated the overall idea of making a new True Grit, I love a lot of the pieces that are going into it. I really enjoy Jeff Bridges. At first glance, I don’t think I would have chosen him to fill the boots of the most epic cowboy ever (whether you like westerns or not, there’s no denying that John Wayne is the cowboyest of all the cowboys). But after further thought, I actually think there’s some genius to that casting. The Dude has a certain swagger to him, and a gruffness that makes him an appropriate choice. I suppose his Oscar-winning success as country singer Bad Blake in last year’s Crazy Heart makes it a little less of a stretch. At least we know he can wear boots and pull off acting like a drunk. I’m thrilled to see him paired with the Coen brothers again, even if it’s not for another cult-bound comedy like The Big Lebowski. And let’s face it, have the Coen brothers ever really made a bad movie? Then there’s Matt Damon, in the role originally played by Glen Campbell. Matt Damon in a western also sounded pretty out there to me originally – All The Pretty Horses was hardly a success, and I’d go so far as to say it’s one of the more significant down points in Damon’s career. But I do love Matt Damon. Even in bad movies, he’s a great actor. Seeing the previews for the movie, and the various screen caps . . . all right. I’ll buy him as a snooty Texas Ranger – for now at least.

I’m still a little skeptical of the Coen brothers’ insistence that this isn’t a remake of the John Wayne version, but is a more faithful interpretation of the book. It’s true that the 1969 version took a few creative liberties with Charles Portis’ novel, but taking it all into consideration, it doesn’t change the overarching themes, or the key plot points. I can see how the Coen brothers can change things to follow the book more carefully, but it’s not really going to change the core story that much. And for all their talk about following the book, the first leaked screen cap – showing an eye-patched Jeff Bridges – quickly told me that it wasn’t as close as they were trying to sell. I mentioned earlier that I thought there was some genius to casting Jeff Bridges to fill a role once played by John Wayne – but that genius doesn’t necessarily extend to casting him as Rooster Cogburn. He’s twenty-some-odd years older than the Rooster written by Charles Portis (and looks it). I feel like the story was ignored in favor of marketing decisions there, and Bridges was chosen more to play John Wayne’s signature role than he was to play Charles Portis’s character. I don’t mean to be nitpicky (if I wanted to, I would point out that Rooster Cogburn, while missing an eye, never wears an eyepatch in the novel), and I really am looking forward to seeing Bridges’ performance. I even think it would be kind of cool if he could repeat at the Oscars, winning the Best Actor statuette for the 2nd year in a row, and making it 2 wins for the role of Rooster Cogburn*. I just think that maybe the Coen brothers are trying too hard in their diatribe on the virtue of their movie as an accurate interpretation of the book, and not a remake of the first movie. I’m not buying your argument, Joel and Ethan.

*The Golden Globe Awards, usually considered to be a fair prediction of whom will be nominated for Academy Awards, did not extend a nomination to Jeff Bridges for his performance as Rooster Cogburn when their announcements were made last week. However he was recognized with a nomination by the Screen Actors Guild, and between that and the wide critical acclaim for his performance, an Oscar nom is still very much a possibility.

Even if it winds up being a great movie filled with great performances thanks to masterful directing, I don’t think it’s possible to overcome the history and significance of the original, or John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn – it was his greatest role, and a great movie to boot. We’ll see come Wednesday what I (and everybody else who sees it) think.

Sarcasmo

PS – Hey Matt Damon . . . Ben Affleck is aging better than you are. Do what you want with that information, just know there are concerns.

Currently Excited About: True Grit, apparently.