Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: "True Grit:" nothing special. For the first time in memory, Bridges gives a

Posted by Dalton on December 28, 2010 at 15:05:13:
>> Two immediate examples that prove you wrong: the determination of the girl in her dialog with the horse seller and the violence erupting in the cabin. There was plenty going on to keep you on your toes. <<
It's funny you bring these two particular scenes up. They stuck out in my mind as the ONLY two scenes done better in the original 1969 True Grit.
One improvement in the Coens' version: Mattie's falling into the snake pit as an "equal and opposite reaction" of firing the fatal gunshot to Chaney was more symbolic. In the original, it comes off more as a plot convenience since Chaney lives after Mattie's shot. (It is Cogburn who finally kills him.)
The original took a more paternalistic approach. Mattie remains "innocent" of any direct killing and does not lose her arm. In the Coens' version she gets retribution at her own hand, but must be "punished" with an irredeemable physical handicap, just as Cogburn was. There's a little more truth and resonance to the story this way, implying that justice does not come without cost to he (or she) who seeks it.
Was the Coens' more explicit telling of the story worth all the effort? Not really. As I said in an earlier post, the lessons are obvious and virtually the same in both versions. And the Wayne version is more entertaining.