First and foremost, True Grit is a Western. Yes, that’s right, you heard me, a Western. “A Western in the 2000s?”, I hear you say with a bemused look on your face. Yes, it is a Western. Now, whilst some of you may not be shocked at the idea of a Western in the 21st Century, others of you may be puzzled as to why I’m making a rather large point about there being a Western in the 21st Century. You see, the problem is there is a common consensus that whilst Western’s are great, they’ve kind of had their day. Truly great Western’s that spring to mind are the Clint Eastwood trilogy, The Magnificent Seven, Once Upon a Time in the West and the original True Grit. The 2010 version of True Grit is the first exception to this rule.
When you watch the Clint Eastwood Western’s from the late 60s/early 70s, one of the main features is there is very little action until you get to the final few pivotal scenes. For the Clint Eastwood films to work, Eastwood’s The Man With No Name character had to have such an immense presence that you would want to watch on. True Grit has this in abundance with Rooster Cogburn. Rooster Cogburn is the kind of character I really like. He’s an Antihero. He kills people. He drinks. He’s rude, obnoxious, basically everything you wouldn’t expect in the hero of the film. And yet, he’s clearly a good guy, trying to help Mattie Ross, his “employer”, find Tom Chaney. The other hero of the film, LaBoeuf, is the complete opposite of Rooster Cogburn. He doesn’t drink, he doesn’t kill every villain he meets and he wants to track Tom Chaney down by the book. These two characters play off of each other so well and provide some of the most entertaining parts of the film, with their arguments, bickering and their need to prove they are better than the other.
While both Jeff Bridges’ and Matt Damon’s performances are excellent, Jeff Bridges as Rooster Cogburn just beats Matt Damon as LaBoeuf. Whatever scene Rooster Cogburn is in, you’re hanging off of his every word, even when he’s in a drunken state and is just mumbling. Whilst they are tracking Tom Chaney, you hear his life story as he grumbles on and on to Mattie about how his wife left him along with his son and how he really blames himself, and you actually feel sympathetic for this drunkard with an itchy trigger finger. The real point, for me, when you realise how much of a good guy Rooster Cogburn is, is when in the final scenes of the film where he travels miles and miles to get Mattie to a doctor about she is bitten by a rattlesnake, eventually saving her life.
Like with LaBoeuf, Cogburn’s character would not work as well without Mattie Ross, played by Hailee Steinfeld. Where LaBoeuf opposes Cogburn with his work ethic, Mattie opposes Cogburn with her desire to see justice done to the man who killed her father. She wields both the carrot, the money she is still to pay Cogburn, and the stick, her sharp tongue and restless desire to see Tom Chaney hang. She is religious, which Cogburn, judging by his lifestyle, probably is not, she is caring and she isn’t lazy, forming a trio of character with great screen presence and chemistry.
The best scene of the film has to be the final fight between Ned Pepper’s gang and Rooster Cogburn. The great thing about this scene is it’s like a mini rollercoaster ride. Initially, you think Rooster, the good guy is obviously going to win, even though the odds are stacked against him. Then, when his horse gets shot and Ned Pepper prepares to shoot him, LaBoeuf makes an incredible shot and kills Ned Pepper, although it takes a while for him to fall from his horse, which just raises your anticipation. Then, the scene ends with Mattie shooting Tom Chaney after he regains consciousness and knocks out LaBoeuf. Alas, my description is pretty average at best and cannot truly convey how great this scene is, so here’s a video of it:
Reading through the reviews on IMDB, the reason it’s probably not rated as highly as it should be is because people continuously compare it to the original. Luckily for me, I have not seen the original, or read the book, so I was coming at this film from a completely new viewpoint. Obviously, it will be different, it’s made over 40 years after its predecessor, with a different cast, different directors and a different approach. If you are looking for a feel-good film, this probably isn’t for you. If you are looking for romance or comedy, this isn’t for you. However, if you are looking for a great Western full of everything that a Western should contain, I would definitely recommend this film. For me, this film is a definite 8/10.
Stay tuned for more posts.
If you like what you read, follow my blog via the big Follow button at the top right hand side of the screen, or follow me on Twitter at @jcwriter678.
J.P.W. 