I'm normally quite averse to most movie remake ideas, particularly ones where they remake a classic that stands up well to time. I know it's mostly for economic reasons, but honestly some iconic movies just need to be left alone (could you honestly imagine ever hearing of a remake of the Lord of the Rings? Or the Harry Potter films? Right. That feeling of confusion and wave of ridicule you just got is why I don't really like remakes). The one reason I did give TG10 a chance was because of the Coen brothers. The Coen brothers are on a big roll and have proven, particularly in the last 4 years, that they are gifted filmmakers who understand how to properly construct a story. 2 of their last 3 films have been great, critically praised, and nominated for Best Picture: No Country for Old Men (NCFOM), which won them an Oscar for Best Director, with the film winning the BP Oscar, and A Serious Man (most folks seem to have ignored Burn After Reading. Having seen it, I'd say that's a good thing). Because this story was going to be in their capable hands, I went into the theatre keeping an open mind and reminding myself that every once in a while the remake can do the original justice (think King Kong of a few years ago).
Unlike book to film comparisons, I have no trouble comparing remakes to originals, as they are on the same medium. Fortunately for us, TG10 delivers the goods and is the original's equal. This film does a great job of setting the atmosphere of the movie's time period from the jump, drawing us in to the classic, idealized American West. We get the sense of lawlessness and incivility that the West is known and celebrated for in American cinema. The movie is also beautifully shot; as with NCFOM, the Coens once again show a great aptitude for putting the American West landscape on film and finding strategic moments to fill our eyes with beauty - shots where there is light snowfall, particularly at night, immediately spring to mind. That's not to say that TG69 (1969 was when the original was released - get your mind out of the gutter) didn't effectively capture the West; it just didn't do it as thoroughly as TG10. I know a lot of that has to do with the advancements in camera technology, but it nonetheless makes a big difference. The Coens also bring a lot more wit and humor to this incarnation than the original, with some scenes being laugh out loud funny. I appreciated that small thread of humor woven throughout.
Although it's been a long time since I've seen TG 69, there are a few differences, some big, others tiny. The biggest one is that, for me, TG10 really fleshes out and completes the Mattie Ross character, rather than regulating her to a tag-along like the original. I suspect the original gave much of her character's chutzpah to the Rooster Cogburn and LeBoeuf characters so as to make them seem more heroic and important - in a postmodern, more feminist world, I like TG10's interpretation of Mattie better. Additionally, as best I remember TG69, LeBoeuf stays with Cogburn and Mattie throughout their adventure, whereas in TG10 he goes away for a while and comes back. I think this is pertinent as it increases some of the antagonism between LeBoeuf and Cogburn. And finally, some scenes, like the finding of Emmett and The Kid in the small house, are set at night in TG10 as opposed to the day in TG69. While I imagine that TG69 had to set most of its action during the day for technical reasons (harder to film things on location at night in 1969 vs today), the nighttime setting is preferable as it adds to the tension of the action. TG10 is just as good if not better than TG69 in most respects with one exception: the iconic, climatic Rooster vs Lucky Ned and his gang shootout. While Jeff Bridges is great (see below), he ain't John Wayne. You just don't get the same adrenaline rush and chills as the original gives when Rooster rides into his adversaries. John Wayne will always own that scene.
My biggest complaint about TG10 would be something that a friend pointed out to me before I saw it and then subsequently noticed in the viewing. The film is set in Arkansas in the late 1800s, yet all of the characters, with very few exceptions, speak perfect, proper English with fantastic diction. I have lived in the south for many years, and though I've never lived in Arkansas, I know several people that have and I can assure you that it is hard to be in a southern community and not have people that have a drawl, speak with improper grammar, or sound awkward. While I recognize some of that is the Coen brothers style of dialogue, it seemed nonsensical to not at least attempt southern speech. Even Damon's lame attempt at a Texas accent doesn't cut the mustard. A story set in the old south where everyone speaks properly? That dog don't hunt.
No conversation about TG10 can be complete without talking about the amazing cast. It's kind of impossible to takeover a role that's already been cemented in most people's mind as legendary - John Wayne did win his only Academy Award for TG69 - but Jeff Bridges does an excellent job as Rooster; he will no doubt get an Oscar nomination. Bridges' Rooster is more drunken, slovenly, and ill-tempered, which is probably how the author of the TG novel imagined him. Damon adds to his list of impressive supporting roles as LeBoeuf. Brolin is serviceable as Tom Chaney, and Barry Pepper makes a pleasantly unexpected but welcome appearance as Lucky Ned. But the real star of this movie is Hailee Steinfeld. She is fantastic as Mattie Ross, perfectly capturing her character's determination, gumption, wit, and intelligence; you know almost immediately that this is no ordinary 14 year old girl. Her scenes with Colonel Stonehill perfectly encapsulate the essence of her character. She is a real joy to watch, and she should grab an Oscar nod. It is well deserved.
Overally, this is a great moviegoing experience. I think TG10 is slightly superior to TG69, but they are both worth your time. Let the hunt for Tom Chaney begin (and then begin again).
No comments:
Post a Comment