Tuesday, January 4, 2011

True Grit (2010)

Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen

Run time: 1hr 50min.

"The wicked flee when none pursueth." Proverbs 28:1

In the battle of The Duke versus The Dude...as much as it may be sacrilege to even whisper...this envisioning of True Grit dominates even the memorable John Wayne's Oscar-winning turn by a longshot. The Coen Brothers simply cannot make a sub-standard film. They are THE directors of our time, and though True Grit had a path already paved for it, their work here draws just as much from the 1968 Charles Portis novel to give it its own identity rather than re-hash what was accomplished cinematically in 1969.


There is a sense of apologetics to it; making it known that many faithful followers of The Duke will be put off by the intrusion on a classic, yet simultaneously it forges ahead in its own fashion. Oddly enough, this is probably their least intrusive film I have seen other than Intolerable Cruelty or O Brother, as far as pervading a viewer's psyche and making an audience uncomfortable. It certainly has its squirm-worthy moments, but it is utterly accessible and it has several chuckles along the way. It is reminiscent of Clooney's protagonist Ulysses and John Wayne's take on Rooster Cogburn's awkward interactions with the little girl he reluctantly allows to accompany him on his mission of vengeance. I say this knowing that it is ultimately unfair to compare the Duke and the Dude...and also equally unavoidable. Might as well embrace it. On to the film at hand.

We open with our introduction through voiceover to a grown Mattie Ross after the turn of the century. She recalls the events that transpired concerning her father's brutal murder, by the cravenly Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin). She was only 14 then, and soon we meet her at this age, played adeptly by Hailee Steinfeld. We encounter her tending to the final arrangements of her father's burial; but she looks to enlist the aide of a lawman who will help her exact justice for the wrong done to her and her family. The only reasonable choice of course is Jeff Bridges' incarnation of the cantankerous Marshall, Rooster Cogburn.

She is the film's moral center in a world where the good guys are good and the bad are bad; and then there are good guys who are bad at being good and good at being bad. In a place and time when America was still carving out its identity, much of American society's makeup was created in this harsh, but manner-driven old west, and the Coens lovingly embrace this conundrum. As the original is often regarded as a character study, one could also argue this breaches the same material across the hull-and makes each character toe their respective lines, none more so than Mattie. She has moxie, but a sense of justice. She is naive to believe the rest of the world is bound by her own code that she is ingrained with, but intelligent and experienced enough to endure the brutality and stern journey that awaits her.

In an early scene where Mattie first meets Texas Ranger LaBoeuf, (played by Matt Damon being, well, brilliant again---he's hit a home run in every role since The Bournes) his quirky sense of grandeur for his trade and title leave him floundering when vexed with this sassy, smart 14 year old. It's a nice balance, and again, helps set the tone for the players. Her time spent in town interacting with a wide variety of folks, including Marshall Rooster Cogburn made me smile. She hires Cogburn, being told that he is a man of "true grit"---so that he can capture Tom Chaney and hang him for his crime. LaBoeuf has made a career out of chasing Chaney; he wants him for murdering a Senator in Texas. Mattie will not stand for this and aims to see the job done right by accompanying Rooster on the hunt. Of course both men recognize the danger in this and unbeknownst to her they set out into Indian Territory where Chaney has fled. She tracks them down and in the river crossing scene--I couldn't help but think that Rooster's mentality was---"if she makes it across alive...fine. If not, it's going to ruin my best suit getting wet to save her." A recalcitrant trial by fire of sorts. It is fun to witness him hedge about it.

This is where...and I'm prepping you for it, lest you need to cover your ears (or in this case, eyes) that Bridges far surpasses John Wayne's take on Cogburn. It is in his quiet moments, when no lines are uttered...that Bridges masterfully espouses the weary, hardened, yet likable soul of old Cogburn. Each facial expression tells a story, longer than the one you are in the theatre to witness. His gaze pierces you. Let it. That's what it is there for.

You hear some high-pitched gurgling that you may give pause to and recall the bumbling Dude of Life from The Big Lebowski; (he even uses the word "abide" as the Dude does-subtle-but I think certainly intentional) and be on the lookout for a nod to The Duke--Bridges' gait as he stammers about from dismounting a horse or navigating the daylight in sobreity round the courthouse is a tribute to the old cowboy. And best of all, it does NOT detract from the storytelling, or his interpretation of the Marshall. You see it; you smile; you move on. Bravo, Jeff.

The most prevalent character to me, is the landscape. The Brother's treatment of arid life in the time of tumbleweeds and spurs becomes such a visceral presence that it drives the film; I am reminded again of O Brother, Where Art Thou and even somewhat of No Country For Old Men. With these three films Joel and Ethan are single(?)handedly reinvigorating Americana and the classic Western. I hold a large breath of trepidation and anticipation to see who else follows Western suit and with what material, for none can handle it as masterfully as these two have proven to do.

As the journey progresses, so do the risks, the dangers and the cold reality that have become as natural as the air that Cogburn breathes. Not so for his impressionable female companion. In slight disgust and wonderment does she witness some of the more viscous work that the Marshall's reputation has staked. She also becomes the self-appointed mediator between Cogburn and LaBouef who bicker like an old married couple, that ultimately still kind of like each other. The fear and debate is that the trail has gone cold, led them astray and Tom Chaney will have eluded them; seeking solace in the refuge of "Lucky" Ned Pepper's (Barry Pepper) Gang.

Talk about gritty. Barry Pepper is on-screen for about 5 minutes total and will make the hairs on your arm stand up. As the climax builds, we are steered away from the threat of Tom Chaney who briefly seems dangerous only in his ignorance, and laughable in his abundant ineptitude. It is Lucky Ned who presents a calculated danger. He has history with Cogburn, an ugly one and he won't be going quietly. But look out. Most dangerous is a foolish man who thinks he has nothing to lose. It is in the final act that we see at last, no longer the glimpse of Cogburn's grit and merit...but now the prevalent quality of determination to see justice done and safety granted to Mattie. This did cast my memory back to the 1969 version; Joel and Ethan's camerawork on the starry night horse ride is a last homage to what has transpired before. It is here in this scene, after all she has witnessed, endured, been subject to, that this resilient young woman is a girl once more--frail, vulnerable and crying sorrowful tears. This is her passage into womanhood; her loss of childlike innocence.

There is one glaring difference sadly, between the original film and this. Ironically, John Wayne won his only Oscar for his portrayal of Rooster Cogburn, though many contend he was far superior in several other roles, such as The Quiet Man...some even believe as this role neared the end of his life and career, he was given the Oscar almost as a lifetime achievement in cinema instead of for his take on the crotchity Marshall. And so, even though as good as Coen's version is, superior to the original; as pensive and clumsy and yes, "Gritty" as Bridges makes his Cogburn out to be, little of it (save the cinematography, possibly the adapted writing and direction) will probably be in Oscar contention. If the field for Best Picture stays widened to 10, it will get nominated. Matt Damon as Texas Ranger LeBouef may also get a nod, but will ultimately get overlooked; Brolin and Pepper aren't featured long enough; Steinfeld might garner some due attention; and if the Academy can forgive Bridges his temerity to reinvent an immortalized character...made immortal by a legend himself...then maybe, just maybe, he will be considered for a second year in a row.

I say all of that to say this. This is how I know that the Coens are the most exceptional directors I've seen. They had the opportunity to make a movie---to pay tribute to a classic---which they did. They made it endearingly, carefully, artfully...and deserve a lot of praise and recognition for it, but in the end probably won't get it because it will be forever measured against the orginal. And they went ahead and made it anyway. That, my fellow viewers, takes true grit.

2 comments:

  1. Thank you pardner, for reminding me. It is stirring and optimistic; while it imparts a yearning. It seems and sounds completely familiar, like it was pulled from any of the old Westerns you might have wtached as a kid. Since much of the material was previously published however, it was deemed ineligible for "best original score."

    ReplyDelete