criterionforum.org

Markson wrote:True Grit.

Wish I could see this film NOW...

Markson wrote:True Grit.

Just got out of a 3 hour class on a rainy day. Super psyched to see this. Is it December yet?

Christ, it's exciting to see a great western come out.

truly a lost art. I actually just popped in to post this and have to admit it's the one film I'm most looking forward to this winter. Looks great, and apparently they'll be much more faithful to the book (though I never read it). I've wanted them to do a Western since Fargo, and I'm hopeful it will have been worth the 15 year wait. I just don't understand why studios are so adverse to them, while greenlighting monthly dreck with Katherine Heigl and Ashton Kutcher in whacky misunderstandings before realizing they really do love each other! Who knew Three's Company would end up having a greater impact on 21st century hollywood than John Ford and John Wayne.

some gorgeous stills

Taking on an Iconic figure like Wayne ain't easy, but i'll be damned if Bridges doesn't pull it off. and let's be real, the Academy gave him the oscar because they failed to earlier when they should have...a bit too much clowning around in this one for my taste...hopefully the hone in on the "grit"....

This, and Winter's Bone, are the only two films I have been really excited about this year in advance to their release. The trailer looks fantastic, and I agree Bridges is one of the few actors I can see filling a role formerly held by John Wayne (though, I am not a John Wayne fan).

HistoryProf, do you not consider No Country for Old Men a 'western' or a 'neo-western'?

I've always enjoyed the Coens more contemplative fare like Miller's Crossing and No Country, this looks to be more of the same which certainly has me excited. If they continue making westerns - and yes I consider No Country to be one - then they could hopefully spark more Hollywood interest in the genre.

I'm as much a fan of Westerns as the next person, but I don't really see them coming back into fashion. They were more common in the past because they all used the same studio backlot and/or ranch sets, so they were cheap and easy to make, but those conditions don't really exist anymore. I much prefer this new pace of a few good ones every few years.

I've also noticed that most of the prominent recent Westerns have been remakes of a sort; True Grit, 3:10 To Yuma, The Assassination of Jesse James (not a remake, but a Western figure who's had almost as many movies as Dracula). The only real original ones in the last 20 years that stick out to me are Unforgiven and The Proposition (which is Western Australia, at that).

willoneill wrote:I'm as much a fan of Westerns as the next person, but I don't really see them coming back into fashion. They were more common in the past because they all used the same studio backlot and/or ranch sets, so they were cheap and easy to make, but those conditions don't really exist anymore. I much prefer this new pace of a few good ones every few years.

I've also noticed that most of the prominent recent Westerns have been remakes of a sort; True Grit, 3:10 To Yuma, The Assassination of Jesse James (not a remake, but a Western figure who's had almost as many movies as Dracula). The only real original ones in the last 20 years that stick out to me are Unforgiven and The Proposition (which is Western Australia, at that).

Isn't that an essential part of the Western tradition, though, telling the same stories over and over? I don't know of anyone but Ford, off the top of my head, who remade his own movie twice.

Besides, I think the very scarceness of Westerns in the current movie environment means that any remake is going to be hugely different from its predecessor, one way or another- the context, and the way we view what the West was really like (especially after shows like Deadwood, which I would argue is the most significant portrait of the West since Unforgiven at the very least) is totally different, and movies made now are going to reflect that.

I agree that I'd rather have Westerns rare but consistently good than mass produced and overwhelmingly crappy as they used to be- between The Good, the Bad, the Weird, The Proposition, The Assassination of Jesse James, Deadwood, and No Country- not to mention (to judge from the trailer, cast, and track record) True Grit and (from what I've heard) Meek's Cutoff coming up, it's hard to think of any genre that was so good so consistently.

aox wrote:This, and Winter's Bone, are the only two films I have been really excited about this year in advance to their release. The trailer looks fantastic, and I agree Bridges is one of the few actors I can see filling a role formerly held by John Wayne (though, I am not a John Wayne fan).

HistoryProf, do you not consider No Country for Old Men a 'western' or a 'neo-western'?

I knew I should have qualified that w/ NCfOM...which I loved and I guess would consider a "modern western" or 'new-western' - I just meant that I've always wanted them to do their own McCabe and Mrs. Miller - a 19th century western setting - whether it be Monument Valley or the Sierra Nevadas, Gold Rush or Cowboys, etc. It's always felt like a genre their attention to detail and story telling abilities would thrive in, and I'm hopeful this will prove that feeling correct.

matrixschmatrix wrote:

willoneill wrote:I'm as much a fan of Westerns as the next person, but I don't really see them coming back into fashion. They were more common in the past because they all used the same studio backlot and/or ranch sets, so they were cheap and easy to make, but those conditions don't really exist anymore. I much prefer this new pace of a few good ones every few years.

I've also noticed that most of the prominent recent Westerns have been remakes of a sort; True Grit, 3:10 To Yuma, The Assassination of Jesse James (not a remake, but a Western figure who's had almost as many movies as Dracula). The only real original ones in the last 20 years that stick out to me are Unforgiven and The Proposition (which is Western Australia, at that).

Isn't that an essential part of the Western tradition, though, telling the same stories over and over? I don't know of anyone but Ford, off the top of my head, who remade his own movie twice.
Besides, I think the very scarceness of Westerns in the current movie environment means that any remake is going to be hugely different from its predecessor, one way or another- the context, and the way we view what the West was really like (especially after shows like Deadwood, which I would argue is the most significant portrait of the West since Unforgiven at the very least) is totally different, and movies made now are going to reflect that.

I agree that I'd rather have Westerns rare but consistently good than mass produced and overwhelmingly crappy as they used to be- between The Good, the Bad, the Weird, The Proposition, The Assassination of Jesse James, Deadwood, and No Country- not to mention (to judge from the trailer, cast, and track record) True Grit and (from what I've heard) Meek's Cutoff coming up, it's hard to think of any genre that was so good so consistently.

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada was another very good one. If only someone other than Kevin Costner had helmed Open Range that might have turned out well too. So it is frustrating to have so few to choose from, but you are correct that far more often than not the wait is worth it in the end. Another that I quite enjoyed, though flawed, was Seraphim Falls - a good example of 'even when they don't quite work, they are still great fun to watch' I guess.

matrixschmatrix wrote:and (from what I've heard) Meek's Cutoff

It belongs in the discussion of best Westerns ever, not just recently.

I can't get an idea from that trailer how Jeff Bridges will be in the role, but damn, his face sure has gotten appropriately craggy!

I tend to agree that recent westerns have been consistently good (although I didn't like The Assassination of Jesse James), so this will be a must-see for me.

There is an extended, far more expository trailer attached to prints of The Social Network. It doesn't appear to be online yet. The film looks pretty great.

I'm a bit surprised by who's playing Mattie, the girl. Based on the script (I haven't read the book), I thought they'd get someone who looked tougher.
Her character has one scarily one-tracked mind. Casting against type, I guess. Might work even better.

Jeff wrote:There is an extended, far more expository trailer attached to prints of The Social Network.

Found here.

Didn't know Spielberg was producing. Looks awesome.

My Dad was telling me about this a while ago. I guess he met a couple of production assistants from the film at the gun shop where he works.

Reviews are embargoed until Wednesday, so Scott Feinberg's just got yanked off his site. He called it a "classic" though, and the best western since Unforgiven. He also said the film has best picture and director nominations in the bag, plus nods for Bridges, Damon, the girl, the script, and Deakins. Apparently, Twitter is abuzz too.

Here's sample of today's reactions, and here's another. It sounds mostly quite positive. The young girl who plays Mattie sounds like she steals the show, which you would expect if the film is faithful to the novel. Word is that it is the least "Coenesque" film they've done, which will probably please as many people around here as it disappoints. I read several reviews today that compare it to Anthony Mann, so that could be interesting. Very much looking forward to it.

Kellen wrote:/Film guys have some video reaction after watching True Grit

Attention, flabby charisma-less internet bloggers: don't post video anythings of anything