That's right, usually when I do this it's during the Halloween season. But then I realized I should've made "vs." during any season because there remakes out there that aren't horror related. So let's get started with the True Grit films.
Contender #1 - True Grit (1969)
Director - Henry Hathaway
Writer(s) - Marguerite Roberts
Release Date - Jun 11th, 1969
Production - Wallis-Hazen
Distribution - Paramount Pictures
Budget - $900,000
Gross - $31,100,000
Contender #2 - True Grit (2010)
Director - Joel and Ethan Coen
Writer(s) - Joel and Ethan Coen
Production - Paramount Pictures, Skydance Productions, Mike Zoss Productions, DreamWorks Pictures, and Scott Rudin Productions
Distribution - Paramount Pictures
Budget - $35-38,000,000
Gross - $252,300,000
Story
The story for both films is, a hired hand by the name of Tom Chaney has shot and killed Frank Ross. While he's on the run, Frank's daughter Mattie hires lawman Rooster Cogburn to hunt him down, along the way they meet Texas Ranger LaBoeuf, who's also hunting down Chaney. All three of them decided to work together, find Chaney, and bring him to justice.
Round #1 - Visuals
As per usual these seems very unfair because both directors had very different equipment to work and different budgets. So it makes sense one would have more of style to than the other. So how to I judge this then? Well simply put it's the director (or directors) experiment with their cameras. Hathaway showcases a lot beautiful landscapes and keeps his camera strongly in focus, but the Coen Brothers play with the camera much more. Closes up here and there, also showcasing the great cinematography etc.
So...as unfair as it might seem, point for the remake.
Round #2 - Characters
Oh boy, this one was kind of hard. Because both the original and remake have very different main characters. '69 Mattie is very determined to get Chaney, but she's also much more realistic and very innocent. With '2010 Mattie she's also determined, but very vengeful. Hell, revenge almost seems to be the only thing on her mind. Then there's LaBoeuf. Both versions are over their head but what separates them is 1969 still knows what he's doing, where as 2010 version is very by the book and you kind of get this feeling he's demanding to be taken seriously by Cogburn. Speaking of which, let's get to the man everybody pays to see, Rooster Cogburn. Now let's get this out of the way. Yes, '69 Cogburn is basically John Wayne, but that's what people wanted to see, However! The character is shown to be tough and cunning while still caring about others. Then we have the remake version, while still tough and badass in his own right, he seems lost and does what to do what's right.
So who wins? Well honestly I'm calling it a draw. I understand you could argue the remake wins because the characters seem much more flawed. A good argument, but I didn't hate the 1969 characters either so, it's a tie.
Round #3 - Action
To make this quick I'm calling this a draw as well. Because both provide some fun gun fight scenes. Although the remake's is much more brutal, but come on. The original couldn't show that much violence given it was the 60's. The best it could do was shoot and show the guy falling down. Unlike the remake where it's shoot, see the impact/blood splatter, and then the guy falls down. So yes, this round is a tie.
Round #4 - Story
Final round and it's all about the story! Let's start with the original. But first, let me state something, the original rightfully deserves all of the credit it gets. It's still a good movie and belongs in film history, having said, in pure unbias way, it is a typical revenge story, especially one for a John Wayne film. Bad guy is defeated, character goes off to have another adventure, the end. Sounds harsh I know but, getting from point A to point B was still handled very well.
With the remake...damn, it's dark. We still get our revenge story, but one of our main characters [Mattie] isn't left very happy. She spent a piece of life seeking revenge and got it, but in the end all of the people she meant along the way and befriend are either dead or their fates are left unknown. It's a very bittersweet story.
So which one wins? Well, while I'm all for stories where our hero gets revenge and we all cheer "Yeah! Revenge is awesome!", I do also enjoy a story about how revenge doesn't always give you much. So the winner of this goes to the remake.
Winner - True Grit (2010)
So I hope you enjoyed this edition of vs. Due come back on Saturday, Feb 8th, for my review of the newest action flick, Love Hurts. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.
No comments:
Post a Comment