Quote: Nat Wicks @ October 6 2010, 6:44 PM BSTOne of my brians is psychic.
This guy?
New at the box office Page 125
No, my one is way better.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ October 6 2010, 6:40 PM BSTWell, they're not remaking the film, as such, as doing a new version of the novel that film was based on, which I think is fair enough.
The problem I have with that is that the novel is a true classic and the original adaptation is one of the most respectful and faithful Hollywood ever managed. The crackling dialogue is lifted directly from Portis' work and the plot is unchanged apart from the ending, which is modified for necessary filmic reasons.
Given that the locations and camera work are stunning, and the performances, from Kim Darby and John Wayne in particular, are spot on, it is difficult to see what the Coen brothers can bring to the party other than to screw it up.
And I speak as someone with a lot of time for the Coen brothers.
Quote: Timbo @ October 6 2010, 7:20 PM BSTThe problem I have with that is that the novel is a true classic and the original adaptation is one of the most respectful and faithful Hollywood ever managed. The crackling dialogue is lifted directly from Portis' work and the plot is unchanged apart from the ending, which is modified for necessary filmic reasons.
Given that the locations and camera work are stunning, and the performances, from Kim Darby and John Wayne in particular, are spot on, it is difficult to see what the Coen brothers can bring to the party other than to screw it up.
And I speak as someone with a lot of time for the Coen brothers.
I dunno, I don't see what the harm, or the problem is. It's a new film version of the book, what's wrong with that? A lot of people won't have seen the first film either, and probably never will, but would go and see this.
For example, I actually haven't seen it, don't really like John Wayne, but am very interested in seeing this version.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ October 6 2010, 7:39 PM BSTFor example, I actually haven't seen it, don't really like John Wayne, but am very interested in seeing this version.
The point is that this remake is at best redundant, but more likely a travesty.
See the original, it is very good, and is I am sure available on DVD; or better yet read the novel, which is excellent and grips from the opening line: "People do not give it credence that a fourteen year old girl could leave home and go off in the wintertime to avenge her father's blood..."
As for not liking John Wayne, Jim Carrey brings me out in hives, but that did not stop me enjoying The Truman Show. Sometimes someone is just right for a part, and I can't image anyone uttering a line like "Fill your hands you son of a bitch", with quite the same conviction as the Duke.
Quote: Timbo @ October 6 2010, 7:54 PM BSTThe point is that this remake is at best redundant,
Well that depends entirely on what they do with it. It may well be, or it may emerge as a great film in its own right, who knows?
The new Pink Panther did
Quote: Timbo @ October 6 2010, 7:54 PM BSTThe point is that this remake is at best redundant, but more likely a travesty.
People get a bit precious about these things. It's just a remake. Some are good, some are bad. And having never bothered watching True Grit, I'm rather interested in seeing the new version.
Quote: chipolata @ October 7 2010, 4:03 PM BSTPeople get a bit precious about these things. It's just a remake. Some are good, some are bad. And having never bothered watching True Grit, I'm rather interested in seeing the new version.
Why not watch the old version? I can guarantee that is good.
Funny trailer for 'Your Highness':
And, 'Cowboys And Aliens':
I'm not sure about Cowboys and Aliens. Seems a slightly one sided fight.
They might be shit aliens.
*watches trailer*
OMG, that looks awesome.
But why is Daniel Craig wearing such a rubbish hat?
'Source Code', new film from 'Moon' director, looks pretty interesting: