Stagecoach versus True Grit (2010): Stagecoach in my opinion is a better film all around compared to True Grit (2010) because I thought that it was more interesting and had better cinematography. I realize that True Grit was filmed on better equipment and edited by all of the new technology we have in this decade but I think that everything has gotten too fancy and that the art of filming is starting to become less appreciated. (Although, I do like that it seems easier to pursue something in the film business as a job). I think that the Coen Brothers tried so hard to make the story seem real and they went too far. I like the simplicity in Stagecoach’s scenes of the open ranges of the west and their comical relief characters that made it seem like it wasn’t so bad to be in the stagecoach. I don’t think there was a comic relief character in True Grit and looking back that made the movie seem harsher. In True Grit you have the shared element of the story taking place in the time period of western cultivation and the good versus evil conflict along with Mattie Ross’s character driven to find Tom Chaney to avenge her father. But you also see Cogburn as a weak character initially because he is either drunk, in court, or in the back room of a run down place in town sleeping. I had a hard time believing that he was the main character in the story because Mattie seemed to be the hero since she did what she needed to do to get Tom Chaney herself. I didn’t realize he was till just before I started writing this and remembering that he saved Mattie’s life by carrying her back to civilization to heal her snake bite wound.
Unforgiven versus True Grit (2010) is hard for me to compare. I think that they are very similar movies and I didn’t especially like either one of them. Both I think were desperate attempts to make western movies more popular in the current culture. I think that Unforgiven is more revisionist than True Grit because in Unforgiven the women characters have larger roles than in True Grit, the only woman I distinctly remember is Mattie in her young and old self. There are not very many very violent scenes in either of the movies, I think that people now would rather see a character save someone else’s life or stand up for someone rather than seeing fight after fight. Unforgiven definitely did have more fighting than True Grit, the bar scene at the end of Unforgiven made me feel very uncomfortable. This fight, however, is why I think that Unforgiven is revisionist. Along with how Little Bill is trying to settle down and make this town larger and he ends up dying, which is symbolic of how the movie criticizes expansion of civilization. In True Grit, it can be either classic or revisionist depending on what you are comparing it to. This is definitely more of a classic western because they are out on the frontier looking for Tom Chaney. Also the characters don’t have different personalities, they are the same, and some what boring group of “cowboys” that all are angry about trying to find an enemy… big whoop, this story was boring. But both are definitely westerns be cause of the good, Mattie or Will, versus evil, Chaney or Cowboys/ Little Bill, and because Mattie and Will are looking for justice. Along with the obvious, both stories are set in the open plains of the west.
As I have mentioned in both of the earlier paragraphs I think that True Grit is a poor mixture of both the revisionist and the classic western and it made the movie un-enjoyable. In my opinion there is a fine line between what makes the movie become both types of westerns. There is such a distinction of how the two are separate that it makes me sad that the Coen Brothers didn’t choose one of them to follow, I think that because of this indecision it made the movie less enjoyable and boring. I felt like we were sitting watching the dessert and some small fights of power between the 3 people traveling then we randomly find the enemy then he’s dead and the movie is over. I loved the setting, the cinematographer gets some credit for making the movie look beautiful but thinking about the plot I don’t find any interest. I don’t think that the Coen Brothers intended the movie to be able to be analyzed by both perspectives. I think they should have taken the revisionist rout and made Mattie the hero of the story.
