My wife came home a few days ago and said one of her employees saw it and said “Don’t bother”.
I’ll not bother. I wouldn’t have, anyway. Nothing will ever replace Wayne’s marvelous role in that film.
From the first day I heard of this remake, I was prepared not to like it.
But, I have to say, this review gives me a little pause.
John Wayne was of course unforgettable as Rooster Cogburn in the original. But, of course, he stole the show. Maybe that wasn’t all good. It’s obvious from the story itself that it is supposed to be first and foremost about Mattie Ross. And Kim Darby wasn’t really that great in the part.
I guess I’ll reserve judgment until I see it, if I get the opportunity to do so.
This actually a great movie. Jeff Bridges is wonderful and the script lends a lot more dimension to Rooster than the original movie did. Wayne’s version was more broad and comedic than Bridges’, and that served the purpose of what audiences expected in the late 60s.
I love both movies, maybe the original a little more.
....back in the late 1960s when the book came out John Wayne read it and immediately bought the screen rights...he had been in the movie business long enough to know a good western when he saw one....and he knew this was going to be his baby all the way....at his age and with his experiance in the genre, there has never been an actor more perfect for a role.
I call that bold talk for a one eyed fat man.
Ditto what you said!
I liked The Dukes Version as well,but I did see the New Version ,enjoyed it, but The Duke is still the King.
Between the Two,the Wayne Movie I enjoyed the ending a lot more