In our first ever “Watch with History”, we compare the 1969 and 2010 versions of the movie “True Grit.” While the 2010 version has better cinematography, we prefer the characters and humor in the 1969 version.
May 3, 2023
People also ask
Is the True Grit remake better than the original?
Is True Grit 2010 worth watching?
Are there two versions of True Grit?
Is True Grit 2010 historically accurate?
Nov 26, 2021 · Both great. It's hard to decide. 2010 is just magic. Bridges is great. Suits the roll. 1969 is a classic. Superb.
Jan 28, 2011 · It was shot better, scripted better, edited better and acted better (except for Robert Duvall's portrayal of Ned Pepper).
Duration: 8:14
Posted: Aug 25, 2019
Posted: Aug 25, 2019
Sep 6, 2014 · I personally liked both. The original is always great but the new version is more correct in as far as how things may have turned out like the ...
Sep 3, 2023 · The 1969 adaptation made Cogburn the lead character so the movie could be a starring vehicle for Wayne, but the 2010 remake remained truer to ...
Feb 16, 2015 · I don't know what it says about 1969 vs. 2010, but it says something about Henry Hathaway who worked his butt off directing 67 movies but almost ...
The 2010 was nominated for 10 oscars and did not win one but it was very worthy of several.Jeff Bridges was more realistic,and gruffy.The 1969 was more engaging ...
Feb 18, 2011 · 1969: "True Grit" is a great novel because it balances death and revenge with charming characters and lighthearted comedy. Both movies ...
Dec 17, 2010 · Portis' novel contains a great amount of humor, especially in the dialogue of the exchanges between the characters, and this is simply better ...