The Black Vault

Usually not very good. I watched one the other evening, it was ( no offense to anyone here ) but in my personal opinion, TERRIBLE. How it was EVER considered for any academy awards of any kind, is far beyond me. Only the girl could ever be considered, the others-----------not so good.

It was True Grit, one of the very best Movies ever made. They should have let it be instead of butchering it.

Cole

I haven't seen it yet.
Jeff Bridges wasn't good?
I usually like him a-lot.
You can't top John Wayne, though.
My favorite John Wayen film is, "The Cowboys"..so good..so sad
(and there's that fricken cowboy theme again..all because I saw a pic of a nice looking guy in a cowboy hat a few months ago..and it caught my eye..now cowboys haunt me..WTF??)

our minds truly do draw stuff to us.. or our attention locks onto themes and such

While I admit to liking the original True Grit movie more than the remake, I thought the new one was well made and quite enjoyable. BTW, my favorite John Wayne movie was his last-The Shootist.

The Shootist was also my favorite John Wayne Movie, but not becasue I think it was his acting in it. I loved it becasue of the story and period of time, plus it was filmed where Mrs. G-2 and I were married, up in Carson City. JW really had 3 distinct periods of his movie carreer. First was the real early westerns of the 30's, next period was the WW2 and post WW2 period through the 50's, lots of John Ford classics. Third was his later in life period, but he was always classic John Wayne in everything. Always the John Wayne face and personality. I thought True Grit and Rooster Cogburn were his best acting roles, as a character actor. He actually developed a unique character. Jeff Bridges I thought did a very good job with the character of Rooster. The same year Tomstone and Wyatt Earp were made. Doc Hoiday was played by Val Kilmer in one, and Dennis Quad in the other. Both played to role a little different, but both were excellent IMHO.

As far as remakes, usually they do not measure up against the classic versions, but those versions were for our time. The remakes are for this generation to enjoy. How many times have they made King Kong, and none match the classic first, like Frankenstein, or Dracula. Many younger people never knew the origionals exsisted. I was talking one day to the young guys at work, and was shocked to hear them all say, they didn't even know who James Cagney was.

B..

Bridges is one of my very favorites, love him...He tried to over do it this time around.... maybe the director, who knows----------------changing bits and pieces of the original script was just hard to watch. The thing with the Wild West show was unnecessary and plain stupid.

They re-make them to make money-----------has nothing to do with enjoyment----------what's wrong with watching the original, surely royalty payments don't hurt that much. Most of the older players have passed on anyway.

I guess Footloose will be the next disaster, yet to see it, not sure that I will....I wasn't a fan of the original despite being a Kenny Loggins fan.. Probably some modern day T and A galore packed into it.

Cole

Every generation has its own things, which is Okay.

I don't usually like remakes. The new True Grit was tolerable but, no more than that. It was no where near a good as the original. The remakes never are. Another thing I don't like seeing is the second, third, fourth or twentieth sequel. All they're showing to me is, no one in Hollywood has any imagination anymore. No one can make anything original anymore. All the Hollywood greats are gone, and I think the mediocre ones are too. Nothing left but the dregs.

Straw Dogs remake = legit.

Remakes are like eating out, always using someplace else as tonights yardstick for approval. Mrs. G2's Grandfather had the answer to "whats the best steak you ever had"? The one I'm eating right now.

If you never knew it was a remake, you can enjoy it for what it is.

I did forget about that ending in True Grit, where she goes to find him in the Wild West Show. I didn't care for that either Cole.

We went two times to a playhouse live performance. One stage set, only 50 seats, all done by aspiring actors you have never seen before. It was really a lot of fun to do. Point is on stage, live playhouses, or Broadway, certain plays are classics and are done over and over again, in different places by different people. Remakes in movies do not seem to have the same acceptance as live plays. Certain movies were great stage plays, like The Producers. Some things could never be remakes, like "I Love Lucy". Charleys Angels didn't make it 3 weeks, plus a few others I can't think of.

Greeny2,

Some things could never be remakes,

Agree....

How about Charlie's Angels..35 ??

or Rocky 96 ???


Is there any new and inspiring even entertaining material out in Hollywood anymore?

Is there any new original material which can survive the marketplace on writing, acting, producing, directing skills....without depending heavily on special effects??

I do not find computerized special effects to be a good substitute for the above man made skills.

Nor do I find a heavy reliance on fighting and action a good substitute for olde fashioned drama.

I think Alfred Hitchcock movies spoiled me in this arena. He did all his stuff with camera angles and light/shadow manipulation. It took me some time to realize his genius.

The last movie I enjoyed was a movie with Matt Damon..about a guy who could see into people just by touching them.

While I am not a Matt Damon fan, I recognized by this that Matt Damon was an actor who could be flexible in his roles ..not just an action type actor like Stallone.

I think the movie was called..."Hereafter."

It was the same with his role in "True Grit" though I did not like the move at all. But Matt showed himself to be not a stereotyped actor as is Stallone and John Wayne.
I can admire this.

One of the worst movies/DVDs of recent which I sat through is a move called " Machete."
Good Grief!!!

Thanks,
Orangetom