Quoting Shakespeare seems particularly apt, here. For those saying that remakes are unnecessary - do you feel that if you’ve seen one production of Hamlet, that there’s nothing to be gained by ever seeing any other production of Hamlet? If not, why should movies be regarded any differently?
There does seem to be a difference in a play that is made for interpretation by actors and directors, and someone making films based on a novel.
I would like to have dinner with William Shakespeare and Charles Portis. 
Everything they do has a very distinctive voice and tone to it, both in terms of dialogue and look. They may well be the best film makers of their generation. They don’t do the conventional, they don’t walk through things and they aren’t trite. People are thinking of this as a remake of the John Wayne movie, but I’m pretty sure they’re seeing it as their own adaptation of the book and approaching it as if the John Wayne movie never existed. I think the movie is more likely to resemble No Country for Old men in terms of look and feel than the John Wayne movie. Sparse, gritty (if you can forgive the term), quirky and intensely character focused.
They also don’t do routine or bland characters. Every character has depth and quirks. I think we’ll see a lot more done with Matt Damon’s character, for instance, than the wooden, plodding Glen Campbell was able to do. They’re not making a John wayne movie, they’re making a Coen brothers movie.
Yeah, it’s clumsy, but you somehow managed to get my point. De gustibus non duodenum vobiscum, indeed, indeed.
Save for the very ending.
I would agree with all of that except for this:
I keep hearing that the Coen’s movie will be “truer to the book.” The John Wayne movie was almost slavishly true to the book (except for the very end). It lifted almost all of its scenes and dialogue directly from the book.
I would be more enthusiastic about the Coens’ movie if we weren’t being promised that it will be “truer” to the book, but rather that the Coens were doing a “meditation” on the story, merely taking the book as a starting point. That would give them the freedom to do the things that they do well.
Book fans of the type to whine about how they screwed up the book would be almost as insufferable as John Wayne fans whining about how Jeff Bridges couldn’t possibly fill The Duke’s shoes (snort and I like John Wayne as an actor).
It’s the Coens. They’ll be faithful enough, put their own stamp on the book, introduce the book to a new generation of fans, and make it great.
carnivorousplant, really, you did?
How did the book end?
Spoiler follows
Major
Spoiler
Follows
Mattie loses her arm due to the snake bite, believes that anyone interested in her is out for her money, and writes the story as a bitter “old maid”.
Ah. Thanks!
Ask the author?
Yes, Mister Portis was a patron at the library where I worked. I think I was impolite enough to twice ask him, once about True Grit as a film, and once about a scene in The Dog of the South.
I wasn’t making fun of your grammar, TreacherousCretin, just trying to say in a funny way that I adamantly disagree with you about Jeff Bridges’s acting skills (which for my money seem to consist almost entirely of bemused smiles). 
And also…
Mattie never sees Rooster again after he rescues her from the snake pit. He winds up joining a touring “Wild West” show. Years later Mattie tries to catch up with him at one of its performances, only to learn that he has recently died. Pretty depressing stuff.
I liked the movie’s ending better, really.
Come on, he does more than that. Have you ever seen anyone who can shamble with as much effortless grace as he does?
Seriously, Bridges is an understated actor, but he does act. He’s not showy but he embodies characters.
I was thinking the same thing.
Mr. Portis has never been into Happy Endings, as I recall.
Thanks, Spoke, I think. I’d forgotten that.
Wait, you’re faulting Bridges for using a style that’s recognizable, and saying that Wayne is a better actor? Look, I like them both for different reasons, but while Bridges can play Rooster Cogburn, Wayne could and would never have played characters like The Big Lebowski’s The Dude, Fearless’s Max Klein, The Fisher King’s Jack, Stay Hungry’s Craig Blake, The Last Picture Show’s Duane Jackson, The Men Who Stare at Goats’ Bill Django, American Heart’s Jack Kelson, Surf’s Up’s Zeke ‘Big Z’ Topanga, Iron Man’s Obadiah Stane, Arlington Road’s Michael Faraday, Jack Baker, Preston Tucker, Matt Scudder, Lewis Tater (and Neddy Wales), Barney Cousins, Jack Forrester (he sure has played a lot of Jacks), and on and on.
STARMAN! Frickin’ Starman!
Bridges does indeed have an affable bemused smile, but he’s also a great actor, equally at home in serious roles, scary roles, grown-up roles, silly roles, goofy roles, hard-edged, vulnerable, murderer, hero, villain, sweet, down-on-his-luck poor man, psychopath, President of the United States, dreamer, you name it. I mean, really, I can’t believe I just spent a half-hour getting links to “prove” that Jeff Bridges is one of our finest actors, but it was fun. John Wayne is great, I’d never put down John Wayne, especially since I do love him in the original True Grit, and I just saw him in Rio Bravo fir the first time a few weeks ago and loved it/him, but come on, John Wayne didn’t have a fraction of the range Bridges has.
Who said Wayne is a better actor? Neither of these guys is a “great” actor. However, those who say Wayne couldn’t act are dead wrong, as are those who say Bridges is a great actor. Bridges is a decent actor, who nevertheless manages to bring a little bit of “stoned surfer” to every role he plays. “Stoned surfer” is not what the role of Rooster Cogburn requires.
Wayne was born for that role, Bridges was not.
I hope Bridges and the Coens prove me wrong. I’m a big Coen brothers fan so I have some hope they’ll make it work (…a hope tempered somewhat by memories of The Ladykillers).
(And please spare us the affliction of more badly faked Southern accents.)
I was attempting to play along. Looks like you’re funnier than me.
Which would still make him a more versatile actor than JW and his shoes.
We must agree to differ. Speaking of which- “De gustibus non est disputandum” ? You’re in America now, Pal. Speak Spanish.
.
Ah…validation!