Review: True Grit
True Grit is the Coens’ most genial film. Not their most personal (2009’s A Serious Man), but the least permeated by that restless, cerebral energy which occasionally pitches their work over into empty cynicism. Less an affectionate riff on the conventions of the western than it is a full-blown tribute to the genre, True Grit is also aesthetically faultless, a continuation of a purple patch that now stretches four films from No Country for Old Men. For a film that only began shooting in March of last year and premiered in December, it is an outstanding technical accomplishment.
We expect this from the Coens, though. We know they’re perfectionists. What is surprising is the transparency of True Grit’s moral universe. It possesses neither the existential turmoil of A Serious Man nor the misanthropic near-nihilism of Barton Fink or No Country. True Grit is an inviting work, even crowd-pleasing—and to be honest, that weirds me out.
This warmth is partly attributable to the source text. True Grit is based on the 1968 novel by Charles Portis, in which fourteen-year-old Mattie Ross enlists the help of trigger-happy, hard-drinking Deputy US Marshal Rooster Cogburn in tracking down the man who murdered her father in cold blood. Though the Coens’ adaptation is a far cry from the first attempt to bring the book to the screen — a stiff, bright-coloured 1969 version starring John Wayne — it adheres to the book enough to feel less “Coenesque” in its plot and preoccupations than any of their films bar The Ladykillers.
There’s the usual roster of Diane Arbus-worthy supporting characters, of course, and the period setting allows the Coens to indulge their passion for the rhythms of regional life and speech. Unlike the heroes in many of their films, though, Mattie, Rooster and Matt Damon’s LaBoeuf are all fundamentally (and unambiguously) decent people. True Grit’s villains, on the other hand, do not entirely bear out their bad reputations—but the “crook with a heart of gold” character type does not muddle our moral compass any more than “well-meaning lawman with a drinking habit”. With only one significant exception, the film is populated with good guys and bad guys and we know which is which. It’s not quite Black Hat vs White Hat, but it’s as close as the Coens have ever come. Even Fargo, enamoured of the saintly Marge Gunderson, never felt so damn upright.
For this reason, I think, True Grit is a minor work in the Coen canon. The lyrical pessimism and amor fati that haunt No Country, Blood Simple, A Serious Man and even The Big Lebowski constitute the vital spark of the Coens’ artistry. Metaphysical certitude is not unbecoming to them, but it’s a less compelling thematic choice.
Maybe they were conscious of this when crafting the final sequence, a melancholy postscript which sits awkwardly with the rest of the film. It’s a reassertion of that familiarly inhospitable worldview, emphasising the fragility of human intimacy and happiness (and sounding the film’s one and only equivocal note regarding Mattie’s headstrong autonomy). As far as I’m aware, this ending is true to the book — certainly more so than the smiles-all-round horse jump that concludes the John Wayne film — yet it could just as well have sprung from Joel or Ethan’s head.
I’m obviously a devotee of the bleak, ambiguous Coen universe, and so perhaps this finale should be a welcome return to favourite themes. In practice, though, it jars. Better that the denouement be too cynical than too sentimental? Absolutely. But True Grit’s rousing, unironic account of human lives and pursuits does not build a solid foundation for the final grim argument to rest upon. Perhaps this is a case of the artists not fully committing to an alien theme and approach, or perhaps the flaw lies in the source material (there’s an interesting discussion to be had, I think, about who bears what responsibility in film adaptations). Either way, the ending doesn’t work.
The film strikes a better balance between hope and despair in the earlier night-ride sequence. Here Rooster finally repays Mattie’s love with an act of fortitude that mirrors her own. We see that by her abiding (though perhaps irrational) faith in a fundamentally just existence, she has finally jolted him out of whisky-fuelled ennui. This haunting passage, with its too-starry sky and strange visual effects, is a clear homage to Charles Laughton’s Night of the Hunter; like that film, True Grit (until its final minutes) celebrates the unshakable convictions of childhood, recognising in them a prism by which to distinguish meaning in a bitter world. That is: the universe may be inscrutably monstrous, in the final analysis, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t enjoy our stay. The Coens could have stopped there.

jessie
07/02/11 - 9:07 PM
Really? You think these characters are decent people? I found this film chilling. I thought it was a tragedy to be honest- thought the character of Mattie was tragic & disturbing.
Yosh
07/02/11 - 10:43 PM
Well, I found the conclusion chilling – especially regarding Mattie’s character – but up until that point, I definitely felt the film was celebrating Mattie. Maybe the more triumphal aspects of the story were meant ironically, but I really didn’t experience it that way.
Jessie
07/02/11 - 11:04 PM
Yeah, I guess I found it a little less clear. Who knows, maybe i’m reading too much into it, but I felt it was deliberately dead pan- using the skin of a classic western, and filling it with something altogether more unsettling and anti-climactic.
Yosh
07/02/11 - 11:09 PM
Well, it’s not a far-fetched reading. That’s certainly the way the Coen Brothers usually play things – distorting generic codes, turning them to darker purposes. I just didn’t feel they were doing it this time!
Jake Wilson
08/02/11 - 11:39 PM
I agree with Jessie — the Coens make the same film over and over. Rooster is a monster in search of redemption, which he ultimately achieves. Mattie like most Coen protagonists suffers from the sin of pride, which comes before a fall just as it does in The Ladykillers or A Serious Man.
Yosh
09/02/11 - 8:04 AM
I’ve never thought about pride in their films, but you’re absolutely right. Particularly because most of their protagonists are a) articulate/intelligent (though usually not as intelligent as they think), and b) scheming, they do tend to overreach.
But I don’t agree that that pride is always directly responsible for the suffering that almost inevitably follows. I can’t see most of the Coen films as simply parables of Old Testament justice. They don’t read that way to me.
And whether or not the Bros succeeded, I do think they were trying to do something different with True Grit – if only in terms of trying to please a wider audience.
Brad Nguyen
09/02/11 - 7:06 PM
An interesting quote from Ignatiy Vishnevetsky’s review at http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/2628 :
“I’m inclined to think that the Coens are apolitical not because the individual films lack politics, but because each film puts on a different kind of politics like a costume (coarse cynicism in Burn After Reading, American populism in The Hudsucker Proxy, vaguely neo-conservative dread in No Country for Old Men, etc.), and I’m also inclined to think that they’re amoral filmmakers (which is not say that they’re amoral people) because their morality changes from film to film, and their personal stances (whatever they may be) are largely uncoupled from their directing.”
Jake Wilson
09/02/11 - 11:24 PM
Love Ignatiy, but disagree with that quote — the moral worldview of the Coens is pretty consistent, though it appears in a range of guises.