I have seen both film versions of True Grit, the 2010 rendition being the most recent for me.  After reading the original novel I have concluded in my own opinion that an American western theme is still clearly represented, yet the typical “mold” has been in some ways broken.

For me there is an obvious difference between the characters played by John Wayne and Jeff Bridges. John Wayne is known for being a classic western movie star of his time. It’s not to say that Hollywood and modern media producers do not still romanticize their content, though I believe such “fluffing” was much more prevalent in the 40s and 50s. I believe John Wayne played Rooster as more of a typical “hero” and in that case followed a formula in regards to the usual Western myth, a “cowboys and Indians” sort of element that came popular with his time.

Of course, today those stereotypes have been exposed for their faults. I believe Jeff Bridges depicted Rooster’s idea in a more accurate way to what a man of the time might have been. In the past there were much more prevalent gender roles, of which were socially reflected to a degree in the time that John Wayne was an actor. Audiences of that era were expected to see that Wayne’s Rooster was “just doing his job”. A man was supposed to be tough and it wasn’t questioned. But I feel we question Bridges’ Rooster and that we are obligated to do so anyway. The Coen Brothers film exposes the hardships of the time that the film is set. But in this sense it feels like a more realistic depiction to me.

So, True Grit still goes on about tough characters surviving in a tough, new world, but over all I think that the main character’s gender plays a huge role in breaking it out of the usual myth. In comparing the two movie renditions, I feel that the first caters toward a more ordinary Western, while the latter displays a much clearer, pragmatic view on the environment of the time. Like anything, it depends on perspective how you might form an opinion. I do personally prefer the Coen Brothers film. And on a side note I was happier about the more accurate age of Mattie’s actor in it versus its predecessor. I believe part of the earlier’s casting choice also came from the tendencies of the time.