Features
Headlines
Search
Archives
Well, they held out on us for long enough, but we have finally been afforded a glimpse of the year’s last major awards hopeful. It’s short, sweet and pleasingly oblique — but you only need watch the first few seconds to know we’re in for something a bit more substantial than the creaky 1969 oater that won John Wayne his gold-watch Oscar. At this teaser stage, they’re still keeping Jeff Bridges’s expectation-laden performance under wraps, showcasing newcomer Hailee Steinfeld instead — and she evidently has a lot to chew on. Meanwhile, whatever the fate of the film, it looks like we can write DP Roger Deakins’s umpteenth nom down in ink. Click on the image to check out the trailer via Apple, or watch the embed after the jump.
79 responses so far
1 9-27-2010 at 2:35 pm
Karen said...
We have ourselves one of the ten Best Picture nominations.
2 9-27-2010 at 2:38 pm
Mike_M said...
Sweet, sign me up! Are we thinking this will be PG-13 or R? I thought I heard somewhere (was it hear) that early implications indicated this would be PG, but doesn’t seem that way from this teaser…
3 9-27-2010 at 2:42 pm
McAllister said...
Could she be a Best Actress contender instead of Best Supporting?
Looks wonderful.
Oh man. Can’t wait.
4 9-27-2010 at 2:47 pm
caro said...
i like it but it’s easy i like western movies
5 9-27-2010 at 2:47 pm
James said...
By my record, the Coens have delivered two great American films(No Country for Old Men and A Serious Man) and the criminally underrated The Man Who Wasn’t There.
Of course with some of their films having western touches, True Grit should be a perfect match for him. Be pretty sweet if they had any sequences that matched the craft on display in several of those action sequences in No Country for Old Men.
6 9-27-2010 at 2:52 pm
americanrequiem said...
holy shit, this looks so freakin epic. yes yes yes yes thankyou
7 9-27-2010 at 2:57 pm
davidraider88 said...
When Kris watches the trailer he will go ga-ga for it lol. The film looks great, can’t wait to watch on Christmas week.
8 9-27-2010 at 3:00 pm
Jim T said...
Westerns bore me but this seems like it might be a great movie. Oh, great westerns bore me as well :p
(not that I’ve tried to see many of them)
9 9-27-2010 at 3:01 pm
davidraider88 said...
The trailer music was a little too Eastwoodian for me
10 9-27-2010 at 3:03 pm
Sean C. said...
Looks good.
11 9-27-2010 at 3:06 pm
Loyal said...
While I’m not a fan of the Brothers Coen, I do love westerns and this trailer looks great.
12 9-27-2010 at 3:08 pm
Mike_M said...
@davidraider88 I actually fell the title text/font looks Eastwood-y as well… but the whole thing still looked stunning!
13 9-27-2010 at 3:10 pm
Pete said...
Holy shit, this looks even better then I imagined.
Does this not just blow the original into tiny pieces or what?
Where are all those fools who didn’t include this in their 10 now?
And what did they expect? It’s not like Coens are not on the most important filmmakers to make a movie this year.
And not only does Bridges looks awesome. He friggin’ owns.
It doesn’t stop there, I think Coens might be looking at up to four nods again.
14 9-27-2010 at 3:16 pm
Andrew M said...
Did Kris see this yet? I don’t think he’ll be able to handle this haha.
15 9-27-2010 at 3:16 pm
Pete said...
I caught something important:
The credits list Spielberg as an “executive producer” not a “producer” as we were led to believe earlier. Weird.
16 9-27-2010 at 3:17 pm
Pete said...
And James, I haven’t seen “A Serious Man” but “The Man Who Wasn’t There” might be Coen’s best work.
17 9-27-2010 at 3:20 pm
Drew said...
I’ve watched it a few times now and it did more then give me chills. As strange as it may sound, but I think you can feel the atmosphere of this film from just a minutes glance of what’s in store.
By the way, does anyone know the song that was used? It sounded great.
18 9-27-2010 at 3:23 pm
tintin(uruguay) said...
Great trailer! Better than i expected.
19 9-27-2010 at 3:25 pm
Speaking English said...
Best directors working today.
20 9-27-2010 at 3:25 pm
Matthew Starr said...
It will be a catastrophe if Deakins does not win this year. Hell it already is that has not won yet.
21 9-27-2010 at 3:26 pm
James said...
Well Pete, I should correct myself. They have made more two great American films, but I also referring to this decade. And yes, The Man Who Wasn’t There would probably be in my top 5 from them.
22 9-27-2010 at 3:29 pm
Hunter Tremayne said...
Ah man, that was crackerjack. Loved it.
23 9-27-2010 at 3:29 pm
Speaking English said...
… Aren’t all their movies American? Am I missing something here?
24 9-27-2010 at 3:30 pm
Bing147 said...
I think minimum we’re looking at picture/actor/supporting actress/cinematography/art direction/costume design. Film editing/director/screenplay/score may all very well be in play as well.
25 9-27-2010 at 3:31 pm
Zack said...
I love the whole thing, but this being our first look at both Damon and Brolin, I was particularly impressed at how willing they, a couple of A-listers, are to obscure their recognizability for their respective roles. And since I’m a dork, I got a little chill when they showed the black mark on Brolin’s cheek.
26 9-27-2010 at 3:44 pm
SJG said...
I like the original True Grit, I love the Coen Brothers, so naturally I’m really looking forward to this.
But I don’t get why everyone’s creaming themselves over that particular teaser. It’s pretty much what one would expect, isn’t it?
27 9-27-2010 at 3:45 pm
Pete said...
Bing147,
Not the score. The Academy seems to have a clause that states that they cannot nominate Carter Burwell no matter how genius his score is.
28 9-27-2010 at 3:47 pm
Al said...
In a way its upsetting that I enjoyed what I saw, considering how much I love the original (thats right, I can admit it), but damn…..the Coens know how to make movies.
29 9-27-2010 at 3:48 pm
qwiggles said...
PRETTY excited.
30 9-27-2010 at 3:48 pm
Ella said...
Looks terrific! As does little Hailee. Can they really keep her in Supporting?
31 9-27-2010 at 3:51 pm
Zack said...
Also, just because I’m a dork: fuck it, Dude. Let’s go bounty hunting.
32 9-27-2010 at 3:54 pm
Chris138 said...
I’m impressed. Definitely looking forward to this one.
33 9-27-2010 at 3:57 pm
JJ1 said...
I think the trailer looks fantastic. That said, wasn’t there word that this film will have a comedic tinge to it, and rated PG? Or am I losing my mind?
34 9-27-2010 at 4:06 pm
daveylow said...
I don’t love the Coen Brothers but this looks like it could be good if it actually stays true to the Western genre.
35 9-27-2010 at 4:06 pm
Silencio said...
I’m not even big on westerns, but this got me ready to buy a ticket.
36 9-27-2010 at 4:06 pm
Patriotsfan said...
It’s not a whole lot, but I’m excited, although I’ve been pretty excited since they announced the project.
37 9-27-2010 at 4:08 pm
Matthew Starr said...
Scott Rudin probably feels like Secreteriat right about now with the films he has coming out this season.
38 9-27-2010 at 4:18 pm
Ivan said...
Best Actress Race remember me the 2003 scenario. That was a crowded year…
Jennifer Connelly/House of Sand And Fog, Scarlett Johansson/L i T& Girl with the Pearl Earring, Nicole Kidman/Cold Mountain, Uma Thurman/Kill Bill vol. 1, Gwyneth Paltrow/Sylvia, Cate Blanchett/Veronica Guerin & The Missing, Meg Ryan/In the Cut, Julia Roberts/Mona Lisa Smile
so it is… Jennifer Lawrence, Sally Hawkins, Anne Hathaway, Michelle Williams, Julianne Moore, Maria Bello, Naomi Watts, Diane Lane, Hilary Swank, Carey Mulligan
but eventually two of the five nominees were really unexpected …
KEISHA CASTLE HUGHES… HAILEE STEINFELD/TRUE GRIT
SAMANTHA MORTON… LESLEY MANVILLE/ANOTHER YEAR
DIANE KEATON… ANNETTE BENING/THE KIDS ARE ALRIGHT
NAOMI WATTS…NICOLE KIDMAN/RABBIT HOLE
& CHARLIZE THERON…NATALIE PORTMAN/BLACK SWAN
39 9-27-2010 at 4:32 pm
Dan Seeger said...
@JJ1, I don’t know about the rating, but the Coens have noted that they were attracted to this project because they were surprised that the original novel was so darkly funny. Given that, it’s interesting that the trailer makes it look like deadly serious Oscar bait.
Matt Damon getting the “Academy Award winner” tag in the trailer drives me nuts. Yes, it’s technically true, and yes he’s an excellent actor with ample Oscar-worthy efforts under his gun belt, but unless it’s referencing his contributions to the script, it’s also misleading. It’s not important enough to get especially upset about, I’ll admit, but it’s one of my pet peeves.
40 9-27-2010 at 4:32 pm
Graysmith said...
Looks great, no doubt. Very impressed by Steinfeld, it’d be fun if she could get in on this race too. Mostly I’m just thankful for a good teaser trailer. Doesn’t spell it out, just gives you some glimpses to whet your appetite.
41 9-27-2010 at 4:36 pm
Graysmith said...
Dan Seeger,
I don’t think it’s wrong of them to list him as an Academy Award winner. He is, after all. It’d be far more misleading to call him an Academy Award nominee because that’s all he is as an actor, and it’d be disrespectful to not list anything at all when Bridges is noted as an Academy Award winner. Damon’s Oscar isn’t any less valuable just because it’s for writing, if anything it’s all the more impressive. How many actors can call themselves Oscar-winning writers?
42 9-27-2010 at 4:36 pm
Glenn said...
Okay, I’m sold. I wasn’t too much excited for this one – I wasn’t keen on “A Serious Man” and thought they might’ve been disappearing up their own arse, but this looks great. Best western since “Open Range” from the looks of this (not that there are too many options, but ya know…)
43 9-27-2010 at 4:58 pm
Marc R. said...
and the award for best cinematography goes to…..
44 9-27-2010 at 5:02 pm
Dan Seeger said...
@Graysmith, fair points, and I’ll admit that once you decide to offer up their Academy credentials (and given the one held be Bridges is so fresh that engraving shavings are still falling off of it, why wouldn’t you?) that it would be odd in its own way to pretend Damon has only ever clapped for other people. Still, his contribution to this film is of an entirely different facet of production than the one that won him that Oscar. They’re not putting that descriptor up there to make people think “Oh yeah, he’s a really good writer.”
I’m also not trying to diminish the value of his accomplishment in winning the Oscar. I was pleased as can be when he and Ben bounced around on that stage, and I hope the two of them join Emma and Billy Bob for the occasional round of drinks in the Academy bar. It’s just off in a way that rankles me, though, as I noted, I’ll also quickly acknowledge that it’s not that big of a deal.
45 9-27-2010 at 5:07 pm
Erik 815 said...
My first thought was the same as Matthew (20) and Marc (43). Roger Deakins has ZERO oscars! Look at that trailer again and try to convince yourself there’s any way on earth he will not win. Apologies to Mr. Pfister, but he’s gonna have to sit this one out.
46 9-27-2010 at 5:28 pm
Al said...
Is there an article to back up the PG rumor? I just don’t see True Grit not being R, or at least PG 13, and I doubt a Coen brother film is capable of that either, but who knows.
47 9-27-2010 at 5:56 pm
Princess of Peace said...
Looks great and it looks like Hailee Steinfeld will be terrific!
48 9-27-2010 at 5:57 pm
Jake G. said...
Looks like this is the Best Picture winner this year!!! Best trailer ive ever seen in my life!
49 9-27-2010 at 6:08 pm
Tye-Grr said...
Wow. It looks good. Really good. I’m officially excited for this one.
50 9-27-2010 at 8:01 pm
Artorious said...
To all the people who think Deakins has this wrapped up based on a trailer, watch The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford and tell me how he didn’t win. I hope he will win, but nothing is ever assured.
51 9-27-2010 at 8:59 pm
MovieMan said...
This looks glorious. Cannot wait.
52 9-27-2010 at 9:10 pm
Leone said...
Give Deakins the Oscar right now. Yes, just based on this trailer.
53 9-27-2010 at 9:38 pm
Danny King said...
I love how the big names are sidelined in favor of Steinfeld.
54 9-27-2010 at 10:04 pm
matsunaga said...
The Oscar for cinematography last 2006 can go either way.. Though I was rooting for Seamus McGarvey for “Atonement” that year.. It was a tough call.. But there’s nothing to take away from deakins as he has proven to be one of the most talented lenser of his generation…
He proves it again here at “True Grit”….
55 9-27-2010 at 11:23 pm
Glenn said...
Jake, settle down.
And Deakins lost in 2008 because of, ahem, “There Will Be Blood”. Hardly an undeserving winner. Besides, Deakins probably split some of his vote with the more traditional (and eventual Best Picture winner) “No Country for Old Men”. Not the best year to use as an example of him being robbed.
56 9-27-2010 at 11:52 pm
matsunaga said...
Sorry it was year 2008… Though I’m rooting for Atonement…
57 9-28-2010 at 12:52 am
Guy Lodge said...
Can I make a confession? As much as I love Roger Deakins, I don’t think he’s once been the best in his nominee field.
58 9-28-2010 at 4:59 am
Dominik said...
But Deakins should have been the winner for “Barton Fink” and wasn´t even nominated. So he´s kind of due, I think. Though I´m not convinced that he will win for this, just based on this 1 minute-trailer. Wonder how so many people so easy get so excited, well.
59 9-28-2010 at 6:10 am
Pete said...
Glenn, in my opinion both ‘Jessie James’ and ‘No Country’ deserved the win over ‘There Will Be Blood’. Especially the former. We can argue about it but the point still stands.
The only reason why I stopped worrying about Deakins’ snubs is because I feel that he will be rewarded eventually. He must be.
And as for that ‘dissapering into’ comment. You really didn’t get the movie, did you? Meaning that you clearly missed the fact that it’s, above all, a comedy of a very particular kind. It was almost a science fiction comedy an very much intentionally so. That said, few people *really* did. Otherwise, any charges of pretentiousness would dissapear at once.
Guy, maybe if Deakins was nominated for Hudsucker’s Proxy we wouldn’t even be having this conversation?
As far as I see, there had been two real crimes this decades in the cinematography category:
1. Munich not even getting a (winning!) nomination. It still amazes me considering it had everything going for it. It had better cinematography then “Saving Private Ryan”!(NOT at all a dig at SPR). But, heck, objectively speaking, just like with Coens, pretty much every Spielberg film belongs in the category. “A.I.” is amazingly pretty.
2. “Children of Men” loosing to “Pan’s Labyrinth”. You want to talk traditional? I’ve got your traditional right here. Pan’s deserved to lose any year but THAT year it was a travesty.
60 9-28-2010 at 7:03 am
James said...
Kind of hope Deakins will get his win, just so we can spread the wealth a little bit at these awards shows.
61 9-28-2010 at 7:56 am
Conor said...
I have to disagree. I think the spread the wealth of awards shows is kinda silly. Instead of giving awards to people who haven’t gotten one, shouldn’t they give it to the best nominee, regardless of how many he/she has won?
62 9-28-2010 at 8:00 am
Joe said...
Guy: I wouldn’t disagree. Half of his nominations have been of the Randy Newman “oh why not” variety (see: Kundun). The other half lost out to not-all-that-undeserving winners. (For example, O Brother is one of the best lensed movies ever, but… well, so is Crouching Tiger, to be honest.)
Dan Seeger: I’ll admit I noticed that as well. (Kind of like the trailer for The Town: “from the acclaimed director of Gone Baby Gone”. I’m surprised they didn’t say “from the Academy Award winning director…”) But oh well, if you’re gonna say “Academy Award winner” after each cast member, might as well include all categories. An Oscar is an Oscar, after all. I actually have more of a problem when they mix Oscar nominees with non-nominees. “Academy Award winner Jack Nicholson! Academy Award winner Diane Keaton! And, uh, Keanu Reeves.” At least with this trailer, they could emphasize the “introducing” credit for Hailee. (Hint to the Academy, maybe?)
63 9-28-2010 at 8:27 am
Pete said...
You are not looking at this from the right angle. It’s one thing to claim the guy never produced Oscarworthy work in absolute terms (which he has and I am yet to hear anyone say otherwise) and quite another to say that people Deakins lost to happened to be deserving also.
By that logic, Deakins was deserving too. So, why not him? He is probably in the top 5 DPs in Hollywood anyway.
Resent the Randy Newman analogy too. Listen to the songs he got nominated for last year and tell me he didn’t deserve it (heck, it was certainly better than “Enchanted” and I love Menken’s work). Just because someone is consistent doesn’t mean he should be taken for granted.
64 9-28-2010 at 9:24 am
Brian said...
Perhaps I am being too pedantic but I find it irksome the way in which Damon’s Academy win, for screenplay, is being promoted in his past few films misleadingly (IMO) as an acting win.
65 9-28-2010 at 9:42 am
Brian said...
Oops sorry Dan Seeger got there before me :-)
66 9-28-2010 at 10:14 am
Alex said...
If I was a member of the general moviegoing public, I wouldn’t think Matt Damon’s Oscar win was being touted either way.
67 9-28-2010 at 10:20 am
Alex said...
*Being touted either way by its inclusion above Damon’s credit in the trailer I mean.
I think anyone who visits In Contention or most other film awards websites would most happily agree to seeing the new film by the Coen brothers any day of the week, trailer or not.
Because, like it or not, trailers are there to get asses in seats just as much as to be able to give those in-the-know like us a heads up for who and what to look out for in an upcoming awards season.
68 9-28-2010 at 11:38 am
Guy Lodge said...
“Guy, maybe if Deakins was nominated for Hudsucker’s Proxy we wouldn’t even be having this conversation?”
Hudsucker over Three Colours Red? Nuh-uh.
69 9-28-2010 at 1:07 pm
Dan Seeger said...
Glenn: The example you give always just makes me a little sad for whoever doesn’t get to have some sort of Oscar related adjective attached to their name, especially when it’s a really big cast of people who’ve received some amount of Academy recognition.
On the other hand, I would really enjoy it if every time Keanu Reeves was credited in a trailer it was as “uh, Keanu Reeves.”
70 9-28-2010 at 1:32 pm
Chad Hartigan said...
You mean Blockbuster Entertainment Award Winner Keanu Reeves?
71 9-28-2010 at 2:33 pm
matsunaga said...
I beg to disagree with Pete regarding Pan’s Labyrinth’s win over Children of Men… I think the Academy preferred Guillermo Navarro over Emmanuel Lubezki that year because the former’s work in Pan’s Labyrinth added palatability to the film… The color palette was so much defined that that it added to substance to the storytelling of the film…
On the other hand, Lubezki’s work in Children of Men, being a great cinematographer that he is, just happened to be up against a film which had a beautiful production values which the Academy usually prefers… Not that Children of Men didn’t have good production values…
You can call it a traditional pick but definitely Pan’s Labyrinth deserved the win for Best cinematography that year…
72 9-28-2010 at 5:46 pm
Pete said...
Matsunaga, I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. In my mind, Lubezki’s work was stunning, innovative, beautiful. Production values (with which his work was a perfect pairing), had nothing to do with it with the skill he brought to the film. The timing, the camera movement, the lighting, the enviroments were all captured superbly.
To me it is several orders of magnitude ahead of Pan’s. So much so, in fact, that I feel silly arguing for it. As I realize that you have your own opinion and preference, I will respectfully disagree.
In many ways, though, it is irrelivant for me why Pan’s won. The Academy has a history of recognizing a certain type of films in this category.
In my opinion, it wasn’t one of their brightest moments.
I will agree on one thing though, Pan’s Labyrinth’s lensing probably the best thing about the movie. For full disclouse, I am on record for thinking the film vastly overrated on the whole.
73 9-28-2010 at 5:46 pm
Jake G. said...
No i dont have to calm down Glenn!!! I think this is the Best Picture Winner for this year so dont tell me to calm down!!!
74 9-28-2010 at 6:00 pm
Pete said...
I support this man’s right to get excited about the movie he wants to see on a movie website.
75 9-28-2010 at 8:11 pm
matsunaga said...
Pete, you’re right about that, maybe because we have our different taste…
I guess it’s safe to say that in 2007 ceremonies, they opted for fantasy which was Pan’s Labyrinth than Sci-Fi that was Children of Men..
Just like what you’ve said, Lubezki’s work is stunning, innovative and beautiful, and I must admit that I’m a fan… Time will come that he will be recognize by the Academy and I hope it’s for The Tree of Life…
76 9-29-2010 at 12:44 pm
Pete said...
Agreed, matsunaga :) .
And for those interested in making predictions: unless she is forcefully presented that way to avoid competition with other actresses, there is practically no way Steinfeld
will be going the supporting route. The biggest change in this version is that it is now her story (she’s the central element) and she’s got more presence in the screenplay, too. If anything, it’s Bridges who’s the supporting player in this or a co-lead, at most.
Obviously, this will be more clear once the movie is actually seen.
77 9-29-2010 at 2:22 pm
Mike_M said...
I think we may have heard the PG rumors (was the word used “family friendly” maybe?) on one of the early summer podcasts. I think Kris may have said it, but I don’t recall 100%. Kris, do you remember?
78 10-01-2010 at 1:16 am
Simon Warrasch said...
Oscar Nominees for:
Picture (!)
Director (?)
Lead Actor (Jeff should be)
Supporting Actress (?)
Supporting Actor (Josh Brolin ?) (Matt Damon = NO!)
Screenplay (!)
Cinematography (! = Winner, or Wally Pfister)
Editing (?)
…