• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Polly Pickford
    January 29, 2011 - 19:17

    The simple "remake" of a movie as a source of "Revenue" , nothing more, nothing less . Commerce at its crassest .

  • Dougf
    January 29, 2011 - 09:42

    Well speaking as one who has lived through the advent of the current age of almost complete 'relativism' , I find myself increasingly in favour of a more 'absolutist' cast of mind. And even moral absolutism as portrayed in the Coen film has clear boundaries and distinctions as indicated by a scene near the end of the film in which Mattie meets up with Cole Younger and Frank James. She treats Mr. Younger with clear civility and human 'respect' because he shows the same qualities to her, but she is completely disdainful of Mr James as he is 'scum' to her. And why ? Because Younger stood for her and James oafishly remained seated, earning him the withering retort " stay seated, scum'. And yet both were outlaws back in the day. Nor does she turn from Rooster when he confesses to her that he too was an outlaw way back in the day in new Mexico. She's not a prig, and she does contextualize. She's just clearly on the side of 'right' . Nowadays, we look for the good in the bad at all costs and where has it got us. A veritable morass of moral equivalence, in which we cannot even call anyone a 'terrorist' because they have their reasons. An economic World in which the few can ruin the lives of the many and profit from it and NOTHING happens to them except they become richer. Yes people are fed up with 'modern morality'. Because it's NOT moral at all. It has no central core and therefore no guideposts along the way for people to at least take notice of, even if they don't always manage to head in the 'right' direction. I take note of another small 'modern' anecdote which i think sums up the issue. A recently retired Gurka soldier in India fought off a hoard of dacoits on a train to defend the other passengers and evidently killed 3 and wounded 8 of the gang before they fled. In hand to hand combat with only his kukri against all their weapons. In India he is to be honoured and rewarded for his courage and steadfastness. As others have pointed out (and not with ANY respect) in the effete, decayed, and moribund, West, that man would be under arrest for possessing a concealed weapon and for abusing the criminals. Victims don''t matter here any more since everyone is a victim of something now. Yes we need 'understanding' of human frailties and some compassion for SOME of the 'evil-doers', but in the end we have to be able to draw distinctions between 'good' and 'bad' behaviour, and the current 'morality' has proved itself incapable of doing that in the final analysis. It gets 'confused' easily and people are getting increasingly fed-up with it. They want some form of moral 'arc' , especially since they have discovered that relative morality ALWAYS ends up in a bad place, because humans given the option will inevitably head off the rails in numbers sufficient enough to derail the entire system and bring it into disrespect and disrepute. Yes we do need a 'balanced' outlook but the 'modern' system is completely out-of-balance. It excuses the Cheneys and punishes the Cogburns as a default position. It's the triumph of the pencil-necks. And it has failed. In the end, it too will pass from history as a failed experiment. As it should . Nothing lasts forever ---- especially failed things.

    • Aidan
      February 26, 2011 - 00:53

      Jeff bridges plays mr James at the end! I haven't read the book so I'm not sure if this is just the coen's spin on the story. Is it supposed to be cogburn just wanting to get a look at mattie one last time to see how she ended up? Weird!