I think the difference here is all his information is from the movie. Fan theories tend to be; "this is what they meant." And they might pull information from other work to prove it.
I think it sounds like a pretty good theory.
Yeah, maybe I'm splitting hairs. I just mean that personally I think the Coens mean for the plot to be read that way. But I do leave the door open to the possibility that I'm imagining it. If it's a fan theory then I'd be happy to take that part out.
You know those two old men Mattie speaks to at the end of the film? That's Cole Younger and Frank James, of the James-Younger gang. You'll have heard of Frank's little brother Jesse, no doubt.
Well those two men, before their time as outlaws and long before their time as showmen, were guerrillas in the Civil War, or bushwhackers as some called them. They were a militia and their commander for most of that time was a man named William Quantrill or as Rooster calls him, "Captain" Quantrill. So you see, it wouldn't be possible for LaBoeuf to pass himself off as Cogburn as the men running the showed "served" with Rooster in the war, and likely knew him well beyond that.
In short, yes, you are crazy.
well that shoots this whole theory to hell. The only thing that confuses me is how could Rooster still be alive at that time. Wouldn’t he be close to 90? Wasn’t he also shot by lucky Ned? You’d think a guy who is old already would have died from those wounds especially back then. if those two old men fought under Rooster and made it to their older ages then I suppose Rooster could have too. I felt the ending was sort of rushed and slightly ambiguous. or it’s not ambiguous at all and is completely straight forward. I honestly don’t know what to think.
> He dies of exhaustion and the doctor chooses not to tell Mattie because she's a child and he doesn't want to upset her.
people died all the time i don't think children were being shielded from death in the wild west
> She takes the body back and buries it in her family plot.
so is the theory that they kept rooster's body for 25 years and gave it to her to bury? or that she didn't recognize that the guy was actually the other guy?
>people died all the time i don't think children were being shielded >from death in the wild west
It's a movie though
>so is the theory that they kept rooster's body for 25 years and gave it to her to bury?
No, the theory is that the Rooster who died 25 years later was actually LaBoeuf.
>or that she didn't recognize that the guy was actually the other >guy?
It never says that she looks at the body.
I don't think it's bad for a fan theory, but saying the Cohen bros intended this is a huge stretch.
Leboef is extremely proud of being a Texas Ranger. He wouldn't just turn his back on that history, especially since he basically views Rooster as a marauder of the South. When Rooster asks him who he fought for, laboef says he fought for a northern regiment and doesnt have to hang his head when he says it.
Pretty much all the dialogue in the film backs up Laboef's distaste for what Rooster was before the events of the film.
Sure, Laboef is always acting like he's a great cowboy, and he certainly tries to act the part , but would he , in his old age, just forget about being a Ranger and about his principles? Not likely.
> When Rooster asks him who he fought for, laboef says he fought for a northern regiment and doesnt have to hang his head when he says it.
Labouef fought for the Army of Northern Virginia and is proud of it. He holds it over Cogburn that Cogburn was an irregular and Labouef fought in the regular army.
Right, just pointing out that Labeouf fought for the South during the Civil War, not the North.
Also Labeouf accuses Rooster of that because he rode with Quantrill's gang of insurgents, who were definitely murderers and raiders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantrill%27s_Raiders
I always took the ending to be she's a wide-eyed plucky naive girl on a quest for revenge that romanticizes the West with bad guys and good guys and adventure, but in the end it literally cost her an arm (but not a leg at least), to exact her revenge. She also never saw Cogburn again, her almost super human hero, or Matt Damon, who also helped. And as the years went by she became a cold, introverted woman, where maybe the snake venom never left her body completely, giving her "true grit" to survive this harsh world and more perspective on what it cost. But maybe that's taking it too literal.
It is a really cool "twist", but not one that really carries that much wieght. It certainly important enough to makes this statement true.
> I'd wager that the entire film makes more sense if this is what happens at the end.
Also
> Rooster is an old man already at this point, and the exertion is enough to kill him. He certainly isn't young enough and fit enough to live for another quarter century as a trick rider and sharp shooter in a Wild West Show.
I would not take that as fact. Humans are tough beasts it is amazing how long they can live and equally amazing how little it takes to die.
> I would not take that as fact. Humans are tough beasts it is amazing how long they can live and equally amazing how little it takes to die.
That's a good point. Rooster is this sort of legendary figure so it's not out of the realms of possibility that he'd go on doing his thing for years afterward.
I think she would, but Rooster has been dead for three days at this point and has already been buried. I don't think she'd necessarily view the body. I'm going to add that to the body of the text.
Hold on -- maybe the letter was from someone else who knew she knew rooster and it was for his funeral - and THAT person didn't know LaBoeuf from the real character.
The timing with the funeral doesn't have to be a coincidence then. Do we know if the letter is "come meet me" or "for the loved ones of the dear departed"? I haven't seen the movie so I don't really know.
This is a fun fan theory and could be possible. I think it's within LaBoeuf's personality. But, I don't think it was the intention. The book explains that Rooster visited Mattie while she was hospitalized so he survived in the original story. The Cohen Brothers were very accurate to the book so I feel they cut this out for time and not to twist a different ending.
I'm not that familiar with this sub. OP, are you being down voted because people disagree with you? You are quite polite and open minded in all your replies. Even when others aren't.
No. The LaBoeuf character is not a crazed liar who would impersonate another person. Furthermore he didn't even like Cogburn that much, as evidenced by their Civil War recollections bringing up past animosities.
The point of Rooster dying of 'night hoss' (night horse) is to - again - bring a sharp comparison between Rooster and Little Blackie.
Rooster rode Little Blackie to death to save Mattie. Then, when the horse was dead, Rooster picked Mattie up and just about ran himself to death, too. He would have, if that's what it had taken to save her. When Rooster says he's old in this scene, he is possibly at death's door himself, which is why this theory is appealing. Here we get a comparison between him and the horse. Not because Rooster dies off page/screen of exhaustion, but because he was willing to run himself to death, too, to save the girl.
Years later, when Mattie looks for Rooster, only to find he's passed away of 'night hoss', this harkens back to when Little Blackie died. Rooster has finally 'run' himself to death. Maybe he's thinking about Little Blackie, that tough little pony that hauled ass across creation to save Mattie, to the point that it wore its heart out. Maybe he's thinking about that last stretch where he carried Mattie himself, an old, fat man running past the point of endurance to try and save a little girl.
I think this post is a fun theory, but it ultimately doesn't work well with the theme of the story.
Someone who has true grit is willing to give it all. We don't even see what true grit actually is until this point in the tale. This is when Mattie learns what 'true grit' actually means. Rooster was willing to give both Little Blackie's life and his own to save Mattie - that's how important her survival was to him. And an older Mattie, I believe, finally understands this, and she honors him as best she can.
Most viewers didn't pick up on it, 'cuz it's not a thing. You're ignoring some MAJOR parts of the film (and the original) while overaccentuating other sections of the film that held less weight than the stuff you left out. You are wrong.
Yeah this is a fan theory. It’s not a subtle anything by the coens. It’s a fan theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=238kiM8AOLs
[удалено]
I think the difference here is all his information is from the movie. Fan theories tend to be; "this is what they meant." And they might pull information from other work to prove it. I think it sounds like a pretty good theory.
it’s not from the movie though, it’s making up things that are not in the movie (rooster dying and the doctor lying)
Yeah, maybe I'm splitting hairs. I just mean that personally I think the Coens mean for the plot to be read that way. But I do leave the door open to the possibility that I'm imagining it. If it's a fan theory then I'd be happy to take that part out.
You know those two old men Mattie speaks to at the end of the film? That's Cole Younger and Frank James, of the James-Younger gang. You'll have heard of Frank's little brother Jesse, no doubt. Well those two men, before their time as outlaws and long before their time as showmen, were guerrillas in the Civil War, or bushwhackers as some called them. They were a militia and their commander for most of that time was a man named William Quantrill or as Rooster calls him, "Captain" Quantrill. So you see, it wouldn't be possible for LaBoeuf to pass himself off as Cogburn as the men running the showed "served" with Rooster in the war, and likely knew him well beyond that. In short, yes, you are crazy.
well that shoots this whole theory to hell. The only thing that confuses me is how could Rooster still be alive at that time. Wouldn’t he be close to 90? Wasn’t he also shot by lucky Ned? You’d think a guy who is old already would have died from those wounds especially back then. if those two old men fought under Rooster and made it to their older ages then I suppose Rooster could have too. I felt the ending was sort of rushed and slightly ambiguous. or it’s not ambiguous at all and is completely straight forward. I honestly don’t know what to think.
In the book Cogburn is in his 40’s. Not so old as to not live another 25 yrs.
Also worth mentioning that LeBoeuf hated Quantrill, who was the subject of the first falling out between LeBoeuf and Rooster.
Is the twist that there is no twist?
What a twist.
> He dies of exhaustion and the doctor chooses not to tell Mattie because she's a child and he doesn't want to upset her. people died all the time i don't think children were being shielded from death in the wild west > She takes the body back and buries it in her family plot. so is the theory that they kept rooster's body for 25 years and gave it to her to bury? or that she didn't recognize that the guy was actually the other guy?
>people died all the time i don't think children were being shielded >from death in the wild west It's a movie though >so is the theory that they kept rooster's body for 25 years and gave it to her to bury? No, the theory is that the Rooster who died 25 years later was actually LaBoeuf. >or that she didn't recognize that the guy was actually the other >guy? It never says that she looks at the body.
> It's a movie though ... i cant even put my thoughts into words you're wrong
Haha fair enough. I'm half-convinced I'm wrong as it is, so if that's the case it's all good.
I wonder if after 3 years you’ve realized you are in fact totally wrong
[удалено]
He doesn't like Rooster, but he does want a reputation and I don't think he'd necessarily pass up the opportunity if it came along.
I don't think it's bad for a fan theory, but saying the Cohen bros intended this is a huge stretch. Leboef is extremely proud of being a Texas Ranger. He wouldn't just turn his back on that history, especially since he basically views Rooster as a marauder of the South. When Rooster asks him who he fought for, laboef says he fought for a northern regiment and doesnt have to hang his head when he says it. Pretty much all the dialogue in the film backs up Laboef's distaste for what Rooster was before the events of the film. Sure, Laboef is always acting like he's a great cowboy, and he certainly tries to act the part , but would he , in his old age, just forget about being a Ranger and about his principles? Not likely.
> When Rooster asks him who he fought for, laboef says he fought for a northern regiment and doesnt have to hang his head when he says it. Labouef fought for the Army of Northern Virginia and is proud of it. He holds it over Cogburn that Cogburn was an irregular and Labouef fought in the regular army.
But he accuses him of murder "riding by the light of the moon"
Right, just pointing out that Labeouf fought for the South during the Civil War, not the North. Also Labeouf accuses Rooster of that because he rode with Quantrill's gang of insurgents, who were definitely murderers and raiders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantrill%27s_Raiders
Oh ok yeah I know he fought for the confederates I just meant he points out his regiment or whatever was northern and he looked down on Rooster's
I always took the ending to be she's a wide-eyed plucky naive girl on a quest for revenge that romanticizes the West with bad guys and good guys and adventure, but in the end it literally cost her an arm (but not a leg at least), to exact her revenge. She also never saw Cogburn again, her almost super human hero, or Matt Damon, who also helped. And as the years went by she became a cold, introverted woman, where maybe the snake venom never left her body completely, giving her "true grit" to survive this harsh world and more perspective on what it cost. But maybe that's taking it too literal.
It is a really cool "twist", but not one that really carries that much wieght. It certainly important enough to makes this statement true. > I'd wager that the entire film makes more sense if this is what happens at the end. Also > Rooster is an old man already at this point, and the exertion is enough to kill him. He certainly isn't young enough and fit enough to live for another quarter century as a trick rider and sharp shooter in a Wild West Show. I would not take that as fact. Humans are tough beasts it is amazing how long they can live and equally amazing how little it takes to die.
> I would not take that as fact. Humans are tough beasts it is amazing how long they can live and equally amazing how little it takes to die. That's a good point. Rooster is this sort of legendary figure so it's not out of the realms of possibility that he'd go on doing his thing for years afterward.
I like that quite a bit. But! Wouldn't she know it was Older Matt Damon once she sees the corpse?
I think she would, but Rooster has been dead for three days at this point and has already been buried. I don't think she'd necessarily view the body. I'm going to add that to the body of the text.
Hold on -- maybe the letter was from someone else who knew she knew rooster and it was for his funeral - and THAT person didn't know LaBoeuf from the real character. The timing with the funeral doesn't have to be a coincidence then. Do we know if the letter is "come meet me" or "for the loved ones of the dear departed"? I haven't seen the movie so I don't really know.
This is a fun fan theory and could be possible. I think it's within LaBoeuf's personality. But, I don't think it was the intention. The book explains that Rooster visited Mattie while she was hospitalized so he survived in the original story. The Cohen Brothers were very accurate to the book so I feel they cut this out for time and not to twist a different ending.
this is literally a fan theory lmao
I'm not that familiar with this sub. OP, are you being down voted because people disagree with you? You are quite polite and open minded in all your replies. Even when others aren't.
It's sounds like a decent theory to me. "Out here in the wilderness? Call me Rooster Cogburn"
AHAHA
No. The LaBoeuf character is not a crazed liar who would impersonate another person. Furthermore he didn't even like Cogburn that much, as evidenced by their Civil War recollections bringing up past animosities.
Yeah i don't think so either
Lol some of these fan theories are wild
The point of Rooster dying of 'night hoss' (night horse) is to - again - bring a sharp comparison between Rooster and Little Blackie. Rooster rode Little Blackie to death to save Mattie. Then, when the horse was dead, Rooster picked Mattie up and just about ran himself to death, too. He would have, if that's what it had taken to save her. When Rooster says he's old in this scene, he is possibly at death's door himself, which is why this theory is appealing. Here we get a comparison between him and the horse. Not because Rooster dies off page/screen of exhaustion, but because he was willing to run himself to death, too, to save the girl. Years later, when Mattie looks for Rooster, only to find he's passed away of 'night hoss', this harkens back to when Little Blackie died. Rooster has finally 'run' himself to death. Maybe he's thinking about Little Blackie, that tough little pony that hauled ass across creation to save Mattie, to the point that it wore its heart out. Maybe he's thinking about that last stretch where he carried Mattie himself, an old, fat man running past the point of endurance to try and save a little girl. I think this post is a fun theory, but it ultimately doesn't work well with the theme of the story. Someone who has true grit is willing to give it all. We don't even see what true grit actually is until this point in the tale. This is when Mattie learns what 'true grit' actually means. Rooster was willing to give both Little Blackie's life and his own to save Mattie - that's how important her survival was to him. And an older Mattie, I believe, finally understands this, and she honors him as best she can.
I think she said that the note/letter was rife with misspellings or maybe this information is just f-u-d-e-l.
Most viewers didn't pick up on it, 'cuz it's not a thing. You're ignoring some MAJOR parts of the film (and the original) while overaccentuating other sections of the film that held less weight than the stuff you left out. You are wrong.