Even though the biggest stars don’t necessarily make the best movies, Roger Ebert was usually a fan of John Wayne, who reigned as one of Hollywood’s foremost and most formidable icons for decades.
There are usually exceptions, though, and the celebrated critic had a couple. Most notably, he despised The Green Berets, which was fair enough when its entire existence was to stir up jingoism and patriotism in an audience who vociferously rejected ‘The Duke’ headlining what was effectively pro-Vietnam propaganda.
Ebert liked the classics, awarding the full four stars to Red River, Stagecoach, and The Searchers, to name just three. When Wayne was at his best, Ebert enjoyed watching the face of the ‘Golden Age’ western strutting his stuff. However, he drew the line when age began to creep in and ‘The Duke’ started to rely on past glories.
True Grit was another film that earned a four-star rating from Ebert, and it was the crowning achievement of Wayne’s career after he finally won an Academy Award for his performance as Rooster Cogburn. On the surface, it didn’t really have much in the way of franchise potential, but interest in the self-titled sequel was nonetheless high thanks to a combination of its predecessor’s popularity and Katharine Hepburn joining the cast as Eula Goodnight.
Two legends going toe-to-toe was enough to sell Rooster Cogburn to audiences, making the film a box office hit. The critical response wasn’t anywhere near as kind, with the overriding sentiment being that the only thing the follow-up had going for it was the presence of two legends coasting by on their inimitable presence and star power.
“John Wayne and Katharine Hepburn, it needs no saying, are two of the strongest presences in the history of movies,” Ebert began his one-star review. “Just to see them on the screen is to remember dozens of roles, many of them great, that shaped them almost into elemental forces. The problem with Rooster Cogburn is that those memories become mostly painful.”
He accused the movie of allowing its leads to “conspire in a ripoff of some of their finest moments,” and criticised the sequel for being too self-aware for its own good: “The dialogue they’re given is so consciously arch, so filled with subtle little recognitions of who the two actors are, that we never care about the story, and it never gets told.”
In short, how did Rooster Cogburn make Ebert feel? After blasting it as “contrived” and “so obviously a vehicle” for Wayne and Hepburn to place the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia upon the unsuspecting viewer, he spoke for the audience and said, “We just get depressed.”
The two icons appeared in their fair share of classics, but when they finally joined forces, Ebert could only remark that “talent shouldn’t be thrown around like this.”