MovieChat Forums > Trouble Along the Way (1953) Discussion > Is This an Example of Why John Wayne Alw...

Is This an Example of Why John Wayne Always Played 'John Wayne'?

posted 11 years ago by dannieboy20906
6 replies | jump to latest

The Duke has often been criticized for the narrow range of his acting. He replied in interviews that he found early on that his fans liked him in a certain type of role and that was what he concentrated on. I think he also said that he experimented with trying to broaden his image and he did not work financially.

The cost of making this movie and its box office are not listed. I expect that is because they are simply not known. John Wayne does a good job in this role. If it tanked at the box office and lost money, then it showed that he was right. Maybe this is one of his "experiments" that convinced him that John Wayne fans did not want him to be another Cary Grant.

Wherever you stand on John Wayne's politics or his acting ability, his financial acumen must be acknowledged. He made the right choices for making acting and producing a business. It is difficult to fault the decisions of an actor who was still in the box office tope ten five years after he passed away.

[–] joeparkson 11 years ago

If it tanked at the box office It wasn't because of John Wayne.

It's not a western or war movie as most Wayne movies are, but I think he's well cast here and shows great chemistry with Sherry Jackson. He's believable as a football coach and he shows a funny side.

Where the movie fails is in the casting of Marie Windsor as the ex wife. They cast the perennial noir bad woman as the ex. Can it be more one sided?

With regards to Donna Reed's character, she tries to imply that a girl shouldn't be raised as a tomboy. That simply doesn't ring true.

Absurdity: A Statement or belief inconsistent with my opinion.

[–] TorontoJediMaster 8 years ago

Yes, he did show a bit of a funny side when he and his daughter are sleeping in the bell tower and are -literally- rung out of bed when the bells sound. I loved the rare look of shock and panic on his face.

[–] liscarkat (19396) 6 months ago

The casting of Windsor is not the problem with this movie. In fact, it's a charming, entertaining film with Wayne in a rare non-action role, which he pulls off so well I wish he'd done more like it. The only thing that irritates me is Reed's character's uptight self-righteousness, which gets a bit irritating.

[–] joegerardi (384) 7 years ago

Well, the simple fact of the matter is that the Duke DIDN'T always "play John Wayne." That's been the cry of people that don't like his politics, or don't like him as an actor. There's hundreds of posts that explain and cite his range and ability, and the usual statement is that it's the ONE movie where he doesn't act like himself, regardless of how many different movies are listed in different threads.

But the short list is:

The Searchers;
She Wore a Yellow Ribbon;
Island in the Sky;
They Were Expendable.

Watch those and see if he's playing "John Wayne."

..Joe

[–] liscarkat (19396) 6 months ago

John Wayne was one of the most naturalistic actors in film history.

"He is a very, very good actor in the most highbrow sense of the word."

--Katharine Hepburn, referring to John Wayne

[–] liscarkat (19396) 6 months ago

"The Duke has often been criticized for the narrow range of his acting."

To take one example of a highly touted "method" actor, Robert De Niro always plays himself. Always. The same guy in every movie. John Wayne had a much wider range, and was far more likeable. As for Cary Grant, as great as he sometimes was, he would not have been suitable for this movie. Wayne was perfect. He should have done more non-action and romantic comedy films.