MovieChat Forums > Rooster Cogburn Discussion > Consistency Problem with This Film.

Consistency Problem with This Film.

posted 15 years ago by freedukethree
5 replies | jump to latest

*******Spoiler Alert*****

I am a great fan of John Wayne movies. That said, I have one minor problem with Rooster Cogburn. In the beginning, the marshal, Rooster Cogburn (John Wayne) is in hot pursuit of villain Hawk (Richard Jordon), and is told by Miss Goodnight (Katherine Hepburn) “he had nine men with him; how do you propose to best him?” That is the question on MY mind as well: The posse that he was promised was “long on promise; short on posse.” And they never show. Rooster is therefore taking off after all ten villains alone.

Okay, you say. I am taking it too seriously. It is, after all a “John Wayne” movie. Fine. But later in the film, when Hawk’s men get cut down-one by one-from various disasters that include an Indian fight, as well as quarrels between the outlaws themselves, they are reduced, by film’s end, to only Hawk, and just two or three villains. Wayne is STILL apprehensive about taking them on. “What are our chances?” (Miss Goodnight) “Same as before, sister; they ain’t in our favor.” (Rooster). So, Rooster, apparently, is not superhuman in this film. Even taking on three bad guys is serious business. Yes, realistic. True. But that begs the question: How on earth did he propose to do the same when he was to face Hawk, and NINE OTHER VILLAINS? There is a consistency problem there.

Don’t get me wrong. This is an entertaining film, and worth seeing for a dull weekend afternoon. But this is a minor consistency issue with me. Replies welcome. Thanks.

[–] p_amalthea2004 15 years ago

Heh, this post was made a long time ago, but yeah....

It seems to me that Rooster never truly thinks things through until it's on the verge of being too late to have a plan. If he was sent out to track down 50 men, he probably would go and do it all on his own without much complaint.... well, no more complaint than usual^^.

[–] The_Keeper_of_Angela_Baker 15 years ago

Is it possible that when he was setting out at first, he was alone and only had to look out for himself while by the end of the movie, he not only had to take on Hawk and his gang but also had to watch out for the safely of Eula and Wolf?

Could be similar to the reason he didn't want Mattie to come along with him in "True Grit" ("I can't go up against Ned Pepper and take care of a short-tailed kid!").

[–] paleolith 14 years ago

Probably it's supposed to show a change in his character. His accepting being called Reuben is another such. However, the writing is insufficiently clear to say for sure.

Edward

[–] SipteaHighTea 12 years ago

I was wondering why in the beginning of the film, when Rooster and his deputy barge into that gang's hideout, and the leader of the group motion to one of his men to shoot Rooster's deputy. It would have been better for the guy to shot Rooster first since Rooster has a history of killing so many criminals (in the line of duty, defesnse of himself or fleeing justice, as he stated to Judge Parker).

[–] phillipsdan83 10 years ago

Earlier in the film Rooster had gotten his hands on a Gatling Gun, lost later in the rapids. If he still had had the Gatling, he'd cut down Hawk and the other three laughing. And even without the Gatling, he had nitroglycerin to help cut down the odds.