2 reviews
- robluvthebeach
- Jun 6, 2015
- Permalink
I finally found one of the very few John Wayne films I've never seen, though I must admit this copy I found on YouTube was pretty rough. The sound is only fair and the print is a bit muddy. But, it appears to be the only way to see "Rough Romance".
Like an amazingly large number of films from the 1930s-40s, this one is set in the far nothern wilderness, though unlike most it's not a Mountie picture. Instead, it's about some poachers who steal furs and the folks who stand up against these scum-bags. One of the crooks is infatuated with the daughter of the man who is fencing the furs...and he won't take no for an answer! Who will come to her rescue and put these bandits in their place?
John Wayne is barely noticable in the movie...which makes sense as he was in the early part of his career and mostly was consigned to small parts. With the blurry print, noticing him isn't all that easy!
So is the film any good? Well, not especially...mostly because of the acting. George O'Brien has the charisma of a tomato and Helen Chandler (of "Dracula" fame) is whiny and not especially good. It really is a shame Wayne only had a small supporting part...he could have injected life into the film had he been in the lead.
Overall, a dull little B-movie which is inexplicably overrated at 5.6. I think this is way better than it deserves. In fact, my score of 3 might even be a bit too generous. A film only of interest to Wayne fans who want to see all his films...which is tough as he was one of the most prolific actors of the century.
Like an amazingly large number of films from the 1930s-40s, this one is set in the far nothern wilderness, though unlike most it's not a Mountie picture. Instead, it's about some poachers who steal furs and the folks who stand up against these scum-bags. One of the crooks is infatuated with the daughter of the man who is fencing the furs...and he won't take no for an answer! Who will come to her rescue and put these bandits in their place?
John Wayne is barely noticable in the movie...which makes sense as he was in the early part of his career and mostly was consigned to small parts. With the blurry print, noticing him isn't all that easy!
So is the film any good? Well, not especially...mostly because of the acting. George O'Brien has the charisma of a tomato and Helen Chandler (of "Dracula" fame) is whiny and not especially good. It really is a shame Wayne only had a small supporting part...he could have injected life into the film had he been in the lead.
Overall, a dull little B-movie which is inexplicably overrated at 5.6. I think this is way better than it deserves. In fact, my score of 3 might even be a bit too generous. A film only of interest to Wayne fans who want to see all his films...which is tough as he was one of the most prolific actors of the century.
- planktonrules
- Jun 30, 2025
- Permalink