The Alamo | | Cast : | Dennis Quaid, Billy Bob Thornton, Jason Patric, Emilio Echevarría | | Director : | John Lee Hancock | | Studio : | Buena Vista Home Entertainment | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Widescreen, Dolby | | Released Date : | April 09, 2004 | | DVD Released Date : | May 03, 2005 | | Language : | English (Dubbed), French (Dubbed), French (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), English (Original Language) | | Audience Rating : | PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | July 18, 2005 | | Summary | Memorable, and Quite Good. | Content
 | The Alamo has gotten a lot of bad rap, but it's really quite a good movie. Although, it may not be as wonderful as I say it is, especially if you're not a Native Texan. However, this is still a wonderful film.
:::ACTING:::
William B. Travis: Well, despite what everyone else says, I think that Patrcik Wilson, of Oklahoma! fame, does a wonderful job as William B. Travis, and he plays well against Jason Patric (Jim Bowie). Wilson certainly makes a more interesting character out of Travis, and also a more attractive one.
Davy Crockett: Billy Bob Thornton makes a wonderful Davy Crockett! He certainly helps to hold the movie together, and adds a few comical moments. His preformance is definatly worth an Oscar-Nomination.
Jim Bowie: Jason Patric is possibly the worst actor out of the four main characters. However, he still pulls off the role quite well. After all, there isn't much you can do with a role that requires you to be bed-ridden a good 3/4 of the movie.
Sam Houston: Of course, he's Dennis Quaid! Do you really think I'd have something bad to say about Dennis Quaid? He is an amazing actor, and the role of Sam Houston suited him well.
:::DIRECTION:::
To put it bluntly, the direction sucked. Ron Howard would have done a much better job, enough said.
:::VISUALS:::
Very pleasing visuals on this one, indeed. Despite the small budget, they managed to pull off a few good special effects. Well done.
:::TOTAL SCORE:::
All-in-all, I give 'The Alamo' an 'A'. And yes, that 'A' stands for amazing. You truely will 'Remember the Alamo'.
|
| Rating | | | Date | June 29, 2005 | | Summary | The most historical count so far | Content
| I over the years have developed an interest in the Alamo. I guess it stems from when I was a boy and actually visited the Alamo.
Over the years I watched the John Wayne version, that was released in 1960. Although very entertaining, I found his accout to be pure Hollywood. More entertainment than fact. I also found the Disney version of this film to be fun but again not historically correct.
We will probably never know if Travis drew the line in dirt with his sword or not.
This new version of the Alamo attempts to show Santa Ana and the defenders of the Alamo as they really were.
Its shows how Crockett was in many ways trapped by his legand. The movie even goes so far as to speculate he might have tried to escape if he could have. It also makes you think he would have wanted to fight out in the open instead of being pinned down in a broken down mission.
Its shows how barbaric Santa Ana really was and how he executed prisoners under a white flag of truce. When prisoners were killed they were bayonetted and then shot to make sure they were dead.
The movie does not begin at the Alamo nor does it stop after the battle. It attempts to not only show the defenders of the Alamo, but it also shows what is happening with Sam Houston in his effort to defeat Santa Ana and claim Texas.
There is always the controversy over how Crockett was killed and I Guess there always will be. Whether executed or not his legand remains in my mind.
This is certainly the most historical version of the Alamo ever made. I can see where some flaws may be, but then again, we will never know the full account of what really happened there.
|
| Rating | | | Date | June 28, 2005 | | Summary | Accurate? Pretty much. Entertaining? Hmm... | Content
| I have been an "Alamo fanatic" for about 4 decades now, so naturally I was bound to like the film. I was also bound to be slightly disappointed, given how much I looked forward to this film. There's almost enough reviews here for every defender of the Alamo, but one more won't hurt.
Billy Bob Thornton is far and away the main strength of the film, in terms of entertainment. It is hard to imagine anyone ever doing a better Crockett. I didn't care much for Wilson as Travis at first (too hesitant, not forceful enough) but his performance has grown on me. The worst casting is Emilio Echevarria as Santa Anna. He's way too old and uncharismatic to depict the "generalissimo" circa 1836, and his mannerisms at times seem goofy rather than forceful or cruel.
The main flaw is that there is not enough character development of the defenders (other than Crockett, Travis, and Bowie). This is partly because the film tries to cover the whole Texan War of Independence rather than focusing more on the Alamo itself. This is one of the few aspects in which the old John Wayne version actually made a better choice: Sam Houston should be a cameo role. You don't need to show San Jacinto (maybe just a captioned "what happened after" segment).
The defenders of the Alamo not only are not developed as characters, but they are not depicted very sympathetically. They come across (in the apt words of one of the Tejano defenders) as a bunch of "low lifes." Most of them are too old too. We Alamo fanatics know who Bonham, Autry, etc. were, but the general audience needed a chance to get to know them better.
Uniforms, costumes, weapons, etc. are mostly great, despite some very minor quibbles in other reviews. (One odd "accuracy" flaw in the Alamo set is that the faces of the Chapel and Long Barracks are almost flush -- space limitations).
As I teach my students, when it comes to Hollywood depictions of history, don't expect complete accuracy. The best outcome in the view of historians (like myself) is that a good, entertaining film will get people interested in the subject, and they will read more about it. This newest Alamo failed here, I'm afraid: it tries so hard to be authentic that it didn't connect with a larger audience. It is still a "must see, must own" DVD for Alamo fanatics and history buffs, so I do absolutely recommend it for that audience. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 20, 2005 | | Summary | Complexities of Historical Drama Deal Fairly | Content
| I am one of the many who waited for the release of this film (one suffering from internal politics of a studio underseige from without and within). The only thing that the film suffers from is the studio. The production itself is sterling, the acting more than above average. In the case of Billy Bob Thornton's interpretation of David Crockett, momumental.
As a movie it is an interpretive piece but I think captures a situation where men who represented all complexities of life faced a situation that required they stand above self interest. I think the film captures this. While it held back on excess gore, the battle was shown as a cruel event, the fort as being unglamourous and the question as to why, as some points, individuals choose to be heroic, still an unanswered mystery.
This is a very good file which I hope its supporters will grow each year. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 19, 2005 | | Summary | An elegant and elegiac epic | Content
| 2004's The Alamo is one of the most undeserved flops of recent years (and possibly inflation-adjusted as big a disaster as Heaven's Gate). Bad timing may account or some of it, as America's image went from besieged victims to bloody aggressors (certainly it was barely even released outside the US), but the film's sombre, mournful tone is probably more to blame - beginning with the dead bodies of the defeated defenders, there's a sadness and inevitability to the film that's the complete antithesis of the feelgood destruction-and-revenge of Pearl Harbor. Even Carter Burwell's haunting low-key score is more a lament than the broad action scoring you might expect. The script is well crafted, the characterisation surprisingly strong and the comparative absence of cgi pays dividends with a level of verisimilitude that's been lacking from most recent epics.
It also benefits from an extraordinary performance from Billy Bob Thornton as Davey ("He prefers David") Crockett, a crowd-pleaser faced with having to live up to his own legend, and blessed with the film's best dialogue and it's best scene as he silences the Mexican guns with his fiddle. Thornton owns the film in a way I haven't seen from any actor for a long, long time. He's definitely the heart and soul of the movie.
Thankfully, it's not quite a one-man show. Patrick Wilson does surprisingly well as Travis, Jason Patric's tediously one-note surliness is for once put to effective use as Bowie and the supporting cast is filled with great faces, all caught wonderfully by Dean Semler's superb cinematography. Only Dennis Quaid fares less well as Houston, failing to make much of his admittedly limited opportunities.
True it falters somewhat after the fall of the Alamo, but it's still an impressive, intelligent and sometimes quietly moving epic that didn't deserve its fate at the box-office.
|
|
