Customer Reviews

The Alamo (Widescreen Edition) (2004)

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I don't care what you all say, this is the best Alamo movie I have seen!! They do not have Travis look like a whimp, they have him look like he was. No one knows how Davy Crockett died, so they put a twist to it. I thought the movie was very historically accurate, and I should know, I am a historian, and the Alamo is my area of expertice. So if you say it was bad, that's just good for you, but it was very accurate, and entertaining!!!

After reading some of the reviews, it is clear that some of you do not understand "The Alamo." First of all, it is NOT a REMAKE of the John Wayne version (Now fondly referred to as the WAYNEAMO). Even though the title is the same, it is in reference to the Shrine of Texasand the events that took place there, not a previous film. This movie stands on its own merit. Saying the Alamo is a remake of the Wayne version, is like saying that "Saving Private Ryan" is a remake of "The Longest Day" or "D-Day, the 6th of June." Another reviewer was trying to figure out Santa Anna's age. He was 42 to be exact. While this movie was as Hollywoodian as any true story, it is probably closer to the truth than any other Alamo movie (and Wayne's was not the only one). Kudos to those who recognize the character flaws of the real "Three" as portrayed in the film, and not the happy-go-lucky or flamboyant attitudes as portrayed in the Wayneamo. This movie is certainly historically accurate in that sense. The weather conditions were accurate, and the time of the morning the battle began was accurate. With this movie you got a sort of feel as to what took place. But the big question still is: Did Crockett die fighting or did he surrender and was executed. Look at the movie again. Hancock settled this by having Crockett die "Twice." Once, when he and three others were in the Alamo chapel at the end of the battle, and they rushed head-long into a swarm of Mexican soldiers. While you did not actually see Crockett "die" in that scene, the message was quite clear. Then there is the Screamer scene. Crockett was a frontiersman and a statesman. But he was human. And I believe this movie portrayed him as he really was. So it would not surpirse me if the real DAVID CROCKETT demanded the surrender of the Mexican army, knowing full well he was going to be executed (and by the way, did anyone actually see him die in that scene! Just a swarm of Mexican soldados swarming over him with their bayonets after Santa Anna ordered his execution). But the truth is, we will never really know what actually took place at The Alamo.

I believe this was made by the same group that made the terrible Pearl Harbour. This is only slightly better but not by much. It is a very hollywood version of the Alamo. The dialogue is cheesy as is the direction. I was looking forward to a realistic telling of the story but what we get here is worthy of a made for TV offering but not a major movie

This is a very entertaining movie, great fo an evening when you are in the mood for a movie

Another retelling of one of America's most dramatic battles, The Alamo depicts the futile 13-day standoff in 1836 between a brave group of "Texians" and their Mexican adversaries at a small Spanish church in San Antonio.

Despite the odds against them, the Americans are willing to sacrifice their lives for land they have chosen to call home. Patrick Wilson stars as the impetuous Lieutenant-Colonel William Travis, who struggles for the respect of his volunteers. But, like the character he portrays, the unpolished Wilson is overshadowed by Billy Bob Thornton as Davy Crockett and Jason Patric as Jim Bowie. Thornton's performance as the compassionate and multi-talented "King of the Wild Frontier" is expressive, while the infrequently seen Patric is intense as the typhoid-suffering famous knife-fighter -- both are humble, knowing they are not the legends they have been made out to be.

Together, these three men must stand up for their ideals against ruthless General Santa Anna (Emilio Echevarria), who views them as "pirates". Determined to preserve the integrity of the Mexican territory, he is confident in the strength of his massive army -- though seemingly all pomp and circumstance, they are a formidable force.

Yet, director (and co-writer) John Lee Hancock is unable to bring much fervour to the story; perhaps he was preoccupied with his upcoming rehash of King Arthur. The battle scenes, though interesting, do not make up for the bland screenplay, which frequently stalls to explore the life stories of the three principals...the banal dialogue is as dry as the dusty compound where the action takes place.

Like Pearl Harbor, an unnecessary postscript is tacked on to protect American pride, but this merely lessens the impact of the tragedy. Here we see General Sam Houston (Dennis Quaid) leading the retaliatory battle and cry for Texas independence. As usual, the likeable but unaccomplished Quaid acts rather than lives his character -- he is as lifeless as the corpses surrounding the funereal fortress.

This version of The Alamo is not the epic it pretends to be. While the images of slaughter may unite some Americans against the terrorism that has affected their country, this film is only mildly inspiring. Unlike the actual event, it will not go down in history. Rating: 5 out of 10.

This version of the 13 day siege of the Alamo in 1836 is more believable with still bigger than life characters. The individuals interacted bettered and you could feel that they were real; the actors did not outshine the characters they portray. The surprise was the superb acting of Billy Bob Thornton as Davy Crockett.

This film shows that there are good sides to people and bad sides to people; even heroes have their problems. It was interesting on how the blacks had to choose sides or the lack of sides. You can see this again in the film dated "Gunga Din" (1939) where Gunga Din (Sam Jaffee), native Indian, had to choose sides in the conflict with the British.

I have been to San Antonio and the film nails the feel of the area. The area has not changed that much.

In the end you feel that everyone gets his/her up-and-comings, yet you want the story to go on.

this movie is very good. critics hated it, alot of people hated it too. i loved it. how you could hate this movie is impossible for me to understand. this is one movie that did everything perfectly. it gave great action, a great story, and wasnt burdened by trying to make a love scene/story. unlike alot of people i thought denis quaid was wonderful. after the battle of the alamo i was really hoping theyd continue with that last charge and they did. dennis quaids speech was awesome. also this is one of the first movies to get the sound of gunfire right. i am very impressed

Here is a movie that was done with forethought and care. Billy Bob's Crockett is memorable on all levels. Michael Corenblith's set should be perserved like the Wayne set in Brackettville. It's more a film about people than a battle. The history is almost the backdrop for the transitions of the characters. For the first time there is a real feeling of siege. Only Disney's Davy Crockett came any where close to that feeling of "waiting".
This film will grow in prestige and will be regarded as a truly classic film as the years go by.

(...) First of all, you are not historically correct. Davy Crockett was executed later...though he may not have said "I'm a screamer". Trust me... I just got out of seventh grade Texas history and I had a teacher who cared alot more than she should have. Now to the movie. I looked on tons of movie websites and could not find the release date for this DVD. When I finally found it here... I almost wet my pants. That will be a freakin' wonderful day. September 28th... the new Christmas. This movie is so stinking awesome...everything from the actors to the set to the... dang man it all rocks! Though I will get the fullscreen version of this flick, this was the only version of the DVD that had a review I could bash. Just kidding. Lots of people don't know that Davy Crockett was in fact executed...so its okay buddy. Don't feel stupid. Jason Patric did a wonderful portrayal of William B. Travis. He didn't act wimpy... he was just a dignified military man... who was scared. Heck, if I was in charge of a couple of farmers with pitchforks against the whole Mexican army... I would've been a wee bit scared also... and don't tell me you would'nt be Mr. The only actor I was displeased with... and I mean the only one... was Dennis Quaid. In most movies, such as "The Rookie" he was phenomenal... but his portrayal of Sam Houston wasn't so hot. He does look like him though... at least by what we know from paintings and such. Anyway... this movie is the bomb. I may be a kid, but I have reviewed alot of movies and seen alot more than most adults have. So don't skip over this because it says... I don't know... whatever it says.

Let me start this revie by saying the movie is only as historically accurate as the historian you choose to believe. I found this version to be a lot more truthful than any other Alamo movie. The Texan troops were not the heroic, freedom at any cost, soldiers we were led to believe in the history books. They were people with alterior motives, who were caught in the middle of a giant pickle with no help. The Mexican soldiers were not dark and faceless, as the John Wayne version tried to portray. They did not go into great detail with the common soldier, but they at least hinted at them as being human beings.

The big three at the Alamo were not the great heroic leaders, who were there because of freedom. They were there because of their own agenda. Travis escaped a life of marriage and debt from Mississippi, to become a man of importance in Texas. He did not come to fight for freedom. Bowie was one a criminal in the first degree. Forging documents, due to a loop-hole in the Louisiana Purchase documents, which would have made him one of the richest landowners in the U.S. When he was discovered, he came to Texas. Crockett was voted out of Congress from the state of Tennessee, even though he was extremely popular (he lost because he fell out of favor with President Andrew Jackson. He came for a new political life, not to fight the Mexican troops for freedom.

Sure there is a lot of Hollywood drama, but I beleive the details of the siege and battle are far more accurate than anything previous. Even the capture and execution of Davy Crockett has been debated heavily, there is still at least written documentation of that event actually happening. Otherwise,it is all speculation and here-say, but I do not think Crockett said those things to Santa Ana before he died.

The only real problem I had with the movie, is Santa Ana is way too old. The guy died in 1876, and the Alamo was in 1836. Santa Ana lived into his 70's(I beleive,it could have been 80's) So that would put him in his 30's or 40's at the time of the battle. The actor looked like he was in his late 60's. I thought he did a good job, but he did not look the part. I thought Thornton was superb as Crockett, even though he is kind of a nut.