The Alamo

The only thing that could make yet another jingoist Alamo movie worse is Billy Bob Thorton. And someone just had to do it.

This is film is supremely unfairly judged by critics. The historical significance of the event is expertly portrayed with a large amount of care put into the attention to detail in the context of time and the actual battle itself. The characters are flawed and leave you confused on whether or not you should be rooting for them. These are slave owners. Liars and drunks. Davy (David) Crockett; a product of his own legend coming to terms that he is, in all reality, just a man. Jim Bowie; another living legend that is flawed, complicated, and haunted by his personal demons. And LtCol Travis; the man who is just trying to hold it all together because it's what he believes he was put there to do. They are generally products of their time and were in actuality people just like you and I. Every actor chosen conveys their role well. This film is a guilty pleasure of mine and still pulls emotion from me every single time I watch it. If you're looking for a "hollywoodesque" portrayal of one of the most famous last stands of all time; this isn't it. If you're looking for a deep dive into the history of the Battle of the Alamo, the complex men involved, the raw unfiltered sacrifice they made and a well researched play by play of the actual battle (they legitamately built a 1:1 scale replica of the Alamo as it was and the surrounding area for the film); this is your cup of tea.

for a 2004 movie, its one of the best of the times. one if the best

Really amazing movie, one of the best movies to ever watch loved the build up the music the acting everything.

If you like historical movies with a side of epicness, then you might enjoy The Alamo as much as I did. It's a movie that in today's film landscape would be a completely divisive product, which makes it already worth your time. Although many give Billy Bob Thorton praises, and he deserves them, watch out for Jordi Molla's performance. Dennis Quaid also does a lot with a script that's not too keen on memorable dialogue. Patrick Wilson and Emilio Echevarria do their best, but then again, the script wasn't the right one for their characters. The Alamo battle is one of my favorites ever put to film. It's both massive and personal and God I wish Game of Thrones producers would've seen it before shooting The Long Night episode. It's brutal, it's glorious, and it happens at night. That's how you shoot a battle scene in a dark environment! Give it a try. You might even learn something.

Not really a bad film. Maybe a B grade overall.

Is it slow at some parts? yes of course, but during a time where Battle wasn't expected not everything is fast paced. Is it a perfect movie? No, but what movie is to everyone. I did find this movie to much better than what the critics say.

This is a very good film and will be re-evaluated over time. Builds the suspense and fear these men must have felt. Great battle scenes too

John Lee Hancock's THE ALAMO may not be as good as John Wayne's THE ALAMO (Director's Cut) in regards to epic battles, Hollywood glamour, musical score, and star power...it is by far more accurate of the two. Problems with the 2004 version are: 1. The Battle of the Alamo is too well-known; 2. The revisionism is too watered down to really offer anything new; and 3. The battle scenes needed more blood and violence to show how vicious the hand-to-hand combat battles truly were. I had heard that the third reason was why Ron Howard actually stepped away as a director. Disney had gotten nervous over the boldness of the original vision of the 2004 film and opted to make a movie accessible to teens and to avoid a lot of controversy. As a result, the 2004 adaptation failed at the box-office despite it still being a good film. Billy Bob Thornton, though he lacks the charisma of the real David Crockett (or John Wayne for that matter), still gives a strong performance as a brave man quietly struggling to live up to his "Superhero" persona. Patrick Wilson is excellent as Col. William Barrett Travis (which happens to be my favorite Alamo hero). Although Jason Patric is miscast as Jim Bowie, he's not as miscast as Richard Widmark was in the John Wayne version. Patric, despite his lacking the kind of screen presence needed for playing a larger-than-life character, still has a few strong moments. Overall, this is a noble entry with mildly disjointed plot twists (due to possible script revisions). The Alamo also can come across as a little draggy and repetitive at brief intervals as it tries to give the old Spanish mission its due. And although the battles scenes are still thrilling, it needed to show the horrors of war a little more graphically in order to accentuate the bold decisions leading up to March 6, 1836.

As with any historical movie, there are going to be some inconsistencies. The acting was, of course, a bit more dramatic than necessary, but I believe the spirit of the characters was portrayed correctly. It's not 'Tombstone' accurate, and it's not 'La La Land' acting, but this is a great movie if you're a Texan. B+