Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Mark Stenroos Personally, I have never understood the adulation for the Texicans who died at the Alamo. These were for the large part a group of swindlers, cheats, reprobates, adulterers and who knows what else lowlifes who were fed up with the good ol' USA and decided to hitch their fortunes and futures to the government of Mexico. When things didn't go their way on that account, they decided hell, let's form our own country, our agreement with Mexico be damned, driving the Mexican military out of Texas.Things didn't go so well after that, at least at the Alamo. But America loves its pseudo history and heroes, so we continue to make movies that tend to whitewash the ugly parts of our history. That is not the case with this movie, which gives us the clearest account of the men who fought it out at the Alamo, warts and all. We finally get to see these legends put in the perspective of what and who they really were, and it isn't flattering, to say the least. Indeed, one doesn't come away from this movie feeling much sympathy for the defenders of the Alamo. Davy Crockett shows up thinking the fighting has already ended, and as his friends die around him during the final battle, he expresses not any patriotic or heroic thoughts, but regret that he got his friends into "all this." Bowie, Travis and the rest are cut down without fanfare, or a star turn at dying with dignity and profundity. As Santa Ana tells his officers, "what are soldiers lives but like those of chickens?" Apparently, that goes for the Texicans as well.Speaking of Santa Ana, he comes off quite well in this film. Was he a dictator? Sure. Dictators were the norm at that time. Was he cavalier in sending his troops to their deaths by marching them into fire in wave attacks? Not according to the way wars were fought at the time. Santa Ana was prescient (in the movie, at least) by realizing that the Mexican people would forever be under the foot of the Americans if they couldn't defend and hold their territory. He declared the Texicans to be pirates, and adopted a "no prisoners" policy. In the movie, he calls the Texicans "bandits," which they were. The discipline of the Mexican army stands in stark contrast to the rag-tag Texicans, who indulge in a false sense of security by convincing themselves that the Mexicans would never be able to reach the Alamo quickly, as doing so meant marching 300 miles in the dead of winter. Well, guess what? They did it, taking the Texicans totally by surprise (and suffering tremendous casualties in the process). The hubris of the Texicans shows - they had no idea what they were up against in Santa Ana's army. Worse, as Bowie tries to negotiate a truce, Travis fires off a cannon shot, provoking Santa Ana in declaring that no prisoners will be taken, though he does show compassion by allowing any Mexican in the mission to leave under a flag of truce before the battle ensues.The professionalism of the Mexican forces also stands in stark contrast to the Texicans. The clear chain of command in the Mexican army allows for discussion of tactics and philosophy, even if Santa Ana stands as final arbiter in making a decision. Compare this to the "every man for himself" power struggles going on between Bowie and Travis, and one realizes there was just not enough time available to the Texicans to gel into a disciplined fighting force that could win the day.Visually and story wise, this is a very good film. The casting is good all around, with Billy Bob Thornton producing a unique and honest portrayal of Crockett. Where the film fails - and fails miserably - is in the musical score, which is boring, repetitious, and in many places at odds with what is happening on screen. This is no more true than in the final Alamo battle scene, which would have been more effective without any music. One doesn't expect or want a John Williams Star Wars-style composition for this scene, but almost anything else would do. The score is completely at odds with the battle, leading nowhere, highlighting nothing, without crescendo or climax. It is really awful.I think the film would have been much improved had the subject of slavery (Mexico outlawed it, Texas wanted it) been more deeply explored. And there are many other aspects of those 13 days - raids and other pre- battle operations - that never seem to get mentioned or even hinted at in the movies.That aside, this movie is definitely worth seeing at least once. I find the denouement after the final Alamo battle to be both anticlimactic and entirely unnecessary. The Sam Houston-led battle is under-manned, small of scale and looks cheap, especially as it follows the battle at the Alamo itself.I give it a 7 out of 10, with most of the stars withheld due to the lousy score.

Wuchak Released in 2004 and directed by John Lee Hancock, "The Alamo" is a Western about the 1836 siege and fall of the famous Spanish mission-turned-fortress by Santa Anna's army of a couple thousand disciplined troops. The Alamo is defended by a ragtag assortment of roughly 200 soldiers, militia men and volunteers, including the famous frontiersman & politician Davy Crockett (Billy Bob Thornton), loose cannon Jim Bowie (Jason Patric) and by-the-book militarist Colonel William Travis (Patrick Wilson), the latter two regularly butting heads. Sam Houston (Dennis Quaid) is on hand as a significant peripheral character. The more popular John Wayne version from 1960 is just all-around more entertaining than this generally dreary rendition, although this version certainly earns points for being more realistic plus giving Santa Anna considerable screen time (excellently played by Emilio Echevarría), the latter of which the Wayne version doesn't do at all. Not to mention, this version ends with the humiliating defeat of Santa Anna & his army in a mere 18 minutes just six weeks after the fall of the Alamo. The rallying cry of Sam Houston & the Texian Army was naturally "Remember the Alamo!" You could say that Wayne filmed the Spirit of the Alamo with everything that goes with it, like big historical speeches, while the newer film goes for a more realistic telling, including de-mythifying the various legends. When it comes to historical accuracy, this version is about as close as any Hollywood movie gets. But keep this in mind: No movie has ever been made, or will ever be made, about the Alamo that's thoroughly accurate, except for the obvious gist of things. Why? Because ALL of the defenders were killed. Even the Mexican eyewitnesses who were there disagreed on the major events that took place. For example, there are those who claim Davy Crockett was killed in the assault, as shown in Wayne's version, while others say he survived the battle along with 5-6 others only to be captured, lined up, and executed, as essentially depicted in this film. So any movie you see about the Alamo is going to contain a lot of conjecture.Dimitri Tiomkin's score in Wayne's version is a dramatic, thrilling and tragic multifaceted piece that captured the slow build-up, eventual battle and aftermath. Carter Burwell's score in this version is mediocre by comparison; while certainly adept and adequate, it's essentially a funeral dirge that puts a dreary overcast over the proceedings. BOTTOM LINE: I've seen this version of "The Alamo" twice and have mixed feeling about it. I prefer the more modern, realistic tone of this version to Wayne's rendition, as well as the time devoted to Santa Anna & his men, not to mention the inclusion of the Battle of San Jacinto. On top of this, the movie's spiced with numerous good-to-great bits, but – overall – it just comes across too flat and dull. Something needed to perk it up out of the cinematic doldrums. The depiction of the Battle of San Jacinto does this, of course, but it's the last 12 minutes of the film and too little too late. Perhaps too many cooks spoiled the broth. The movie runs 134 minutes and was shot in near Wimberly, Texas, forty miles north of San Antonio GRADE: C+ (5.5/10)

tomsview Was another version of the Alamo a good idea? Judging by the box office results the answer is no, but this one professed lofty intentions, to make it as close to the real story as possible, with just a few changes here and there.According to the earliest publicity, the decision to make another Alamo movie was born from the alarming state of world affairs, and the desire to remind Americans how they had made sacrifices in the past for ideals they believed in.Whatever the motivation, the filmmakers had to overcome the problem that movies set in the early 19th century are often stuffily costumed and talky. As one commentator said, the Alamo era is a bit like Charles Dickens meets the Old West.The 1960 version overcame the problem with three high profile stars – John Wayne, Richard Widmark and Laurence Harvey as Colonels Crockett, Bowie and Travis respectively. However, the makers of this version, which is beautifully crafted in every department, went for characters that seem overwhelmed by events, but in the process they may have made them a little too lacklustre. Even the music set the tone for the two versions; Carter Burwell's elegant but restrained score versus Dimitri Tiomkin's mighty opus for the 1960 version. Thanks to the movies, Australians also have a fair idea about the events at the Alamo. Like Americans we watched Fess Parker's Davy Crockett go down swinging Old Betsy, and then John Wayne go out with a bang a few years later – not forgetting Arthur Hunnicutt as Davy in "The Last Command" who has the best line in any Alamo movie when he says to Sterling Hayden's Jim Bowie before the Mexican assault, "They'll eat snakes before they get in here Jim".Those earlier films inspired me to read Walter Lord's "A Time to Stand", which still holds up as an even-handed history of the event. I also became aware of the controversy over whether Davy Crockett was executed after surrendering or went down fighting as he had done in film after film.Billy Bob Thornton plays Davy in an anti-heroic fashion. His Crockett is likable and his performance is a thoughtful one – whether it is the performance that was needed is debatable.Sam Houston, played by Dennis Quaid, appoints William Travis and Jim Bowie to defend the Alamo with a small garrison against the Mexicans. Travis is played by Patrick Wilson and although youthful looking, gives one of the best performances in the film. Jason Patric plays Jim Bowie, who like Crockett is weighed down with his status as a living legend; he also engages in an intense rivalry with Travis.The Mexican army arrives many thousands strong. Santa Anna, played by Emilio Echevarría in the manner of a demented mafia don, orders that the mission be captured and the defenders destroyed. After days of bombardment, Travis informs the garrison that they can expect no relief, and that any man who wishes to escape is free to go. None leave and the Texans are all killed during the battle – except Davy Crockett who is taken prisoner, proves defiant, and is executed.The depiction of the final battle is the most accurate of any version. Played out at night, the long sequence features a breathtaking panorama of the Mexicans closing in on the Alamo.Although the film ends with Sam Houston's victory at San Jacinto, it cannot overcome the attempts to cut the legend down to size. If this was the filmmaker's goal, they succeeded all too well. But in so doing, surely they fell short of fulfilling their expressed wish to create a film to provide inspiration during a time of crisis and stress. If they are looking for the reasons why the movie failed, it could be as simple as that.

denis888 I must say, I never was a Billy Bob's fan, but his part as Davey Crockett made me change my opinion. Billy Bob shined in this great film, and his Davey is a real man with his assets and liabilities, with his likes and hates. A true hero of Texas. His violin on the roof before the attack is a deeply moving scene, as well as his last valiant moments. The character of Sam Houston, impeccably performed by great Dennis Quaide, is another big winner. Dennis performs so deeply and so well that I never doubted his integrity and his sincerity. Another great winner is Mr. Echevarria as Santa Anna - excellent portrayal of a malicious dictator, cowardly and treacherous. His subordinates awoke more sympathy, given the valiant deaths of some, but Santa Anna shies too as a great example of a real evil guy. Very good soundtrack and very stunning battle scenes make the film even more splendid, and the sordid scenes of fighting bring to mind all the heroism and valor of Texans. Greatly recommended