More in-depth film festival coverage than any other website!
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 

Overall Rating

Awesome: 16%
Worth A Look: 16%
Average: 4%
Pretty Bad46%
Total Crap: 18%

3 reviews, 32 user ratings

Latest Reviews

Lucky Grandma by Jay Seaver

Vast of Night, The by Peter Sobczynski

High Note, The by Peter Sobczynski

Taking of Tiger Mountain, The by Jay Seaver

Trip to Greece, The by Peter Sobczynski

Night God by Jay Seaver

Alice (2019) by Jay Seaver

On a Magical Night (Chambre 212) by Jay Seaver

Driveways by Jay Seaver

Free Country by Jay Seaver

subscribe to this feed

Alamo, The (2004)
[] Buy posters from this movie
by EricDSnider

"Apparently, this was the dullest war in American history"
2 stars

It's no wonder "Remember the Alamo!" is spoken so often as a rallying cry. If the new film depicting the battle fought there is any indication, it's a pretty easy place to forget. Because apparently, NOTHING HAPPENED.

Could this be the dullest war film ever made? Perhaps so. It occupies 137 minutes, the first 90 of which are spent not doing anything. The Mexican forces line up outside the Alamo at around the 30-minute mark, and then the Texans and Mexicans occasionally shoot at each other. But only for two or three rounds. Then they quit for the night, and repeat the process the next day. It's the laziest war I've ever seen.

OK, I'm being unfair. In real life, the siege really did last about 10 days, ending, as it does in the film, with hand-to-hand combat within the walls of the Alamo itself. My point is that, real or not, it makes for a dull film. Since the actual fighting was relatively short-lived and depressingly one-sided, perhaps other elements ought to have been bolstered to give the film dramatic weight. Three-dimensional characters would have been nice, for example, rather than the Hall of Fame busts presented by the script (written by Leslie Bohem, Stephen Gaghan and John Lee Hancock, the latter of whom also directed).

It all begins in 1835 in what I consider a promising manner. It establishes a few historical figures -- Col. William Travis (Patrick Wilson), Davy Crockett (Billy Bob Thornton), Gen. Sam Houston (Dennis Quaid) and James Bowie (Jason Patric), to name a few -- and further establishes that many of them don't like each other. Bowie calls Travis a "two-bit dandy"; Travis calls Bowie a "drunken hottentot." (Additionally, Houston calls someone else a "Scottish catamite," a catamite being, according to Webster's, "a boy kept for unnatural purposes." Any film that can dish up epithets like these deserves a fighting chance.)

For reasons I do not grasp, the largely inexperienced Travis is left in charge of the Alamo, a Spanish mission that has often been the focal point for skirmishes with Mexico, and which appears destined to be one again. Crockett, who you will recall kilt him a b'ar when he was only 3, and who is now a congressman, is passing through but offers to help fortify the mission. Bowie, dying of consumption, continues to command his troops, vying with Travis for control of the whole operation. And Houston is off fighting somewhere else, ignoring the Alamo's plea for reinforcements.

Santa Anna (Emilio Echevarrķa), the Mexican dictator who commands his men into battle against the Alamo, is depicted as a mustache-twirling villain with no regard for his own men's lives and who orders them to take no prisoners among the Texans. From what I gather, this is relatively accurate, at least as far as American-penned history is concerned. But again, we must accept that just because something really happened doesn't necessarily mean it makes for good filmmaking. Santa Anna seems like a caricature here, reminiscent more of an animated Disney evil-doer than an actual historical figure.

The film also fails to convey why, exactly, we should be so concerned about the outcome of this battle. "As the Alamo goes, so goes Texas," someone says, but that's a platitude, not an explanation. What happens if Santa Anna takes the Alamo? Will he take all of Texas? And so what if he does? Texas isn't part of the U.S. at this point. Various people seem to be fighting for various things -- the liberty of Texas as an independent republic, the liberty of the United States, and so on -- and the idealism never coalesces into a unified front for a viewing audience to get behind. We're supposed to root for the Alamo just because, well, it's the Alamo. You know, THE ALAMO!

I like Thornton's performance as Davy Crockett, largely because I don't think he realizes how silly he is. Watch for his unintentionally funny tale that explains his aversion to potatoes; then watch later for his rooftop fiddle performance that soothes the savage Mexicans. (I couldn't make this up, folks.) Except for him, the film is as dry and flat as Texas itself.

link directly to this review at
originally posted: 04/09/04 15:22:37
[printer] printer-friendly format  

User Comments

7/15/09 Jimbo Chris Parry is a pussy 5 stars
10/01/08 R.W. Welch Perfunctory pacing; otherwise, okay. 3 stars
3/15/07 mb Good Movie 4 stars
6/17/06 WILLIAM MELUCCI great 5 stars
11/15/05 jessica BLAH!!!! i fell asleep watchin this movie in class...Billy Bob was the best part! 2 stars
8/18/05 ES Liked the original better 3 stars
4/13/05 Quigley this film is worthy of anice place above the gates of Hell 1 stars
2/26/05 goatfarmer not as bad as some of the damners would have one believe 4 stars
2/05/05 Amy Bradshaw This movie was an insult! Couldn't hold a candle to the one with John Wayne. 1 stars
1/15/05 tatum "Historical accuracy" dressed up with "dramatic license"; dullest war film ever 1 stars
10/16/04 gcc Historical accuracy in a movie for a change. BBT Great as crockett, Excellent... 5 stars
9/23/04 Tyrantis They died to protect their right to own slaves... wait, isn't that bad? 1 stars
7/24/04 LeAnn Cantrell (not to fret; relling is overrated) Overall good telling of the story. I learned new things about it. 4 stars
5/29/04 Hilarium Just completely uninteresting. 2 stars
5/19/04 Tom Walsh( ancestor died at Alamo) this movie sucks, a real let down could have done better 1 stars
5/05/04 John it's about real people rather than mythical icons - never sappy and good battle sequences- 5 stars
4/27/04 Alfred Boner I thoguht that this movie wasn't as good as i would of expected it to be, big boner. 1 stars
4/26/04 mary Pretty Good 4 stars
4/19/04 mjjp very disappointed 2 stars
4/18/04 Alex This is one of the best history epics. It is an outstanding movie. 5 stars
4/17/04 ALBERT H. TAYLOR JR. I like Thornton's performance of Davy Crockett. 4 stars
4/16/04 Siamese Toga Princess i hate people who laugh at those who died 4 our sake,... LIKE ALL OF U!!! 5 stars
4/15/04 Wake-Me-Up Borezilla 1 stars
4/15/04 rojo Hollywood and history usually don't mix, this time it works. 4 stars
4/14/04 Aaron Pretty Good 4 stars
4/12/04 pooman45 awsome!Best ever!I love you billy! 5 stars
4/10/04 Prof. Oliver S. Lindenbrook loved the basement scene. 5 stars
4/10/04 Amerigo Vespukey Um...these men were SLAVEOWNERS who STOLE land from Mexico. What's so great about that?!?! 1 stars
4/10/04 Gobsmack Remember this blah blah blah...IT SUCKS!!! 2 stars
4/09/04 Brian having flashbacks of pearl harbor... 2 stars
4/05/04 Ray Remember this movie!!! 4 stars
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:

Discuss this movie in our forum

  09-Apr-2004 (PG-13)
  DVD: 28-Sep-2004



Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About Australia's Largest Movie Review Database.
Privacy Policy | HBS Inc. | |   

All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast