★ 5 / 10
For what seems like 13 hours the film
John Chard
For what seems like 13 hours the film misses classic genre status. For 13 days these brave men hold the fort... The Alamo is not the film it should be, even…
For what seems like 13 hours the film misses classic genre status.
For 13 days these brave men hold the fort...
The Alamo is not the film it should be, even after the 2004 remake (a great film that takes a reflective and thoughtful stance) we find ourselves still waiting for a blood pumping and stirring take on the folklore tale of what happened at the small missionary known as The Alamo. It's San Antonio, 1836 and General Santa Anna is marching his mighty armies into the contested territory of Texas, all that stands in his way is a small band of heroes, Jim Bowie, Davy Crockett and their trusty men who are led by the inexperienced William Travis. They must buy time in order for General Sam Houston to get an army together in which to crush Santa Anna's imposing forces.
There really is no simpler way of putting it other than to say that The Alamo is an overlong misfire. Various cuts have been made to try and create an epic classic out of what was actually filmed, but neither of the cuts can succeed in making it the flowing genre piece it could have been. John Wayne directs and clearly cared about the project (with his own cash invested that was to be expected), but rumours have persisted that Cliff Lyons had to take up directing duties later in the picture, it's not hard to see why if that was the case, but various sources do poo poo this rumour, and is mostly believed to be Wayne's own work throughout the film. Wayne (having learnt from his mentor John Ford) had a great vision for the picture, and the scope is rather impressive, the recreation of The Alamo building in particular is first rate, whilst the formations of Santa Anna's armies finally rouse the picture out of its slumber.
However, the high points in the picture are few and far between, the acting leaves a lot to be desired, with Wayne himself unable to let the Crockett character be anything other than the John Wayne show. Richard Widmark as Jim Bowie steadily holds his own and manages to eek out a bit of bravado interplay with Wayne and Laurence Harvey (William Travers), but outside of that there is not much to write home about. The final third just about saves the film from being a stinker, with the Academy Award for best sound richly deserved, but sadly The Alamo remains to this day a plodding dinosaur that bores when it really should be igniting the spirit. 5/10
Read full review
★ 5 / 10
Overwrought, overly-macho take on history
grantss
Overwrought, overly-macho take on a very historic event. Should have been simple enough: tell the story of the Battle of the Alamo with some good, epic action…
Overwrought, overly-macho take on a very historic event.
Should have been simple enough: tell the story of the Battle of the Alamo with some good, epic action scenes and some character development. The action scenes are there, and are good. However, the character development is quite superficial: there are no shades of grey. Travis is a martinet, Crockett and Bowie are one-dimensional, anarchic, uber- hero adventurers.
Moreover, director John Wayne and writer James Edward Grant add in several sub-plots which have no bearing on the story. Yes, some are there to add some colour to the characters, but they just seem gratuitous and wholly unnecessary.
Acting is almost all of the over-the-top macho variety. John Wayne was always going to be the swaggering hero (that's all he knows), and, as he is director, now he has licence to crank up the swagger. Richard Widmark comes close to matching him in this regard. Only Laurence Harvey, as Travis, plays it straight. Too straight: he comes off as cranky.
Surprisingly, despite all the hammy acting that abounds, this movie got an acting Oscar nomination. Chill Wills was nominated for Best Supporting Actor, for his performance as Beekeeper. Probably the most undeserved Oscar nomination in history. Apparently his marketing campaign in attempting to get the Oscar is worth a movie itself...
This all said, this version is still far better than the one from 2004.
Read full review
55%
TOMATOMETER
· 20 reviews
63%
AUDIENCE
· 5K ratings
6.8/10
20K
•••
Thanks FREEMAN