[Screen It]

 

"THE ALAMO"
(2004) (Billy Bob Thornton, Dennis Quaid) (PG-13)

If you've come from our parental review of this film and wish to return to it, simply click on your browser's BACK button.
Otherwise, use the following link to read our complete Parental Review of this film.

QUICK TAKE:
Drama/Action: Severely outnumbered American forces try to defend the Alamo from the much larger Mexican army that wants to retake the Texas garrison.
PLOT:
It's 1836 and Lt. Col. William Travis (PATRICK WILSON) has been sent to the Alamo, a former Franciscan mission in San Antonio, Texas, to control what's now an American fort in the Texan war of independence from Mexico.

Joining him is Jim Bowie (JASON PATRIC), a commissioned colonel in the Texan army who doesn't believe Travis is the right man to defend the position. Congressman and frontier legend Davy Crockett (BILLY BOB THORNTON) and his men also arrive on the scene, having been sold on the idea of traveling to Texas by General Sam Houston (DENNIS QUAID).

Little do any of them know that Mexican General Antonio López de Santa Anna (EMILIO ECHEVARRÍA) is leading an Army of thousands to retake the Alamo. With less than two hundred men in the garrison -- including Mexican born Col. Juan Seguin (JORDI MOLLÁ) -- the American forces prepare for the onslaught.

Yet, it doesn't occur right away, leading to a tense standoff between the two military forces. With the Mexican army repeatedly testing the resolve of their opponents and their defense of the Alamo, the much smaller American forces hope that Houston will be able to gather and send reinforcements before it's too late.

OUR TAKE: 5 out of 10
"Remember the Alamo?" Oh, I'm sorry, that was supposed to read, "Remember the Alamo!" That was the battle cry that spurred on the American forces to defeat the Mexican ones following the massacre at the titular mission way back in 1836. I suppose the exclamatory version of the well-known phrase is also being used by the marketing folks at Touchstone who are hoping that their big-budget adaptation of the true story will be remembered when viewers are choosing their entertainment options.

Unfortunately, it seems that most, at least in the movie biz, will likely remember the film far more for all of the difficulties in getting it made and then released than for the actual picture itself. After going through a number of cast and crew members who reportedly signed on and then off again from the project, the film was intended as the studio's big 2003 holiday release and Oscar bait.

Various problems, however, including repeated trips to the editing booth delayed the theatrical release nearly half a year. Now that it's finally upon us, the question that remains is whether this will be Touchstone and Michael Eisner's "Heaven's Gate," "Ishtar" and "Waterworld," or the next "Titanic."

With no teen romance angle and dubious overall interest for everyone else, I seriously doubt this film will remotely come close to matching the box office and award success of the latter. It does share, however, some of that chopped up feeling that other troubled, high profile and big budget efforts have sported.

Clocking in at 135 minutes, the film oddly feels both too short and too long. Given the historical significance and events before, during and after the pivotal battle, the film feels as if it needs more exposition, explanation and overall details to do the story justice. Perhaps it contained that in the earlier reported three hour version.

What remains here, however, feels truncated and shortchanged. As penned by Leslie Bohem ("Dante's Peak," "Daylight"), Stephen Gaghan ("Traffic," "Rules of Engagement") and director John Hancock (director of "The Rookie" and writer of "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil" and "A Perfect World"), the picture offers enough cursory information about the events and people to get and then keep the story going. Yet, for those not up on their early American history (and who aren't from Texas), some if not all of the offering might be as dusty and fleeting as a Texas tumbleweed.

That, along with various other script, editing and directorial problems prevent the film from being as engaging and exciting as it might and should have been. Because of all of that, the film thus feels far too lengthy. Without anything at stake for the viewer, there's lessened interest in the characters. That also holds true for the outcome that's already a foregone conclusion for anyone who didn't sleep through their history lessons.

Hancock, however, pulls a "Pearl Harbor" on us by capping the film with an "upbeat" (at least for American viewers) ending with a successful (and historically true) retaliatory battle. It's far too little and way too late, however, to save the overall effort.

The same can be said for Dennis Quaid's ("Cold Creek Manor," "Far From Heaven") performance as legendary Texan general Sam Houston. I had heard rumors that various performers had their parts cut down quite a bit or altogether. And until that post-Alamo bit, it looked as if Quaid had suffered some of the worst cuts, with only a few scenes featuring him. Unfortunately, what's left isn't terribly impressive.

Faring a bit better is Jason Patric ("Narc," "Your Friends & Neighbors") as Jim Bowie who clashed with others before typhoid pneumonia reduced his fighting abilities. Although he gets more screen time than Quaid, his character isn't that much more engaging.

Patrick Wilson (making his feature debut) pretty much falls into the same boat playing the young American commander of the garrison, while Emilio Echevarría ("Die Another Day" "Y Tu Mama Tambien") comes close to but thankfully doesn't quite chew up the scenery playing the flamboyant Mexican General Santa Anna.

It's Billy Bob Thornton ("Bad Santa," "Love Actually"), though, who gets the juiciest part playing American pioneer legend Davy Crockett. Although there are a few hokey moments -- including a bit that proves that the fiddle and not the pen is mightier than the rifle and cannon -- it's a decent and at least interesting performance by the charismatic actor.

One of the other disappointing aspects of the film is its pivotal battle scene. Rather than being exciting, engaging or terrifying, it's simply there, just like the rest of the emotionally and viscerally flat drama. Sure, there are plenty of bullets, cannonballs and bodies flying about, but far too much of that feels listless and boring, especially compared to other films containing similar battle scenes.

The film isn't horrendous by any means, but it's far from the sweeping epic it presumably was designed and intended to be. "The Alamo" rates as a 5 out of 10.




Reviewed March 30, 2004 / Posted April 9, 2004


Privacy Statement and Terms of Use and Disclaimer
By entering this site you acknowledge to having read and agreed to the above conditions.

All Rights Reserved,
©1996-2023 Screen It, Inc.