Benutzerrezensionen

Making a film about the Alamo in 2004 was a risky business. On the one hand, you have the traditional story which doesn't always stand up to close historical scrutiny. One the other, you have revisionist history which often tosses out the inconvenient, replacing it with material which is just as suspect, but politically correct.

This film takes the middle road which, like all compromises, is guaranteed to leave both sides unsatisfied. I believe this simple fact underlies many of the poor reviews this film received.

It is to the film's credit that it presents the most historically credible version of the events leading up to the birth of the Republic of Texas. To be sure, there are still points which may be quibbled over. But without the benefit of a time machine, it's difficult to come up with a more reliable exposition of the known facts.

And that is, to many critics, another of the film's weaknesses. The average movie goer wants to be entertained and reacts negatively to any obvious attempt to educate him/her in the process. That's a sad commentary on our society, but that's the way it is. This movie could have been more entertaining, but then it wouldn't have been as educational. I appreciate accuracy and educational value in historical films, so I really liked it.

The bottom line is this... If you're looking for a familiar retelling of the Alamo story which sticks to the established mythology, this isn't for you. If you're looking for a complete retelling which turns the entire story on its ear, this isn't for you. If you're looking for mindless entertainment, this isn't for you. If you're looking for a real story of real people who changed the face of America, this is a really good film.

Epic western upon the state of Texas's fight for independence in 1836 . The usual band of diverse personalities including Davy Crockett (Billy Bob Thorton) , Jim Bowie (Jason Patrick) , Colonel Travis (Patrick Wilson) defend a small fort against very big Mexican raiding party commanded by general Santa Anna (Emilio Echevarria) . It's until the spectacular crushing spotlight of total slaughter and revenge executed by Sam Houston (Dennis Quaid) when the movie comes alive at all . Previously meeting final tragedy , they contend with each other and finally understand the meaning of life and come to respect each other . It was a troubled issue but with millions dollars budget weighing heavy in the conscience of the producer Ron Howard and director John Hancock led to a real flop and didn't had the wished box office . Big budget production features an impeccable musical score by Carter Burwell and Billy Bob plays the violin , besides it has an incredible number of extras for the Mexican army .

The film is correctly based on historic events . The stalwart but tragic defense has become one of American history's most often repeated legends,although historical research has revealed a few facts that go unmentioned.For instance,Sam Houston,commander in chief of the Texas forces,never felt that the crumbling mission could stand up to a siege,and ordered frontiersman Jim Bowie to destroy.He didn't ,however,and rescinded the order and sent attorney turned colonel William B.Travis to defend it.The force that remained in the mission the date the siege began,is estimated at between 182 .Of these less than 20 were actually Texans,the rest including Bowie and another frontier legend,Davy Crookett were volunteers.Early all of them believed that reinforcements were only a short time away.Santa Anna Launched a pre-dawn attack.To the strains of ¨deguello¨a battle march indicating that no quarter would be given,or no prisoners taken,some 1800 Mexicans troops stormed the fort.They were thrown back by the cannon and rifles of the defenders,they rushed again,and were repulsed a second time.Eventually Santa Anna sent another wave of troops who broke the outer defenses and forced the Texans to retreat,fighting hand to hand.When the fighting was over,there were no survivors among the defenders.The myth that the garrison fought to the last man ,however isn't quite accurate,since the evidence indicates that Davy Crockett and several others were captured and possibly tortured,then executed.That they died bravely has never been disputed.William Travis who at least according to legend,invited all who would stay and die with him to cross the line in the dirt,fell near a cannon at the north wall.And Jim Bowie,already deathly ill from a sickness that had recently claimed wife and children,fought from his sickbed near the main gate.Like many others among the defenders Bowie was armed with the formidable hunting knife named for him.The legendary defense served as a rallying point for the beleaguered Texas.Although Santa Anna ,who lost at least 600 of some 3000 troops against a force of less than 200,referred as a small affair,the valor of the defenders gave the surviving Texan troops something to remember and thus they did,six weeks later at San Jacinto,but a new battle cry had been added to the annals of American history:¨Remember the Alamo¨

John Lee Hancock's THE ALAMO is often sluggish, mired in his effort to provide 'detail' in an attempt at honesty, and it is nearly 90 minutes before action fans get their money's worth (and they do; the Alamo's siege and 'last stand' are mesmerizing), but all that being said, the film is a remarkable re-evaluation of one of America's best-known legends.

While each of the story's principals (David Crockett, James Bowie, William Barret Travis, Sam Houston, and Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana) are de-mythologized, it is Crockett (brilliantly conceived by Billy Bob Thornton) who captures and holds your attention. Neither the folksy backwoodsman (as portrayed previously by Fess Parker and Arthur Hunnicutt), nor the hero answering an oppressed people's call for help (John Wayne's 'take' on Crockett), Thornton's Crockett is a well-dressed country 'sophisticate', who plays the violin and the political game in Washington very well. As the film opens, he attends a Washington production of "The Lion of the West", based on his fictional exploits, with a leading man dressed in what we today consider the 'Official Crockett Uniform' of buckskins and a coonskin cap. The character on stage, and the legends surrounding him which would ultimately incorporate the Alamo as it's final act, is the 'DAVY Crockett' we all know, but the 'real' David Crockett, according to Hancock, is an opportunist who sees political rebirth in Texas, and arrives hoping the battle is already over. Thornton is masterful, showing Crockett's ambition, his fear of having to 'live up' to the legends surrounding him, and his gradual emergence into a true hero, who would defy Santa Ana with his last breath.

The other leads aren't given as much screen time for character development, with the exception of Dennis Quaid's Sam Houston, a heavy-drinking pragmatist with a political agenda and ambitions of his own. Patrick Wilson's Travis is a failure as a father and husband, hoping to rebuild his life and reputation in Texas; Jason Patric's Bowie is a glowering, unsavory adventurer/businessman, involved in slave trafficking, and terminally ill during the siege (Hooker does, however, bow to legend, allowing the dying Bowie a chance to fire his pistols at the Mexicans before being overwhelmed). Emilio Echevarría, the first Mexican to ever play Santa Ana in an American film, has gotten bad press for his portrayal of the leader as a loud-mouthed, insensitive, lecherous egotist, but from all accounts, that WAS what the real Santa Ana was like.

While the slow pacing of most of the film is a problem, the film's final half hour appears rushed, as the Alamo's fall jumps quickly into Sam Houston's victory over Santa Ana, at San Jacinto (an event that occurred after a momentous six weeks of defeat and tragedy barely touched upon by Hancock). While it is understandable that the film makers wanted an 'upbeat' ending, it comes across as jarring, nonetheless.

If you like your heroes and history 'bigger than life', the 2004 ALAMO will disappoint, and you should stick to John Wayne's version. If, however, you want a new perspective, and are willing to dispense with the preconceptions of the past, this film has a LOT to offer!

I've rarely been as surprised by the reviews I've read here - or disagreed with them more - than I was for this film. Most of the ones here are negative and call this film boring, poorly done and lacking in character development.

I am very easily bored. At just over 2 hours, I found this film captivating. Poorly done? John Lee Hancock's film is one of the most effectively produced I can remember. Not one moment of this film was shot on a sound stage. They took 50 acres in Texas and actually rebuilt the entire city of San Antonio de Behar and the Alamo and shot the entire movie in situ.

But the most amazing aspect of these reviews is the repeated accusation of lack of character development. I came away from this film understanding for the first time who William Barrett Travis, David Crockett, James Bowie and Sam Houston really were. The human underneath the legend as it were. David Crockett (Billy Bob Thornton) has a great line in this movie: "If it were just me, simple David from Tennessee, I might go over that wall one night and take my chances. But this Davy Crockett feller - people are watching him". Lack of character development? I don't think so.

The piece de resistance, though, and the one that made me take fingers to keys and write this review (something I almost never do) was the review which claims there was no tribute given to Tejano assistance in the Texas Revolution. Did this person see the same film I did? Or did he/she take a bathroom break every time Juan Seguin's character was on screen? The PRIMARY thing I learned from this historically accurate-as-possible-when-making-a-movie film was ... ta da .... the involvement of the Tejanos! I had never really considered before that there was a brother-against-brother aspect to the Alamo, but it was very implicit in this film.

Ignore the negative reviews, particularly if you are a history buff, and see this film.

"The Alamo" is the most accurate depiction of this historical event in years. The Billy Bob Thornton performance is the zenith of the movie's strength. His portrayal of David Crockett is worth the price of admission. It places the previous actors, Fess Parker and John Wayne, in a cartoon like, position in this dramatic role. One must see this film on the big screen to appreciate it's panoramic impact. Much of the action takes place in the Alamo itself, however, there is the extra benefit of the battle that took place at the San Jacinto Battle grounds. I found it a refreshing presentation of this film genre. All of the performances were deeply felt, and Billy Bob's is especially outstanding. Dennis Quaid as Sam Houston also turns in a remarkable performance. This was a long awaited movie, and well worth the wait. Plan on a long film.

I really saw this by accident, as the movie I had intended to see was not showing. Mainly, everyone just sat around in the Alamo, "jawing" while Santa Ana's men were camped outside. The person who played Travis seemed awfully young for the role. Both Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie were well done although I miss the traditional scene where the "line is drawn in the Sand" to divide those who want leave and those who want to stay and fight ,and dying Jim Bowie begs them to carry him over to the "stay and fight side'! The scenes of the Alamo being stormed were good, but somehow to me the movie lacked pazazz! Instead of ending with the deaths of the defenders, we went on to see Sam Houston defeat Santa Ana on the banks of the San Jacinto River and no credit was given the defenders of the Alamo for the 5 days that their defense had given Houston to prepare. Santa Ana was portrayed as something of a cartoon figure.

Apart from colorful and dramatic sequences that play lavishly over the screen, imparting a generally correct and truthful sense of place as well as history, this is a movie of words. Too many in some places and too few in others.

This is not the cartoonish Alamo of Fess Parker or John Wayne. Thankfully so. But neither is it a summary of all that was actually good or bad about the seminal event that created "Texas" as a concept bigger than life and arguably still representative of the changing frontier in North America.

To put it briefly, I liked what was here but came away dismayed by what was not here. Any movie that presumes to portray an actual and well-documented historical event must do more than touch on this or that fragment of fact. The production staff is obliged to accept what is presented to them by the writers, the actors, and the director -- leaving on the cutting room floor only irrelevant scraps. I have the feeling that procedure was not followed here. Too many threads holding the story together are missing.

For example, the single most important motive lying at the heart of the Texas rebellion is inadequately explained. Was it merely greed and personal ambition on both sides that created the conflict? Or racial and ethnic disputes? Or Manifest Destiny? There is absolutely no clear picture to be gained from this movie that sets in perspective what the fuss was all about. Yet we have glorious and stirring speeches (or at least aphorisms) emanating from all parties, delineating character rather well but existing only in an isolated truth here or a compelling argument there.

Somewhere on that cutting room floor, I suspect, are scenes that focus less on individual character and more on the fact that "Texians" were a unique combination of English-speaking and Spanish-speaking citizens of the newly-created nation of Mexico, a remote outpost or colony of the central government that grew too large for that government to handle. In that sense, it was just like any other historical event reflecting a desire on the part of a distinct group of persons living at the edge of an empire to achieve self-government.

When seen thus, the merging of cultural differences that characterize Texas even today presents a unified entity of mutual interest. What holds this story together, as very ably shown in bits and pieces of the film, is how important it is to recognize what humanity holds in common in spite of apparent differences.

Little wonder that Billy Bob Thornton as Davy Crockett steals the show. (Unlike Dennis Quaid as a one-dimensional caricature of my collateral ancestor Sam Houston.) This movie could have been another thirty minutes longer and mutually subtitled to get at the heart of its message. No Oscars for the current cut.

I was disappointed with The Alamo because I thought it could have been better. There were scenes which were enjoyable. Billy Bob's character, Davy Crockett, is one of the only highlights acting-wise in this one. In my opinion, he comes close to stealing the show. Although it isn't really that difficult in this film. Something about it just didn't work for me. It's tough to put a finger on exactly what it was. Possibly just that the slow beginning didn't draw me in as it should have. Possibly the ending. Who knows. It was nice to see from a historical perspective, as some youth these days may not know much about the real story behind Texas as a state. As a film though, it fell a little short for me.

After writing a phd dissertation and spending months doing research on the Alamo at The DRT library and across Texas, I became convinced that I might not live long enough to see a theatrical release that would finally do the history justice. The IMAX Alamo film is very good along historical lines, but due to budget limitations not to mention physiological IMAX constraints, it did not capture the scope and depth of the event. But make no mistake about it - this Alamo film does both. The Alamo's major participants are three dimensional flesh and blood mirror images of those one will find in their diaries, letters, books and first hand accounts of those who knew them. Even the Mexican dictator, Antonio Lopez Miguel De Santa Anna, is no longer a cardboard demon - he anticipates what Mexico will become without the stern hand that must come down to crush "the American pirates." Also, for the first time, the Tejanos who fought against their brothers and sisters in the Texas cause are well represented. The battle sequences culled from Santa Anna's own battle plans and the accounts of those who carried them out and those who survived, leave no nuance to the imagination and vividly demonstrate that even a chaotic retreat can turn into an unmanageable enemy force, overwhelming the west and north walls of the Alamo. The bloodbath, fury, chaos and desperation pulls the viewer into the center of a swirling vortex of courage and carnage. Patrick Wilson is his superb as Colonel William Barret Travis, the defacto commandante of the doomed fortress. For once, the multi emotional Travis is captured with all of the guilt ridden memories of his humiliating trial in Alabama, and the indecision that plagues his early confrontations with his sceptical Texan force. The ennui and angst of command did take a toll. But Travis' courage and conviction converge in a heart wrenching moment in front of his command, making the case for death with purpose. Jason Patric makes one wicked Jim Bowie and the fact that the Congress of the U.S is still trying to unravel some of his land swindles initiated almost two centuries ago underscores his portrayal. Bowie's legendary prowess in brawling, bilking and beating those around him is well known and Patrick's every move makes you instantly and consistently aware that Bowie was every bit the bad ass. But Bowie was also a romantic of epic proportions and flashbacks to his tragic marriage to Ursula Verimendi give a poignant underpinning to his deadliness. Billy Bob Thornton steals the show as David Crockett - but then - how could he miss? As Dennis Quaid said; "Billy Bob is David Crockett - A hillbilly actor playing a hillbilly actor." Thornton's performance is staggering. A self proclaimed over achiever and withering self critic, Thornton understands the very human David Crockett of his autobiography and letters, juxtaposed with the Davy Crockett of legends. It is a harrowing performance - particularly when Crockett realizes the Alamo is doomed. "David Crockett might drop over these walls and take his chances," he confides to Bowie. But Davy Crockett, the legend cannot. "People expect things," he tells Bowie. "I've been on these walls all my life." There is a palor and sadness that is worked beautifully by the modest film score. The photography paints Greek tragedy. These were and are real people. Many, many fans of the John Wayne ALAMO miss the overblown (but fun) saintliness of the celluloid 60's epic.For some, THE ALAMO 2004 is filled with defenders who were too human, historical facts be damned. But when Micajah Autrey and David die, I couldn't help but feel the pain of retrospection they both felt at that horrible moment. Add to this a wealth of metaphysical angst that is a subscript of this masterpiece. Tejano Catholic Voodoo guarantees the time, place and purpose of Bowie's demise. "Did it matter?" a dying Bowie asks a doomed Travis. "Buck's" face is a mask of hope and despair. These men will die not knowing if giving their lives will matter to anyone but themselves. Director John Lee Hancock does a marvelous job with subtleties that encompass great portions of Travis, Bowie and Crockett 's personality in particular. Did Crockett intentionally hit Santa Anna's epaulet? A second viewing revealed a gold reflection in the pupil of David's eye as he fires. How did Crockett die? He dies going down swinging inside the Alamo Church - but you never see his body. He dies a second time as one who refused to surrender. But you never see his body. ...And in the beginning of the film as you see the bodies of the defenders being carted away, you see Bowie and Travis, but not Crockett's. The last scene of the film is not a replay of the Crockett fiddle scene. There he is, playing over a nighttime San Antonio, alone - with no one in sight - and Billy Bob's "David" satisfied and almost bemused face in the final scene. What a gorgeous shot and a perfect way of tipping the hat to legend as well as a establishing while questioning the nature of immortality.

When history is relevance and universal, what more could we ask? I feel for the people who made this movie. In this climate of blind nationalism - embracing history not despite of its flaws but because of them will not garner the recognition this film so richly deserves. There are those that truly appreciate your efforts and applaud you for THE ALAMO fim I've waited to see all of my life. This one like the real battle, will be remembered. Thank you so much!

A much anticipated updating of the Alamo story touted to be historically accurate in every respect. A very tall order for a topic which to this day motivates extreme passions. In brief, the production team tried to do too much. The subject matter required a long running time to set up the plot, which today is much less understood - or misunderstood (!) than when John Wayne's film neatly followed Republic's "The Last Command" and Disney's Davy Crockett shows. Randy Quaid's Sam Houston, and the post-climax Battle of San Jacinto were poor choices. Old Samjacinto - and the film - would have been better served by a briefer cameo like that provided by Richard Boone in the 1960 version. Clearly the most compelling character in this offering was Thornton's Crockett; not surprising since he's the defender most written about by Alamofiles. Frankly Thornton's performance is the only element raising this production to 5-star. It is superb and really captures the essence of Crockett as described in various histories. The title should have been "Davy Crockett at the Alamo," but perhaps would have needed Disney's paid release. Even the Alamo set, proclaimed in pre-production hype to be historically accurate in all details fell short. Most disappointing, as set designers reduced the size of the courtyard in front of the chapel; I suppose for photography purposes. Wayne's production did the same, in an even more inaccurate rendition of the mission. Finally, a production like this really, really needed a Sam Peckinpaw to accurately depict the savagery of the final battle. Mexican accounts (the only reliable eye-witness ones) are pretty clear and self-damning as to the butchery that took place. According to their written reports and letters, the real battle was even more brutal than the final shootout in The Wild Bunch; but I suppose needed to be cut short to make time for San Jacinto, and to avoid violating PC rules whereby savagery not imposed by Anglo-Saxons must be muted or eliminated altogether. Watch this one for Thornton and when he's not on the screen fast forward with the remote!!

Despite what some people says, this new version of the Alamo still packs a punch. For those of us who are taken by the saga of the Alamo, you will not be disappointed. The acting in no way lessens the impact or the bravery of these men who chose to, for what ever reason, stay and pay the ultimate price for their beliefs. Billy Bob Thorton's portrayal of David Crockett is nothing short of brilliant. It is by far the best portrayal of David Crockett I have ever seen. Some of the characters seem a little thin but not enough to to ruin the experience. Go with your gut on this one. I don't think you will be disappointed. I believe an honest effort was made to tell the tragic story of these brave men.

Greetings again from the darkness. Having grown up in San Antonio and lived in Texas most of my life, I was quite anxious and apprehensive about this movie. When news first broke a few years ago regarding this project, Ron Howard was listed as the director and I could not have been more relieved. His treatment of "Apollo 13" was nothing short of outstanding. A few months ago, when the delay in release was announced, I found out Howard was no longer directing and the reins had been turned over to Hancock. It was then I began to worry. Sure enough, the obvious weakness in this film is the inconsistent direction and chopiness of the story. On the other hand, the lead actors are all fantastic! Patrick Wilson as Travis is just how the stories were told. Jason Patric brings Jim Bowie (and is extremely impressive knife) to life. Dennis Quaid does an OK job as Sam Houston, although maybe a bit heavy handed in his approach. No question, though, that the movie and story belong to Billy Bob Thornton as Davy (he prefers David) Crockett and Emilio Echevarria as Santa Ana. The arrogance of Santa Ana is chillingly portrayed and Billy Bob continues to prove that he is one of the best actors in the world. He becomes his characters. The crucial battle scene (portrayed accurately as being in the dark) is done fairly well, but the bravery and destiny of those involved is heart-breaking. I would have loved to have seen Ron Howard's version, but am impressed with the accuracy of the storyline of Hancock's film.

An excellent piece of the kind of real value and craftsmanship not seen enough today. Once in awhile a film comes along that stirs those who have not been spoiled by too much gratuitous violence, too many special effects and too much low humor. It should come as no surprise that it seems tedious to those who have developed a taste for these. This movie would certainly be boring to the jaded, empty-hearted souls whose only purpose in viewing films is to expose themselves to the latest technique for stirring their prurient interests. This film will hold its own and be watched and respected long after most of the time-wasting nonsense being made today has been forgotten. That this kind of work is being done gives hope for our cinematic future.

it rocks man! all the actors were really good! and their roles suited them nicely, except the guy who acted out William B. Travis could have been a better actor but.. I personally think Jason did the best out of all of them! god, he's so hot! I wish I could have somehow been in that movie..sigh..its such an awesome movie...I love it! i even bought, i liked it so much! i still watch it today! god, i love that movie and Jason Patric especially. they should make a sequel or something to it, 'cause it rocks! its such an amazing movie! you'll love it! its the perfect family movie or gift to give to someone if they're into history. you will LOVE it and watch again and again! its so good, and a fun way of learning, too.

We all know that making a historic movie requires great talent. Although this isn't made to be the best, but still this is a great movie to watch and i came to know how Texas was added to United States list. Great acting by many. The movie was slow at many places but it conveyed the situation of the people at Alamo who lost their lives fighting with bravery. The direction is as usual and the way the story is told can be appreciated. Definitely a worth watch and the rating given definitely cant be less than 6. It deserves 7/10. Dennis Quad acting was good and the way he tells to beat San Antonia is impressive by comparing the battle of wellington with Napolean.

When will a movie about what The Alamo was really all about be made? It is now the twenty-first century and yet here we have, once again, a movie that essentially celebrates a republic -- Texas -- founded on slavery. Mexico abolished slavery in 1829, an important fact totally omitted from this film. White Texans were rebelling against their government in Mexico in no small part because they wanted to preserve slavery. They were, in effect, terrorists fighting against their own government in Mexico City that wanted slavery abolished. The Texan victory over Mexico in 1836 assured that slavery would continue. If Mexico had prevailed at the Battle of San Jacinto, which followed the Texan defeat at The Alamo, slavery would have ended in Texas in 1836 instead of thirty years later. The movie adds at the end that Texas was admitted as the 28th state into the Union in 1845, but omits that it was admitted as a slave state. Is that fact unimportant or irrelevant? So here we have once again a film that distorts history and overturns elemental morality by arguing that those who were, in effect, fighting for slavery were really fighting for freedom. And by the way, it was not only Jim Bowie who owned slaves, as the movie briefly acknowledges, but also Sam Houston and Davy Crockett as well. How heroic is that? I guess we will have to wait for an African American writer and director to finally get this story right.

In the usual thoughts of The Alamo, you begin to think, Hardcore Action, Superheroes like Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie. Boy, you were wrong. The main reason for this film's bad rap is because the trailer marketed it as a Braveheart or Saving Private Ryan, this one proves to find itself in the more personal side of war. Despite constant bombardments by the Mexican army the film keeps a low-action tone until the last half hour or so. It, instead of focusing on the battle to defend the Alamo, John Lee Hancock depends on the "soldiers" defending it.

The film lays more on the shoulders of Sam Houston(Denis Quaid), Jim Bowie(Jason Patrick), William Barret Travis(Patrick Wilson) and Davy Crockett, The Lion of the West(Billy Bob Thorton). You would go in expecting Crockett to be the John Wayne infalable, super courageous, bear killing immortal but instead Billy Bob Thorton gives a human depiction of the legend. You can see the fear in his eyes and the determination in his soul with his suprise that the war ISN'T over when he arrives like he thought. He repeats to everyone, he can't jump the mississippi or fight bears. This, without a doubt is one of Thortons best performances. He dosen't take control and lead the Americans, this is left to Willam Travis, created flawlessly by Patrick Wilson.

An unexpectedly good Performance by the newcomer, he shows how Travis was inexperienced but still had the courage, inteligence and determination to fight who or whatever was thrown his way. When the time comes, he gives a speech to lead his men no matter how difficult the task is. He has a great quarrell with Jim Bowie for control, until finally the sick Bowie is forced to give Control to Travis because of his ailness. Bowie is played dead on by Patrick, he, even on his deathbed takes as many enemies to the grave with him before they steal the last minutes of his life. It was painful to watch Bowie do up the buttons of his waistcoat to join the battle, struggling to hold on to his own life. The men of the Alamo knew no help was coming especially from Houston who would not sentence his men to death trying to hold an old spanish mission.

The great Houston played by Denis Quaid in a simply "scrumtralescant" performance as the drunk war man trying to salvage what he could of his reputation by giving Texas it's freedom. Every carachter has their moment; Travis's speech, Bowie's attempt to do battle, Houston's "remember the Alamo!" and of course, one of the best scenes I have ever experienced in film when Crockett plays the violin along with the Mexican artillery march. This short moment is a scene of edenic quality inside the filthy deathbound fortress. Heaven visits the men as they live a minute or two of harmony in the dark hours of the seige, mexican and american alike.

By all this film proves it's excellence with it's spectacular battle scenes and outrageous sets deserving of an Oscar nomination, as well as Hancock's unique portrayal of lonely men in a war for their home. This film has found a high place in my favorites and is third(behind the passion and Eternal sunshine) as the best movie of the year so far. Hancock deserves awardment, as well as the rest of the Alamo. If I were to give this any other rating than A+, 10/10, two thumbs up, I would be a traitor to the world o film that I love so. I will always remember the Alamo.