Hatfields and McCoys: Bad Blood

Having no idea if the intent of this production is to ride the coattails of the History Channel's "Hatfields & McCoys" mini-series one has to think so. Obviously that one raised the current day brand recognition to an all time post WWII height, why not make a few lousy dollars?

Sadly, this seems to be the the purpose of this "K-Mart" version of the tale. I suppose if it wasn't up against the superior History Channel treatment it may look like a much crisper (almost too clear 16:9 production reeks of HD videotape, i.e., no film soft grain) 1970's ABC "Movie of the Week", but since many viewers will be watching this after seeing the far superior Kevin Costner version it pretty much is laughable.

In addition to the bargain basement production values we get a much different story. I know from research that The History Channel deviated somewhat, but here we have a very topical story with seemingly even more deviation. There just ain't any meat on these bones and the bones themselves are broken. In the back of my mind I get the feeling Jeff Fahey might have been quite good if given more to work with...That's about all I can say as the other performances were less than "phoned-in" to coin a phrase.

O.K., it's watchable if somewhat laughable. That's the only reason I give it a 3 (full disclosure: If I had paid to see it the rating would be less). I don't know how much they paid Christian Slater for his meager role here, but seriously are infomercials next?

This movie is awful. The acting is all around horrendous. Frank Phillips struggles with his accent very noticeably. The few recognizable actors in this film must really be hurting for work. These were supposed to be Appalachian hill folk, but you get clean cut pretty boys with brand new, pristine, clean clothing, gelled hair, and even designer jeans in a few scenes. The first 5 minutes of this movie, a Civil War battle scene, are just terrible, and pretty much set the bar for the rest of the movie. It looks like it was cast with overweight man boys straight out of comicon who jumped at the chance for a reenactment. Indoor scenes have doors open to blank green screens, too. This movie isn't worth the hour and a half of your life - not even for laugh content.

Maybe this movie suffered from the misfortune of my already having seen Kevin Costner's version of the Hatfields and McCoys because it caused me to want to learn more about the events that actually occurred. Sadly, this version failed to make it even to "B" status. This version was so pared down that they messed with a lot of the facts: -Johnse Hatfield did not stay with Rosanna McCoy but under pressure from his family abandoned the relationship. He later married her cousin Nancy McCoy who then left him for Bad Frank Phillips -Randall's wife did not get killed when the house was attacked by Jim Vance; she was driven insane -Ellison Hatfield was not stabbed by two McCoy's but 3 (Tolbert, Pharmer and Bud), who were all then summarily shot by Jim Vance and company upon his death -Bad Jim Vance was not killed by Anse but by Frank Phillips I could go on but I think you get the point. The ending with Johnse showing up with a pregnant Rosanna was just the icing on the cake, trying to have a happy, fairy tale ending where they are one big happy family. The best thing about this version is that they did NOT extend the movie to go onto other events such as Floyd Hatfield's hog, Cottontop being hanged for Alifair McCoy's murder, the Battle of Grapevine Creek, etc.

As far as the acting went, there were no winners here. A lot of the dialogue seemed forced and it failed to stir the least bit of emotion in me to identify with anything the characters went through. Given the choice between the two, go with the Costner version every day of the week.

"I don't plan to out gun them, I plan to out kill them." After a son of Anse Hatfield (Fahey) is attacked by a member of the McCoy family a feud is begun. The Governor of Kentucky (Slater) sends his deputy Frank Philips to try and stop the fighting before its too late. I will do my best not to be biased on this one, but I did watch the History Channel series before this one. For some reason there are a lot of movies that come out that are very similar back to back. Examples like "Deep Impact" & "Armegeddon", "Tombstone" & "Wyatt Earp", "Mirror Mirror" & "Snow White and the Huntsman". This one is no exception as this one is released less then a week after the Costner one aired. Of all the movies I listed there is always one that is way better then the others. Unfortunately this is the lesser of the two Hatfield movies. The budget and acting aside the stories are so unlike the other that I have no idea which one is right. While the Costner one made me want to learn more about the history of the fight this one just made me want to watch the other one again. Overall, maybe if I saw this one first my opinion may be different but the History channel series was a hundred times better. I give it a C-.

It was as if the director picked the worst actors he could possibly find and then told them they only needed to give 10%. The best actor was the mute girl. The best part about the movie was the fact that the producers ran out of money and could only afford to stretch the film to 75 minutes. Christian Slater needs to stop doing western movies. He is actually ruining what could be good shows. I don't know if Sean Flynn or Kassandra Clementi have ever attended an acting school but if they did they need to get their money back and possibly sue the university. I would recommend this movie to anyone who has at least 200 hours a week to spare.