The Ballad of Davy Crockett

If you're going to make historical fiction you should at least try and make it interesting. Most of the actors are sub par and are so reserved and disjointed that they aren't even believable as real people. You took an actual interesting man's life and made it boring. I can't imagine why anyone thought this was a good product. My wife commented part way through that a few of the actors looked like they were animatronics. If you want a movie to make fun of while you watch it this is the movie to watch. If you're hoping for anything else I would save your time. The movie also seems to go for zero violence in an action movie.

Several of the other reviewers give this movie low marks because it's not historically correct. One guy even used the word "disgusting" several times. There is nothing disgusting about this movie. No, it's not historically accurate but it does not claim to be a documentary or even biographical. It's just a story that uses Davy Crockett as it's main character. How many other westerns have depicted historical characters in ways that were not true to the historical record? Mercy, these days even so called documentaries are questionable, depending on their sources. This movie is enjoyable! Are a few scenes a little beyond belief or nonsensical? Absolutely, but this is true of most movies. Besides, many of us don't watch movies to see everything believable and realistic. We watch movies as a break from real life and just to be entertained. All the acting in this movie is very good. The script could have been a little better but it wasn't cringe-worthy by any means. My husband and I both enjoyed this. Clean, decent westerns that are actually good are very hard to find these days. Most westerns made these days are either filled with profanity, nudity and excessive violence or they are so badly written and poorly performed, they aren't worth the time of day...or both. Hollywood doesn't seem to get that just because people are adults, doesn't mean they want to watch mature content. That is what is disgusting!! This movie is just enjoyable. Cinematography is very good. Also enjoyed seeing Jesse Hutch play a bad guy.

I could not continue watching this movie because it has no regard for actual history. Crockett's wife did die in 1815 but then it showed Davy in a meeting with Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren when he got the news that she was ill. Davy didn't even enter state politics until 1821 and was no where near Washington DC until 1827. Jackson and Van Buren didn't win the White House and push the Indian Removal Act until 1831. That is when Davy became and Anti-Jacksonian.

Anyway, others have said how un-interesting the movie was and I agree. But when you can't even get the storyline to match the facts, you have to create it all and that is why the story lacked entertainment. I became suspicious when they showed his boys to be early teens and Crockett was only 29 years old when his wife died. I'll go watch the 1955 version or the 1960 "The Alamo" and at least get somewhat accuracy.

Like a lot of the reviews have stated, this is historically inaccurate. This disappointed me because Davy Crockett is one of my favorite historical figures. To make things worse, the script writing is incredibly bad, and the acting does nothing to make it better. In a strange way, I feel like the producers used AI to create this mashup of bad action and dialogue. Even my wife, who never criticizes poor acting, couldn't help but voice her annoyance with this movie. The only good thing about this movie is it is decent enough to watch with the whole family... the action sequences are so boring and unbelievably bad, but mostly benign, and language is very mild. It is also a good depiction of a strong father figure who sacrifices all he can to protect his family. So that's nice. Overall, just could have been better writing and more believable acting.

Crockett is an interesting figure, the second American celebrity in our history (after Franklin) and there's been no extensive serious film portrayal. A good movie on Davy is needed but this isn't the one.

The only thing this film has going for it is good production values. The plot is saccharine to the point of silliness (think Perils of Pauline,1914). Colm Meany is a solid actor but is annoying in some of the jejune scripts he has taken on (e.g., this one and Alleged, 2010).

Unless this film was targeting evangelicals I can't see why any thinking producer would have approved the script. Nothing here for any adult audience. Maybe we need another film rating category: N for niche audience.