jasonhank1953

I've seen the movie Clear and Present Danger, that inspired me to read the book, by Tom Clancy. And, if anyone out there can find the book this movie was based on, let me know. Because it definitely wasn't the one by Tom Clancy. I have never seen a more gross adaptation of a really good novel since I watched Stanley Kubrick's The Shining and was told that it was supposedly based on the Stephen King book. In short, if you can't even remotely follow a story from a book. Don't bother stealing it's characters and title to sell a movie that could do just fine on its own. My judgement 4/10, just for bad adaptation.

This movie leaves a lot to be desired by history buffs. As it does not exactly follow the true story of the Battle of Shiloh, Pittsburgh Landing to you real Yankees. But, inspite of that it is an interesting film. It is well worth watching if you enjoy any of the other westerns from this era. It is also worth it to see the actors that are in it before they became big stars. The first time I saw it, I missed the beginning and didn't know who anyone was until the end!

While the movie itself has a good story and the performances are great; to me, George Hamilton really captured the essence of Hank Williams. The actual story of how Hank Williams became one of the greatest Country and Western stars of his day is decidedly lacking. I have read the book by Chet Fillipo that inspired this movie and it too seems to be as a gross misrepresentation of Hank Williams as this movie was. Though I admit that Hank had many problems in his life and his true story is a tragic one, this movie does not depict the actual Hank Williams. In fact, the only thing this movie really has in common with his life is that he wrote songs, he was from Alabama, he married a woman named Audry, and he died at a tragically young age. In truth Hank Williams didn't like hard liqour, he drank beer and the movie fails to show all the time that he actually spent on the wagon. It also portrays his relationship with his wife as one more like cat and mouse than hushband and wife. Interviews with those closest to them, including Audry's dauther Lucrecia, say that they rarely argued as horrificly as they did in the movie. The movie also glosses over the fact that Hank was on painkillers and that he and Audry divorced in 1952 and Hank married later that year to Billie Jean Eshellman. In my opinion, this movie bears all the markings of a movie that Joeseph Goebbels would have made about the life of Adolf Hitler, it shows all the good things in marked glorification and then chooses to omit all but the best known of the bad things. In other words, this movie was made by Miss Audry and she didn't want anyone to think bad of her Hank. But, then that too is a testament to the love they held for each other, to the ends of thier lives. And that is the only truth I saw in the movie, Hank and Audry's undying love for each other, just below the surface.