ChikPapa Very disappointed :(

Redwarmin This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Tad Pole " . . . he was an abrasive, stubborn, hard-headed Irishman," son Colin says of ALAMO and John Wayne's "favorite screenwriter" and "other" chess-partner best friend, James Edward Grant. "Jimmy" was Jeff to Wayne's Mutt, this extra on the 2005 HONDO DVD release--PROFILE: JAMES EDWARD GRANT--says. Apparently, Wayne and Grant were NOT best men at each other's weddings (as were Wayne and fellow Western actor Ward Bond), though Wayne, at least, was married often enough to have had several such best buddies. Though Wayne, Bond, and their off-screen cohorts such as Grant and director John Ford may not strike the average fan as Bobby Fischer types, those who have seen the recent film biography of that American chess prodigy will recognize that this quartet was equally as irrational as Mr. Fischer. For instance, Bond and Wayne thought that RIO BRAVO was comparable to Gary Cooper's masterful Western Classic, HIGH NOON. Similarly, Colin Grant says that his dad was SHOCKED not to be Oscar-nominated for THE ALAMO screenplay, one of the many Wayne vehicles for which Jimmy served as mechanic. Being from Chicago, the Grant Family obviously lacked a grasp of Texas History 101. This movie omits the hallowed "Line in the Sand" drawn by Col. William Barrett Travis, a fault which the Academy knew enough to place at the screenwriter's doorstep.

AaronCapenBanner John Wayne both directs and stars in this recreation of the famous battle of the Alamo, where greatly outnumbered forces led by Col. William Travis(played by Laurence Harvey) are ordered by General Sam Houston to defend their Texas outpost in 1836, where the Mexican army under the command of General Santa Anna are rampaging. Joining them in support are Wayne as Davey Crockett, and Richard Widmark as Jim Bowie, who are uneasy allies, but vow to stay and assist until the end, even if it costs them their lives...Surprisingly mediocre film goes on far too long, with needless sundry subplots that drag. Though the climatic battle is exciting, it's not enough to save this disappointing film.

David Conrad Beneath the on-screen machismo and bravado, John Wayne was by all accounts a down-to-earth guy, and this almost always comes through in his performances. It comes through in "The Alamo" not only in his typically John Waynian portrayal of Davy Crockett but in his simple, unchallenging directorial style. John Ford, had he been at the helm, may have opted for a few more sweeping landscape shots or evocative silhouettes to give the visuals more flavor. Still, I doubt even Ford could have turned this bland script into a really high-quality film. "The Alamo" is a likable enough movie, with surprisingly even-handed treatment of the Mexican army, but nothing about it rises above average except perhaps Laurence Harvey's performance as the upper-crust Colonel Travis.

TheLittleSongbird Just for the record I like John Wayne and his films, I love The Searchers, The Quiet Man, El Dorado, The Shootist, Fort Apache and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, and quite like Red River and Rio Bravo. The Alamo is not Wayne's worst movie, not even close, that dishonour to me is still The Conqueror, but again it's not among his best either.Before I point out what I didn't like very much about The Alamo, I noticed several things I liked and admired. The Alamo is a beautifully made film with great colour, magnificent scenery and strong cinematography. Dmitri Tiomkin has penned some wonderful scores, such as It's a Wonderful Life, Red River and The High and the Mighty, and the score for The Alamo was no exception, with its melodious and rousing themes.Some assets showed some good and bad things. One was the script, the second half in written quality is actually stirring stuff. I wish I could say the same for the first half, sadly I found it rather leaden. Another was the direction, in the second half it shows signs of brilliance however in the first it is somewhat self-indulgent with scenes going on too long. This paragraph especially applies to the cast. John Wayne is charismatic enough and does a better job at acting here I feel than directing and Richard Widmark once again gives a solid performance. One of the most disappointing things of this picture is the performance of Laurence Harvey, who's very stiff with an accent that is both inconsistent and obvious.There are also some assets that didn't do much for me. In terms of story, the second half is much better than the first. The second half has some good writing and picks up the pace, the first half on the other hand is in my opinion unexciting and pedestrian with too many overlong scenes that could've been trimmed easily. The Alamo is perhaps 15 minutes too long, the pace is often dull particularly at the start and for a lengthy movie you'd expect more character development than this. Widmark's is probably the most well developed, Harvey's character is very awkward and perhaps even out of place throughout.Overall, too uneven and just didn't engage me. 5/10 Bethany Cox