The Alamo (1960) - Adventure, Drama, History

Hohum Score



In 1836, a small band of soldiers sacrifice their lives in hopeless combat against a massive army in order to prevent a tyrant from smashing the new Republic of Texas.

IMDB: 6.9
Director: John Wayne
Stars: John Wayne, Richard Widmark
Length: 162 Minutes
PG Rating: N/A
Reviews: 11 out of 115 found boring (9.56%)

One-line Reviews (68)

While the events leading up to their actual deaths are suspenseful, engaging, and somewhat graphic at times, they serve as defining moments for their characters.

This is still one of the most entertaining and well acted portrayals of The Alamo ever made.

Wayne, as Crockett, makes another long speech about himself to explain: he had the choice of whiling away his remaining years in a pointless manner or take a meaningful stand on something.

But on balance, this is a fairly intriguing story of a well known historical event that still conjures up a patriotic response whenever 'Remember the Alamo' is heard.

Strangely Compelling Rubbish .

Too long and boring for my taste .

There are those who mention the "slow" segments ...

Though the climatic battle is exciting, it's not enough to save this disappointing film.

The final third just about saves the film from being a stinker, with the academy award for best sound richly deserved, but sadly The Alamo remains to this day a plodding dinosaur that bores when it should be igniting the spirit.

It's much too slow and takes far too long to get to some action.

I think that even people who love this movie have to admit that The Alamo is the ultimate self-indulgent John Wayne vanity project.

I highly recommend it.

Even without those, the movie is still over 2.5 hours, which is too long.

Surprisingly mediocre film goes on far too long, with needless sundry subplots that drag.

Carter Burwell's score for the 2004 version is mediocre by comparison; while certainly adept and adequate, it puts a dreary overcast over the proceedings.

It is too long.

The pressure exerted upon him by the investors alone must have been quite intense, even for a man of the Duke's legendary tough stature.

Entertaining yes, a history lesson no.

John Wayne's all-over-the-map direction and a slow-moving screenplay keep the film from ever hitting its stride.

They are exciting, chaotic, inspiring, violent-terrific, especially for a first-time director.

Dimitri Tiomkin's score is a dramatic, thrilling and tragic multifaceted piece that captures the slow build-up, eventual battle and aftermath.

Hindsight shows it to be somewhat bloated, rather slow paced at times, and over loaded with right wing polemic.

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.

The Mexicans are the weakest link here and their portrayal is very bland, gray and vapid, especially Santa Anna - he is almost non present in the plot.

Considering that THE ALAMO lost a ton of money when it debuted, I was amazed that despite its faults, the film is worth watching--though historically speaking, the film is far from perfect.

Enjoyable viewing and full of splendid heroics.

This is a very good and thrilling film.

Although I am not an expert of war films, I thought that the battle scenes were very credible, especially the final confrontation in which 257 free spirited, undisciplined Texians were overwhelmed by thousands of trained, uniformed Mexican troops, moved to action by the rousing roll of relentless, military drums.

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.

Overwhelming and breathtaking retelling based on notorious battle performed , written , produced and well directed by John Wayne .

I could do without the filler sequences peppered throughout the story, like the cantina scenes and the suggested marital story line between Emil Sande (Wesley Lau) and Flaca (Linda Cristal) that went nowhere.

This is very confusing and drains much dramatic tension out of the story.

Likely if all the events and persons were accurately presented , the result might well have been a boring lecture/travelogue.

Instead there is the "Duke" John Wayne in true John Wayne style and his able cast giving us a rousing movie and with loosely enough facts to make it believable.

), the story flows between exciting 'victories' (stealing the cattle, spiking the Mexican cannons), and an understanding of the inevitable conclusion (defined by Lawrence Harvey, as Travis, in the memorable 'sword in the sand' scene).

Very Cheesy, Propaganda, Boring, Long and Unrealistic .

Its lack of emotional depth leaves The Alamo more entertaining than touching.

Aside from Linda Crystal in the female department, Joan O'Brien appears as stunning blond Sue Dickinson, one of the surviving non-combatants who supplied one significant account of events inside the fort.

This version is just all-around more entertaining than the dreary 2004 version, although that rendition earns points for being way more realistic and giving Santa Anna considerable screen time, which this version doesn't do at all.

There were a number of things that dragged the movie down:Wayne had complete control over this movie and chose to insert numerous windy speeches filled with conservative Cold War rhetoric.

By hiring the very best composer of huge western themes, mixed with stirring and heartfelt emotion -- Dimitri Tiomkin, he assured audiences of rousing background to his great cameraman, Bill Clothier's fabulous and stunning cinematography -- like dropping back into history at such a pivotal moment.

This 1960 United Artists release ranks as an engrossing history lesson and as one of the best performances ever by the legendary Wayne.

I think overall that the film is a mixed bag--not nearly as bad as its reputation would suggest, is very exciting and has some excellent performances, though its rather one-dimensional view of the conflict and its extreme length have to be considered before you watch it.

The first half certainly lives up to the self-indulgent label with endless scenes of Wayne and pals getting drunk, mouthing off, and punching one another; Jim Bowie and Colonel Travis' constant bickering, leading to Bowie's quitting at least twice; and a fairly useless subplot with Davey Crockett romancing a pretty young Mexican widow.

" The first two-thirds of "The Alamo" is a steady build-up culminating in the thrilling and utterly savage attack on the Alamo in the final act.

John Wayne's Batjac company produced this great rousing film recounting the seize of the Alamo.

I recentley saw this one again and it seemed much more plodding than I remember (though the climactic batlle scenes still stood out).

His playing is at best basic and very very formulaic.

Can it be slow and a touch too long?

Besides, the final 15 minutes makes its very long buildup feel very pointless as well.

I prefer the theatrical because I feel that the scenes that were cut were unnecessary and in some cases tedious and painful to watch.

Still, the damn thing does have its compelling bits and pieces....

But, Wayne's version of The Alamo (1960) was much more enjoyable to watch.

This was a painstakingly assembled replica of the area and is breathtaking in its realistic appearance.

Taken in context, this makes The Alamo a successful epic film, and one worth watching more than once.

Despite a terrific fight scene between a bunch of the Texan's henchmen, and Crockett and Jim Bowie (portrayed with easy charm by Richard Widmark), this first part drags, a bit, and seems contrived to allow Wayne to air his political beliefs.

As the producer, director, and star of this highly engaging film, much of the credit goes to John Wayne.

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.

The romantic interest between Davy Crockett and Flaca, played by Linda Crystal, seems unnecessary and pointless.

The uncut video version was more enjoyable than the original.

When I was younger and acquired this film on VHS tape, I made a point of watching the big climactic battle over and over, usually neglecting the rest of it; at that time, it was the final battle which was unforgettable to me and the entire build up was rather tedious and plodding by comparison.

Overall, the second part makes the movie worth watching.

A small group of defenders against a large army is always compelling drama.

His speeches are long, right-wing skewed, trite, banal and never exciting.

This the American version of ZULU and just as exciting and full of heroism and courage.

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.

Worth watching, at least once, in my opinion!

I will admit the movie was not as bad as I expected it to be, it was just way too long and a bit over the top and full of it.