In creating his lurching, mechanized version of "The Alamo,"
director John Lee Hancock leaves out a vital component - heroes.
Hancock, a native Texan whose only notable credit is the unabashed crowd-pleaser
"The Rookie," painstakingly recreates the 1836 battle that led
to Texas' independence, but it is a stilted, unemotional affair.
In pointing out every little flaw of the most famous Alamo defenders
- Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie and William Travis - Hancock turns "The
Alamo" into a daytime soap opera and leaves us no champion.
Crockett (Billy Bob Thornton) loses his luster quickly by making it obvious
he's not that interested in fighting. Bowie (Jason Patric) is felled by
a lung ailment, lying in bed and sweating through the battle's most critical
period. Travis (Patrick Wilson) comes off as an impetuous pipsqueak who
can barely hold onto his command.
Adding to the movie's troubles, Dennis Quaid plays Gen. Sam Houston,
who would later lead the "Texian" army to victory at San Jacinto,
as largely indecisive and often half-drunk. It is an oddly unconvincing
performance from Quaid, who can usually be counted upon for at least competence.
The portrayals may be closer to historical truth, but they don't make
the film any more watchable. By concentrating on his characters' personal
shortcomings, Hancock trivializes the entire event.
"The Alamo" also suffers from a bad case of "Gods and
Generals" syndrome. The time period - the 1800s - is too recent to
seem exotic, but too unfamiliar to strike a chord with contemporary audiences.
It seems, at times, like a school play with a $100 million budget.
It's not all the fault of Hancock, who took over the project after Ron
Howard, wisely it seems, decided to pass. Howard wanted an R rating, which
would have allowed for realism on the battlefield.
Hancock, on the other hand, is hemmed in by Disney's PG-13 demand, and
he can't grab our attention during the combat scenes, which have all the
blood and fury of an amusement park ride.
As the Texian defenders fire cannon blast after cannon blast, the Mexican
soldiers topple over as if pulled by a long string. The nighttime battle
seems more suited for a TV special than a feature film.
Hancock's commitment to historical accuracy is in evidence. Abandoning
the jingoistic tone of the 1960 John Wayne film, the director offers a
saner account of the battle, but not a more compelling or complete film.
While Hancock demythologizes the characters, he doesn't fully explain
the issues that led to the siege. It started in late February of 1836,
when Mexican troops under Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna (Emilio Echevarria,
in a grandiose performance) surrounded the Alamo, an old Spanish mission,
which was defended by fewer than 200 men.
Santa Anna was there to crush a rebellion and did so in brutal fashion,
by storming the fort and killing every last man. He orchestrated a similar
massacre soon thereafter, but was caught unawares by Houston at San Jacinto,
where he was captured and forced to sign over Texas.
Undoubtedly, there were numerous acts of heroism on both sides. You just
can't find them in "The Alamo."
