A frequent and exasperating practice of Hollywood studios today is their penchant for making movies that must be PG-13. This is a greedy attempt to maximize profits by appealing to the largest audience possible. Nothing makes a rich studio CEO happier than the release of a good-ol' PG-13 flick that Mom and Pops can bring the whole minivan full of kids to.
To a certain extent, this is acceptable for moviegoers when the PG-13 rating is appropriate to the film's content (i.e. \Spider-Man,"" ""School of Rock"").??But when the rating is forced upon a film with subject matter that needs an R rating, the PG-13 is an ever-present limitation that severely lessens the movie's impact. Such is the case with John Lee Hancock's ""The Alamo.""
""The Alamo"" is by no means a bad film, but thanks mostly to the PG-13 rating that has been forced upon it, it is neither satisfying nor impressive. Hancock's film boasts superb production value, a few intriguing performances and a handful of finely written scenes,'?but the film does not flow particularly well due to the heavy editing it has endured (almost an hour of footage was excised) and its hit-and-miss character portrayals.
""The Alamo"" is very similar to Michael Bay's ""Pearl Harbor,"" another war movie hampered by a PG-13 rating.??However, unlike Bay and the cast of ""Pearl Harbor,"" Hancock and the makers of ""The Alamo"" actually possess filmmaking talent.??Ultimately, ""The Alamo"" is frustrating because it has a lot of squandered potential.
Hancock's film is structured well enough, beginning 11 days or so before the actual siege on the Alamo. It focuses on three characters in particular-the legendary Davy Crockett (Billy Bob Thornton at his best), the ailing Jim Bowie (Jason Patric) and the ambitious but unpopular Col. William Travis (Broadway actor Patrick Wilson). The film is composed mostly of conversations and confrontations between these three crucial characters.
After the tragic Alamo battle, Hancock tacks on the defeat of Gen. Santa Anna by Sam Houston (Dennis Quaid, the film's weakest link) to get the patriotic juices flowing. Again, this is similar to ""Pearl Harbor's"" inclusion of Doolittle and the Tokyo firebombing after the Pearl Harbor massacre, proving that Hollywood is incapable of making a movie about a famous American defeat without adding on an American victory.
The attention to character in this movie is commendable, and Thornton and Patric deliver commanding performances. Both portray these legendary figures as people with flaws and frailties, and even when their speeches tend to get a little long-winded (a la ""Gods and Generals""), they hold interest. With the exception of Quaid and his bug-eyed overacting, all of the performances are decent. Unfortunately, the PG-13 rating is the largest reason for the film's failure; it defangs the impact of the war scenes and, ultimately, the film's power.
Thus, the central flaw plaguing ""The Alamo"" is its lack of resonance.??While certain scenes contain force (Crockett's death scene is spectacular), this film is extremely forgettable-and considering the rallying cry ""Remember the Alamo,"" its disposability is detrimental to its success.??After the movie ended, I heard someone shout ""You may take our lives, but you will never take ... our Alamo!"" The half-hearted heroics of ""The Alamo"" are only faint echoes from better war entertainment like the classic ""Braveheart.\
