I recently read an article online stating that the original film of the Dukes Alamo wasnt preserved well and that it is in danger of extinction. Supposedly there wasnt the money to do the necessary restoration. does any one have info on this.

The Alamo movie is so poor its not worth restoring why wayne made it i will never know

Matt,

I'm not sure, but could this be actually the condition of the Alamo set? I've heard that has been an issue in the last few years. Don't know about the condition of the movie, I don't think so because the film is only 43 years old, and they don't generally deteriorate that soon. But only the film experts could tell you that for sure.

Could you confirm this to me if it's the film or the actual set.

Hondo

Good point, Hondo! I am pretty sure that I have read somewhere that the film set is deteriorating.

However, there is a news article on JWayne.com regarding the actual 70mm film itself. Here's the link:

http://skyecom.net/jwayne/news/archives/00000028.shtml

In this day and age of digitizing, I suspect having the original film doesn't matter as much. Hopefully, there is a digitized master of The Alamo.

Chester

I was wondering, Chester. With Duke personally involved in the project, and putting a lot of time in this, why wouldn't his estate have the master if not one of the masters in 70 mm? This doesn't make complete sense, because Duke put a lot of heart and soul in this for a long time.

Hondo :unsure:

Thanks for the info, Chester, I've seen this before, but couldn't remember where that was.

There is a new "Alamo" movie being made starring Billy Bob Thornton, among others and I do not think they are using the Bracketville set. Could this be because of deterioration of the set? I thought the movie set was visited more than the actual Alamo because the original is in downtown San Antonio and the movie set has more "atmosphere". Also, the DVD of "The Alamo" is not the director's cut that came out on video a few years ago. Does anyone know why? Why put out a DVD if you cannot/willnot go all the way and make it the best version possible?

DustinB,

Good questions! I believe that the set is in very bad shape to be used for that movie. I've read that it would be easier to build one than to use the one in Bracketville.

As for the director's cut, MGM released it on DVD. The director was John Wayne, & I'm not sure he have a version made for him. I asked Chester a few threads back if he knew of anything about the John Wayne estate having a copy at their vault, but has not responded. And I'm not sure that they even had director's cuts, back in 1960. Maybe someone can enlighten us with their knowledge of this.

My bet would be they didn't make director's cut until recently over the past twenty years. But I could be wrong.

Hondo B)

Hondo,

Sorry we missed the earlier question, about The Alamo master prints. I don't know myself, but I would imagine that with all the money they spent, there must be a master in a gold-plated canister.

I haven't read anything about it, that I can recall.

I think that DVDs are responsible for the phenomena of director's cuts.

Chester

Chester,

It would be interesting to see what the estate has in their vaults. I'll bet that would be very interesting. Hopefully Melinda (the CEO of John Wayne Enterprises) will open it and share with us John Wayne enthusasts. She or the family is starting to release some now with the release of Big Jake, and Rio Lobo.

Hondo :rolleyes:

hi,
What were the last words Jw said in The Alamo?

cya Jwfan

AGGGGGH

"I think he said every third man to the north wall" (not a direct quote)

An interesting segment of trivia regarding the Alamo is that John Waynes mum could not watch the second part of the film becasue she knew he died in it, so when he had cancer in 1964 he admitted himself to hospital and did not tell her the real reason why he was there in order to not cause her and worry or distress.


B)

He probably said:
Cut! That's a wrap! Now let's all get drunk...

Thanks for the chuckle :lol: , Chris. Made my day. dukefan1

hi,
The words he said were: threw up an barricade over here!

cya jwfan

Really? And I was sure it was:
"Hell, that explosion hurt my ears!"
But that must have been one of the infamous cut-scenes from The Alamo for which we will be forever searching...
:lol:

Originally posted by dukefan1@Jul 1 2003, 06:37 AM
Thanks for the chuckle :lol: , Chris. Made my day.* * dukefan1

No probs dukefan1, its interesting to note they used more gunpowder making the movie than they used

in the battle.

The Alamo Starring John Wayne
Made at Alamo Village Bracketville Texas
premired on October 11 1960
in San Antonio Texas

will be shown UNCUT (Long Version)
with entrance music & exit music from the original soundtrack
on Saturday February 21 2004 at
9:00 am central standard time.Turner Classic Movies
Check your local times & channel.

This is the way Everyone should see this movie.
The movie is classic.
John Wayne Produced - Directed & Starred in this epic film.

Nominated for 12 academy awards including Best Picture
Won for Best Sound.

Thanks, Mopargary

Glad to have you back here, it's been a long time since we've seen you. I hope you'll come back and stay a while. We've been posting here.

Take Care,
Cheers, Hondo B)

Did anyone on this messageboard go to watch this movie on the big screen?

:agent:

Just saw the new movie "The Alamo". Good Movie; as a history lesson it has more facts (or reported facts) than The Duke's version, but while watching it, I couldn't help thinking, " as far as movies go, this is not nearly as good as The Duke's!" My question is, when will the John Wayne director's cut be released to DVD? Anyone hear?

ZS_Maverick,

We've discussed this before, and Roland had some pretty good comments about The Alamo that might answer your question. I have the uncut version on VHS, and I also have the DVD of this movie but it has been cut some 40 minutes. I'm not sure what's been cut, but that was the discussion. Go to Itdo's Comment (http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=408&hl=).

Hopefully this will answer some of your question. I'm not sure what to think about it myself, personally. But that is the info we have.

Cheers, Hondo B)

Originally posted by ZS_Maverick@Apr 11 2004, 03:57 PM
Just saw the new movie "The Alamo". Good Movie; as a history lesson it has more facts (or reported facts) than The Duke's version, but while watching it, I couldn't help thinking, " as far as movies go, this is not nearly as good as The Duke's!"
Could you give us your information on the movie, The Alamo (2004)? I assume that's what you are talking about. You commented that it was a good history lesson. I was under the impression that it was not factual at all. I guess I need some clarification on this. I heard that the leaders were not very good leaders, but wanted to defect from their duties.

Just curious with this. Haven't seen it yet. Not sure I will.

Cheers, Hondo B)

Thanks for bringing my attention to that thread Hondo. Ordered the VHS straight after reading it.

Bit of a tragedy isn't it?

Hey there Hondo,

Thanks for showing me the earlier thread about The Duke's Alamo; that answers the question of why I can't find the director's cut on DVD. I do have it on VHS, and while the cut, general release version is a very good movie, I thought the added scenes- Dukes original vision- made it even better. The Duke was a good director.

As far as "The Alamo" (2004), a lot of the things that happend, concerning certain incidents and people involved did match things I've read about Texas history, but as far as calling it a history lesson- that was a bit of an overstatement; I was just trying to say that the screenplay did have more facts than John Wayne's, but Duke's was still the overall better movie (my opinion). But the new version did blend truth and legend pretty well...as a guy that's been interested in Texas history, I had no complaints with it. I was afraid, going into it, that this would be a politically correct, revisionist version- it wasn't.

Maverick

Maverick,

I don't know what to ask. I haven't seen this movie, and have strong reservations to seeing this.

I'd like to ask why this movie is more factual than the John Wayne version?

What was it about Duke's movie was more of a Hollywood version than this one from Disney or Touchstone Pictures?

I am not up on Texas History as you are, and would be very interested in hearing your view of this. I saw that this movie did not do well with critics, but I don't judge critics' view as gospel.

I think a lot of Crockett, Travis and Bowie. This movie doesn't from what I hear. Am I hearing wrong?

What was not correct in history from Wayne's version?

I might have more questions, but would like to be educated from someone who might have an objective opinion. Love to hear more.

Cheers, Hondo B)

Hi Hondo
THE ALAMO - part one

In the last couple of weeks our papers are beginning to pick up on the New Alamo.

The Guardian in a long article (which I must admit i didn't fully read) implied that the film failed because it effectively cut the film into three i.e. The events leading up to the battle, The Battle and finally Houston's victory over Santa Anna at San Jacinto on April 21.

I have just bought The Times and this is what they have to say about the film and the legend.


MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: DOING JUSTICE TO A LEGEND

John Lee Hancock's film the Alamo had a budget of $95 million
It took $9.2 million in its first weekend, gaining no 3 in the US box office charts.

It tells the story of 180 Texan troop under Colonel Travis with Davy Crockett and James Bowie, besiged in an old mission hous in San Antonio Texas, in the war for Texan independence from Mexico in 1836.

4000 Mexicans Led by dictator General Antonio Lopez de Santa anna (1795-1876), killed the exans after a siege from February 23 to March 6

Legend says Crockett died in a heroic last stand, shot as he swung his empty rifle, Old Betsy. Historians now claim that he was caught anhd executed after trying to talk his way out

After the Alamo. the Texan Army, led by General Sam Houston, defeated Santa Anna at San Jacinto on april 21 1836, which set up the state of Texas
[/b]

This article was taken from the Time page 30 Tuesday April 13 2004

See Part Two - The Review to follow.

Hi again

THE ALAMO</span> - <span style=\'color:red\'>Part Two

This is the review of the new film The Alamo again it is quoted from todays 'The Times'


[B]THE ALAMOAN

[SIZE=1]LA Movie Disney Will Forget this Alamo, says SEAN MACAULEY

..............'But the big disappointment was Disney's $95 million epic The Alamo starring Dennis Quaid and Billy Bob Thornton, with a debut weekend of $9 million.
The Alamo was originally slated to be a Ron howard film starring Russell Crowe but Disney balked at Howard's proposed budget of $135 million. Crowe went off to make Master and Commander, while Howard went off to direct the next western he could find, the glum, semi-supernatural curio The Missing'.
The Alamo is no emarrassment. As directed by John Lee Hancock, who previously directed The Rookie, it is a solid, picturesque version of events but it is also one lacking throat-choking tagic emotion.
The Alamo may have been the pivotal battle in the formation of Texas (actually the Republic of Texas, which joined the United States seven years later), but it obviopusly does not have the same resonance for the rest of America. This may be because the villains are the Mexican Army, which is like staging a western in which the villains are Native Amercans.
Also the story of the Alamo is one of total defeat. There were no survivors among the band of local militia and American troop who defended the eponymous fart against the Mexican Army.
However, this being a disney film, there are many ways to solve the ptroblem of a downbeat ending. Pearl Harbor put the Japanese attack in the middle of the story so it functioned like a half time score of one-nil, paving the way for a second half fightback.
The Alamo concludes its devastation a little later, but it still has a third act fightback thanks to General Sam Houston who envoked the battle skills of Wellington and lured General Santa Anna and his men to their Waterloo.
The new film simplifies by laying on the villainy of Santa Anna and his officers with lip smacking relish. This is one decant, egotistical peacock, who sips coffee from fine china and refers to his troops as expendable poultry.
John ayne' version of the Alamo, made in 1960 was more egregiously partisan wih its lumbering theme tune that told of "13 Days of Glory", but it did play fair with it's enemy. In Wayne's ending, Santa Anna is a gentleman who salutes the fort's one surviving widow as she leaves head still held high.
Still, even with a hissable villain and a relatively upbeat ending, the new vwersion of the Alamo failed to catch on. One notable absentee for a bhig modern movie is the youthful Titanic style central romance. One can applaud The Alamo for eschewing this grisly device, but from a marketing viewpoint the film becomes a black hole. There are no element to attract the female or teenager demographics.
Perhaps its last chance lay in the appeal of a familiar story being revitalised with modern special effects ....Pearl Harbor had the bombs-eye view plunging all the way down to its target. The Alamo has a similar, if less spectacular, cannon ball POV shot. But the films most powerful image is of Mexican troops as they surround the fort. This alas, is not an image unique to the digital age.


Part 3 to follow

Regards

Arthur

And Again

CROCKETT, LUSH OF THE WILD FRONTIER

'DAVY CROCKETT AND THE DEFENDERS OF THE ALAMO - HEROES TO GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS- WERE JUST A BUNCH OF DRUNKEN THUGS, RESEARCHERS CLAIM.

In the legend as shown in the John Wayne movie, 189 gallant pioneers died holding back a huge invading Mexican army at the Texas Mission.
Now it is claimed Crockett was all set to surrender in the 11 day siege but was too legless to wave a white flag. University historian Cynthia Orozoco says his tough image was all a myth invented to boost the pride of white Texans over indians and latins.

Even his racoon-skin hat was fiction.
Orozco claims Mexican recors show that Jim Bowie, inventor of the oversize kniife, only stuck around because he had a hoard of stolen gold.
And commander William Travis was unable to flee because he was suffering from VD.

She added:"Latin people now form a majority in San Antonio and they want the record set straight"

[/b][/quote]

Many many years ago as a kid I bought a magazine and one of the articles in side referred to the fact that there had been a mutiny in the Alamo prior to the attack. The article (if I remember it right and this was a long time ago) says that when the Mexicans finally took the mission in one corner they found a pile of dead bodies just heaped together and were told that a portion of the defenders had mutinied and had been executed. Has anyone else heard that story or was I dreaming it?

How do the movies in general view the Alamo as history? For myself I can only comment on the films made post 1939 that I have seen.

In the 1939 Republic Man of Conquest Richard Dix who played Sam Houston on hearing news of the fall of the Alamo is annoyed as previously he had instructed Travis played by Victor Jory) not to defend the Alamo as it wasn't considered stong or important enough.

It is interesting that the new film does not include the line drawing.

In the 1955 'Last Command' (again Republic) this was the picture that was made to spite John Wayne largely using a script that Wayne had virtually commissioned and a comparason betwenn this and Wayne's later Alamo bear marked similarities particularly in view of one of the criticisms about the new picture with regard to the relationship between Jim Bowie and Santa Anna which in both of the earlier pictures was cordial.

In the 1953 Universal International picture 'The Man From the Alamo' sees Glenn Ford being despised by his Fellow Texans as a desrter being the one man who did not cross the line and left before the mission was taken It later transpires that he was deliberately instructed to leave and warn Texas families. Victor Jory who had previously played the hero Travis in Man of Coquest reverts to type playing the leader of a band of renegades dressed as Mexican soldiers.

In the made for TV movie Two for Texas Kris Kristoferson and Scott Bairstow stumble through history but the picture does include a scene from the Alamo where one of the defenders a russian who fought in the Napoleonic Wars does leave the alamo going over the wall.


As the critics say it is all myth and I suppose the truth lies in their somewhere you pays your money and you takes your choice but hopefully this may have answered your questions Hondo.



Regards


Arthur

Arthur,

That was a lot of reading and posting for you. I don't blame you for making three posts. :D The Alamo was a story that has many different versions, and all not completely accurate. We can never know the full story of those who parished in the walls around that mission, because they all died. I'm interested in the survivor, and I assume her story. Did she tell anything of this battle from within the walls?

Going back to Davy Crockett, I know that most of his life that we know about him was legend. He did serve in the Justice of the Peace, State of Tennessee Legisalator and U.S. House of Representatives. He was born in eastern Tennessee, and moved toward the western part of the state. He was married to his first wife when she died, and had a second when he went to Texas. He has fought and killed a bear (one that I know of), and has been a scout for General Andrew Jackson in the Indian Wars. I think that was in Alabama around horseshoe bend. Saying that he was coward in his last battle at the Alamo was something that I could never imagine, but he was 50 years old, and things do happen. I know that if I was fighting in a war that the odds were more than 20:1, I'd run too. But that's me. I think I would run if I ran across a bear or hostal indians, too. Sorry, I can't buy that Crockett was a coward.

As for the people or volunteers a bunch of drunks, I believe that. I would say they drank heavely, but they fought hard. No problem with that statement, especially with the politically correct bunch of morons who think that pot should be the only legal substance for comsumption.

I don't know much about Jim Bowie, or Col. Travis, to discuss anything about them, except the battle at the Alamo.

The only story I've seen was John Wayne's The Alamo. I am interested in the story of Crockett more than the Alamo, so that's my take on that. I am interested in this story o get more information, more of the historical side of this.

Cheers, Hondo B)

Hello once again Hondo;

In answer to your question about what was not historically correct about Duke’s Alamo, there’s a few general facts that historians agree on-

Sam Houston, who was no slouch at military strategy, knew that defending the Alamo was not a wise idea; he ordered the destruction of the Alamo, and told Bowie to bring him the cannons- Sam was building a strategy to defeat the enemy on the battlefield- which he eventually did at San Jancento.

Bowie had other ideas- he thought it was a good idea to defend the Alamo, and to keep it out of the hand of the enemy. Travis didn’t become the commander of the garrison, until Bowie’s tuberculosis put him in the infirmary.

Although Houston warned of the consequences, all of the men of the Alamo really believed in what they were doing, and when it came clear that Houston was right, and they were facing death, they knew that they had to stay and buy as much time for the Texas government to form and declare their independence- which they finally did 4 days before the last battle of the Alamo.

The finale battle itself, took place in the dark- in the pre-dawn hours, and was over before sunrise.

These are a few things the new movie touches on that Duke’s didn’t. BUT in my opinion, Duke’s movie captures the spirit and heroism of the defenders much better than the new one…his is not only more entertaining but a better tribute to the defenders- that’s the goal he had when he went into the project.

As for as the other facts (or as I call them “reported facts”, because you never really know how accurate these historians are) No one really knows much else- about the character of the key players, about whether or not Crockett went down fighting, etc. That’s something for the so called “experts” to debate!

Hope this answers your question…now time for me to forget the Alamo, and get to work!

Maverick.

Thanks Maverick!

I really enjoyed hearing about this story of the Alamo. I had the privilege of going to the Alamo in San Antinio and Brackettsville. I was honored to read the names who parished in that battle.

I am beginning to learn a little more about this story.

Cheers, Hondo B)

P.S. Arthur, thank you for your article too.

A bit of Info on Col. Travis


TRAVIS, WILLIAM BARRET (1809-1836). William Barret Travis, Texas commander at the battle of the Alamo,qv was the eldest of eleven children of Mark and Jemima (Stallworth) Travis. At the time of his birth the family lived on Mine Creek near the Red Bank community, which centered around the Red Bank Baptist Church in Edgefield District, near Saluda, Saluda County, South Carolina. There is some confusion regarding the date and circumstances of his birth. Many sources give the date as August 9, others as August 1, 1809. The family Bible, however, records the former date. Others have confused the date of his birth with that of his elder, and illegitimate, half-brother, Toliferro Travis. The first Travers, or Travis, to settle in North America landed in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1627. Edward Travers became a member of the house of burgesses and amassed significant holdings of land. Subsequent generations of the family drifted southward to the Carolinas, where Barrick or Barrot Travers established a farm in the Edgefield District. Somewhere in the journey Travers became Travis, and Barrot came to be spelled Barret. Barrot Travis's sons, Alexander and Mark, became farmers, and Alexander also became a prominent clergyman.

Travis's boyhood centered around the work of the family farm, attendance at the Red Bank church, home schooling, and playing with area children. James Butler Bonham,qv who also served in the defense of the Alamo, was one of these, but it is difficult to establish a strong relationship between Bonham and Travis in these early years. Alexander Travis, the family patriarch, traveled to Alabama in 1817 and decided to move the entire family to Conecuh County the next year. There they helped found the communities of Sparta and Evergreen. Travis attended an academy in Sparta until he learned all that was taught there; then Alexander Travis enrolled his nephew in a school in nearby Claiborne, Alabama. Travis eventually assisted in the instruction of the younger students. James Dellet (Dellett, Delett), the leading attorney in Claiborne, accepted Travis as an apprentice. Under his instruction Travis became an attorney and partner, and for a brief time operated a joint office across the river at Gosport, Alabama. On October 26, 1828, Travis married Rosanna Cato, one of the students he had helped to teach, when he was twenty years old. Their first child, Charles Edward Travis,qv was born on August 8, 1829. For a year Travis gave every evidence that he intended to remain in Claiborne. He began the publication of a newspaper, the Claiborne Herald, joined the Masonic order at Alabama Lodge No. 3, and accepted a position as adjutant of the Twenty-sixth Regiment, Eighth Brigade, Fourth Division, of the Alabama Militia. A year later he abandoned his wife, son, and unborn daughter (Susan Isabella) and departed for Texas. The story has been told that Travis suspected his wife of infidelity, doubted his parenthood of her unborn child, and killed a man because of it. The story is probably correct, given its persistence, but hard evidence of it is lacking.

Travis arrived in Texas early in 1831, after the Law of April 6, 1830,qv made his immigration illegal. He arrived at San Felipe de Austin, and on May 21 obtained land from Stephen F. Austin.qv He listed his marital status as single, although he was still married. He established a legal practice in Anahuac, a significant port of entry located on the eastern end of Galveston Bay. The purpose of the move there was to establish himself in an area where there were few attorneys while he learned the official language, Spanish. He traveled the country doing legal work and became associated with a group of militants who opposed the Law of April 6, 1830. Eventually this group became known as the war party as tension increased between the Mexican government and American settlers in Texas. Travis had many occasions to oppose the commander of the Mexican garrison at Anahuac, Col. John Davis Bradburn,qv a Kentuckian in the service of Mexico. Bradburn enforced the anti-immigration law, refused to allow state officials to alienate land to American settlers arriving after the passage of the law, and allegedly used materials and slaves belonging to the settlers to build his camp.

The principal dispute at Anahuac occurred in 1832 when William M. Loganqv of Louisiana engaged Travis to secure the return of runaway slaves being harbored by Bradburn. Logan returned to Louisiana for proof of ownership and threatened Bradburn that he also would return with help. Travis alarmed Bradburn with a note passed to a sentry that Logan had returned with a large force. Bradburn turned out his entire garrison to search for Logan, who, of course, was nowhere near the area. Suspecting Travis as the perpetrator of the prank, Bradburn sent soldiers to his law office to arrest Travis and his partner, Patrick C. Jack.qv They were held in a guardhouse and later in two brick kilns. Word of their arrest spread, and men assembled to demand their release. The group drafted the Turtle Bayou Resolutions,qv which pledged their loyalty to the states' rights Constitution of 1824,qv but not to the current Centralist regime, and demanded the release of the prisoners. John Austinqv traveled to Velasco to obtain a cannon to force Bradburn to comply. Col. José de las Piedras,qv commander at Nacogdoches, hurried to Anahuac. Although in sympathy with Bradburn, he realized that the Mexican forces were outnumbered. He ordered Travis and Jack released to civil authorities, who soon released them altogether. This incident began the Anahuac Disturbancesqv of 1832, which resulted in armed clashes at Velasco and Nacogdoches later that summer and produced the conventions of 1832 and 1833qv with their petitions for repeal of the Law of April 6, 1830, and separate statehood.

Travis moved his legal practice to San Felipe in the aftermath of the clash at Anahuac. In 1834 he was elected secretary to the ayuntamientoqv there and was accepted, despite his youth, into the councils of government. He also met Rebecca (Rebeca) Cummings, who lived at Mill Creek, and began a courtship that resulted in a decision to marry once Travis was divorced. Rosanna Travis began divorce proceedings against her husband in 1834, charging him with desertion. They were divorced in the fall of 1835, and she remarried early the next year. She had permitted Charles Edward Travis to move to Texas, where he lived with the family of David Ayers, so that he could be near his father. Travis may not have known when the divorce became final, for he became embroiled in the rapidly moving events of the Texas Revolutionqv in July 1835 and was constantly occupied until his death. In any event, he made no attempt to marry Rebecca Cummings.

After Stephen F. Austin carried the petition of the Convention of 1833 to the government in Mexico City and was incarcerated, fears for his safety cooled politics in Texas until the summer of 1835. By then Antonio López de Santa Annaqv had asserted full Centralist authority and reestablished a customhouse and military garrison at Anahuac under the command of Capt. Antonio Tenorio.qv A war group led by James B. Millerqv met and authorized Travis to return to Anahuac to expel Tenorio. In late June Travis led some twenty-five men by way of Harrisburg and Galveston Bay on an amphibious assault on Tenorio's position and captured the Mexican soldiers easily. The action alarmed the peace party, and for several months Travis was regarded by many Texans as a troublemaker. Gen. Martín Perfecto de Cos,qv Mexican military commander in the north, moved his command to San Antonio. He branded Travis and the other partisans at Anahuac outlaws and demanded that the Texans surrender them for military trial.

When Cos demanded the surrender of the Gonzales "come and take it" cannonqv in October 1835, Travis joined the hundreds of Texans who hastened there, but arrived too late to take part in the action. He remained with the militia and accompanied it to besiege Bexar. He served as a scout in a cavalry unit commanded by Randal Jonesqv and later commanded a unit himself. He did not remain at San Antonio through the final assault in early December, but returned to San Felipe. He advised the Consultation on the organization of cavalry for the army but turned down a commission as a major of artillery. He later accepted a commission as a lieutenant colonel of cavalry and became the chief recruiting officer for the army. Governor Henry Smithqv ordered Travis to recruit 100 men and reinforce Col. James C. Neillqv at San Antonio in January 1836. Travis was able to recruit only twenty-nine men, and because he was embarrassed he requested to be relieved. When Smith insisted, Travis reported to Neill and within a few days found himself in command of about fifty men when Neill took leave. When James Bowieqv arrived with 100 volunteers, he and Travis quarreled over command. They were able to effect an uneasy truce of joint command until Bowie's illness and injury from a fall forced him to bed.

Travis directed the preparation of San Antonio de Valero Mission, known as the Alamo, for the anticipated arrival of Santa Anna and the main command of the Mexican army. With engineer Green B. Jamesonqv he strengthened the walls, constructed palisades to fill gaps, mounted cannons, and stored provisions inside the fortress. He also wrote letters to officials requesting reinforcements, but only the thirty-five men came from Gonzales to his relief, thus raising the number of the Alamo's defenders to approximately 183. Travis's letter addressed "To the People of Texas and All Americans in the World," written on February 24, two days after Santa Anna's advance arrived in San Antonio, brought more than enough help to Texas from the United States, but it did not arrive in time. When Santa Anna had his forces ready, he ordered an assault on the Alamo. This occurred just before dawn on March 6, 1836. The Mexicans overpowered the Texans within a few hours. Travis died early in the battle from a single bullet in the head. His body and those of the other defenders were burned. The nature of Travis's death elevated him from a mere commander of an obscure garrison to a genuine hero of Texas and American history.

Info On Col Bowie

BOWIE, JAMES (1796-1836). James Bowie was born near Terrapin Creek (now Spring Creek) where it crosses Bowie's Mill Road (Turnertown Road), nine miles northwest of Franklin, Logan County (now Simpson County), Kentucky, probably on April 10, 1796. He was the son of Reason (or Rezin) and Elve Ap-Catesby Jones (or Johns) Bowie. In 1794 Reason Bowie had moved his family from Tennessee to Logan County, where he farmed and operated a gristmill with the help of eight slaves. In February 1800 he moved to Madrid, in what is now Missouri. On May 2, 1801, at Rapides, Louisiana, Reason Bowie and his brothers David, Rhesa, and John swore allegiance to the Spanish government. In October the families settled on farms in what is now Catahoula Parish. There Reason's sons, James, John J., Stephen, and Rezin P. Bowie,qv grew to manhood. The family took an active part in community affairs and the elder Bowie reportedly became the largest slaveowner in his locale, with twenty slaves. About 1809 the Bowie clan moved to the Atakapa country in southeastern Louisiana; there Reason purchased 640 acres on the Vermilion River near the mouth of Little Bayou. He then developed a plantation near Opelousas, where he grew cotton and sugarcane, raised livestock, and bought and sold slaves. Reason Bowie died there around 1821.

In his teens James Bowie worked in Avoyelles and Rapides parishes, where he floated lumber to market. He invested in property on the Bayou Boeuf and traded in 1817-18 at what is now Bennett's Store, south of Cheneyville. He was fond of hunting and fishing, and family tradition says that he caught and rode wild horses, rode alligators, and trapped bears. When grown, Bowie was described by his brother John as "a stout, rather raw-boned man, of six feet height, weighed 180 pounds." He had light-colored hair, keen grey eyes "rather deep set in his head," a fair complexion, and high cheek-bones. Bowie had an "open, frank disposition," but when aroused by an insult, his anger was terrible. During the War of 1812, James and Rezin joined the Second Division, Consolidated, a unit that contained the Seventeenth through Nineteenth regiments, drawn from Avoyelles, Rapides, Natchitoches, Catahoula, and Ouachita parishes. In January 1815, according to family records, the brothers were on their way to join Andrew Jackson's forces at New Orleans when the war ended.

After the war they traded in slaves. They bought them from the pirate Jean Laffite,qv who captured slave shipments in the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico and ran a slave market on Galveston Island. Laffite landed slaves at Bowie's Island in Vermilion Bay, and the Bowies took the slaves up the Vermilion and sold them in St. Landry Parish. When they had $65,000 they quit the business. James and Rezin also dabbled in land speculation and developed friendships with local wealthy planters. James became engaged to Cecelia Wells (b. 1805), who died on September 7, 1829, in Alexandria, two weeks before their wedding was to take place.

He also made enemies. Norris Wright, Rapides parish sheriff and local banker, refused to make a loan that Bowie sorely needed. In 1826 Bowie met Wright in Alexandria, where tempers flared and Wright fired point-blank at Bowie; but the bullet was deflected. After this encounter, Rezin gave his brother a large butcher-like hunting knife to carry. On September 19, 1827, near Natchez, Jim Bowie participated in the Sandbar Fight, which developed at a duel between Samuel Levi Wells III and Dr. Thomas Maddox. After the principals had exchanged shots without effect, two observers continued the affair. Alexander Crain fired at Samuel Cuny, and when Cuny fell, Bowie fired at Crain but missed. Wright shot Bowie through the lower chest, and Bowie, said an eyewitness, "drew his butcher knife which he usually wears" and chased Wright. The Blanchard brothers shot Bowie in the thigh, and Wright and Alfred Blanchard stabbed him in several places. As Wright bent over him, Bowie plunged the knife into his assailant's breast, then raised himself and slashed Blanchard severely. All the witnesses remembered Bowie's "big butcher knife," the first Bowie knife.qv Reports of Bowie's prowess and his lethal blade captured public attention, and he was proclaimed the South's most formidable knife fighter. Men asked blacksmiths and cutlers to make a knife like Jim Bowie's.

During the late 1820s Bowie's land speculations centered on the southern Louisiana parishes; he lived in New Orleans, enjoying its excitement and pleasures. James and his brothers Rezin and Stephen established the Arcadia sugar plantation of some 1,800 acres near the town of Thibodaux, where they set up the first steam-powered sugar mill in Louisiana. Rezin was elected to the Louisiana state legislature. James spent little time at Arcadia, however; in the late 1820s he traveled to the eastern cities, as well as Arkansas and Mississippi. On February 12, 1831, the brothers sold Arcadia and other landholdings and eighty-two slaves to Natchez investors for $90,000.

When Bowie first entered Mexican Texasqv is unknown. He possibly was recruited in 1819 in New Orleans with Benjamin R. Milamqv and others for the Long expedition.qv If he did, he was not among those captured. On January 1, 1830, Bowie and a friend left Thibodaux for Texas. They stopped at Nacogdoches, at Jared E. Groce'sqv farm on the Brazos River, and in San Felipe, where Bowie presented a letter of introduction to empresarioqv Stephen F. Austinqv from Thomas F. McKinney,qv one of the Old Three Hundredqv colonists. On February 20 Bowie and his friend Isaac Donoho took the oath of allegiance to Mexico. Bowie, age thirty-four, was at his prime. He was well traveled, convivial, loved music, and was generous. He also was ambitious and scheming; he played cards for money, and lived in a world of debt. He reached San Antonio with William H. Whartonqv and Mrs. Wharton, Isaac Donoho, Caiaphas K. Ham,qv and several slaves. They carried letters of introduction to two wealthy and influential Mexicans, Juan Martín de Veramendi and Juan N. Seguín.qqv Bowie's party continued on to Saltillo, the state capital of Coahuila and Texas.qv There Bowie learned that a Mexican law of 1828 offered its citizens eleven-league grants in Texas for $100 to $250 each. (A league was 4,428.4 acres.) Bowie urged Mexicans to apply for the eleven-league grants, which he purchased from them. He left Saltillo with fifteen or sixteen of these grants, and continued to encourage speculation in Texas lands. His activities irritated Stephen F. Austin, who hesitated to approve lands Bowie wanted to locate in the Austin colony but eventually allowed the tracts there.

In San Antonio Bowie posed as a man of wealth, attached himself to the wealthy Veramendi family, and was baptized into the Catholic Church,qv sponsored by the Veramendis. In the autumn of 1830 he accompanied the family to Saltillo, and on October 5 officially became a Mexican citizen. The citizenship was contingent on his establishing wool and cotton mills in Coahuila. Through his friend Angus McNeillqv of Natchez, he purchased a textile mill for $20,000. On April 25, 1831, in San Antonio, Bowie married Ursula de Veramendi. He had appeared before the mayor, declared his age as thirty-two (he was actually thirty-five), and pledged to pay Ursula a dowry of $15,000. He valued his properties at $222,800. But the titles to his 60,000 arpents of Arkansas land, valued at $30,000, were fraudulent. Walker and Wilkins of Natchez owed Bowie $45,000 for his interest in Arcadia Plantation, and had given McNeil $20,000 for the Saltillo mill. Bowie borrowed $1,879 from his father-in-law and $750 from Ursula's grandmother for a honeymoon trip to New Orleans and Natchez. The Bowies settled in San Antonio.

Veramendi family tradition says Bowie spent little time at home. He apparently became fascinated by tales of the "lost" Los Almagres Mine,qv said to be west of San Antonio near the ruin of Santa Cruz de San Sabá Mission. Bowie obtained permission from Mexican authorities for an expedition into Indian country financed by the Veramendis, and on November 2, 1831, he left San Antonio with his brother Rezin and nine others. On the nineteenth they learned that a large Indian war party was following them, and six miles from San Saba, Bowie camped in an oak grove. An attempt to parley failed. Bowie's men fought for their lives for thirteen hours. The Indians finally drew off, reportedly leaving forty dead and thirty wounded. Bowie lost one man killed and several wounded. The party returned to San Antonio. On January 23, 1832, Bowie made another foray to the west. He now carried the title of "colonel" of citizen rangers. He left Gonzales with twenty-six men to scout the headwaters of the Colorado for Tawakonis and other hostile Indians. After a fruitless search of 2½ months, he returned home.

In July, in Natchez, he learned that José de las Piedras,qv Mexican commander at Nacogdoches, had visited the towns of Anahuac and Velasco to quiet the antagonisms between the government and the mainly Anglo citizens. Upon his return, Piedras demanded that all citizens in his jurisdiction surrender their arms. The colonists rejected the demand. Bowie hurried to Nacogdoches, and on August 1 accompanied James W. Bullockqv and 300 armed men in their siege of the garrison there. Piedras chose to fight. During the night he evacuated his men and marched south, having lost thirty-three killed. Bowie and eighteen men ambushed the Mexican column, and Piedras fled. Bowie marched the soldiers back to Nacogdoches (see NACOGDOCHES, BATTLE OF). On March 9, 1833, Monclova replaced Saltillo as the state capital. When the two towns raised small armies to contest the change, Bowie favored Monclova. On one occasion when the forces confronted each other, he rode out and tried to precipitate a battle. He believed that the fortunes of Texas land speculators lay with Monclova.

In September, Veramendi, his wife Josefa, and Ursula Bowie died of cholera at Monclova. Ursula died on the tenth. A Bowie relative and Veramendi family tradition say Ursula and one child died in the epidemic. A Bowie family friend reported that Ursula had two children, but both died young. Bowie was ill with yellow fever in Natchez and unaware of the deaths. On October 31 he dictated his last will, in which he bequeathed half of his estate to his brother Rezin and half to his sister Martha Sterrett and her husband.

Mexican laws passed in 1834 and 1835 opened the floodgates to wholesale speculation in Texas lands, and Texas-Coahuila established land commissions to speed sales, since the state treasury was empty. Bowie was appointed a commissioner to promote settlement in John T. Mason'sqv purchase. The governor also was empowered to hand out 400-league parcels for frontier defense. The sale of these large tracts angered some colonists, who also resented a rumored plan by speculators to make San Antonio the capital. They questioned Bowie's handling of Mason's 400-league purchase. One traveler met Bowie and Mason en route from Matamoros to Monclova with $40,000 in specie to pay the last installment on Mason's land. Bowie also sold Mason land certificates to his friends in Natchez. In May 1835, however, Santa Anna abolished the Coahuila-Texas government and ordered the arrest of all Texans doing business in Monclova. Bowie fled the capital for Texas. On June 22 he wrote a friend in Nacogdoches that all communication between Mexico and Texas had been cut, that troops were boarding ships at Matamoros for the Texas coast, and that Mexican forces were en route from Saltillo toward the Rio Grande. In July, Bowie and others in San Felipe and Nacogdoches were beating the drum for war. Bowie led a small group of Texas "militia" to San Antonio and seized a stack of muskets in the Mexican armory there.

On July 31, 1835, William B. Travisqv wrote Bowie that Texans were divided and that the Peace Partyqv appeared the stronger. Travis was a leader of the War Party.qv Bowie had hired Travis as early as 1833 in San Felipe to prepare land papers, and in June 1834 Travis represented Bowie and Isaac Donoho in a case filed by Francis W. Johnson.qv Travis also did legal work for Bowie's friend Jesse Clifft, a blacksmith who is often credited with making the first Bowie knife. The War Party sought military support among the Indian tribes in East Texas. On August 3, Bowie reported on a recent tour of several villages where he found many of the Indians on drunken sprees and all reluctant to cooperate.

On September 1, Austin arrived home from a long imprisonment in Mexico City. On October 3, Santa Anna abolished all state legislatures in Mexico. After being elected to command the volunteer army, Austin issued a call to arms. On October 16 his forces camped on Cibolo Creek twenty miles from San Antonio. Bowie arrived with a small party of friends, principally from Louisiana, and Austin placed him on his staff as a colonel. Travis and others joined the army. Gen. Sam Houston,qv in command of the Texas regular army, arrived and condemned the idea of attacking Bexar. He maintained that Austin's army, weak and ill-trained, should fall back to the Guadalupe or Colorado river. Bowie and Capt. James W. Fannin,qv at Austin's orders, scouted south of Bexar for a new campsite. On their way, Bowie drove off a Mexican patrol. On October 26, Austin moved 400 men to San Francisco de la Espada Mission. Bowie took ninety-two horsemen and inspected area of Nuestra Señora de la Purísima Concepción de Acuña Mission, near Bexar. At dawn on the twenty-eighth, in a heavy fog, the Mexicans attacked Bowie with 300 cavalry and 100 infantry. Bowie fought for three hours. "Bowie was a born leader," Noah Smithwickqv wrote years later of the battle of Concepción,qv "never needlessly spending a bullet or imperiling a life. His voice is still ringing in my old deaf ears as he repeatedly admonished us. Keep under cover boys and reserve your fire; we haven't a man to spare." Bowie captured a six-pounder cannon and thirty muskets. He lost one man, while the Mexicans left sixteen on the field and carried off as many. Bowie, Fannin, and the detachment remained in the immediate area south of Bexar while Austin moved his army and established headquarters on the Alamo Canal.

Three days after the battle Austin sent Travis and fifty men to capture some 900 horses being driven south to Laredo, and asked Bowie to create a diversion to cover the escape of Mexican soldiers who wanted to desert. Bowie made a display of force, yet the soldiers failed to come out. On October 31 Bowie notified Gen. Martín Perfecto de Cosqv that he would join Austin in an attack on Bexar. On November 1 Austin demanded that Cos surrender; he refused. Austin hesitated. On November 2, Austin's officers voted 44 to 3 against storming Bexar. Bowie did not vote. He asked the same day to be relieved of command and again tried to resign on November 6. He had earlier served in a volunteer ranger group, fought Indians, and was the type of officer who served the community in time of need. He apparently had little interest in a formal command. Provisional governor Henry Smithqv and Houston wanted him to raise a volunteer group and attack Matamoros, but the General Councilqv declared that Bowie was not "an officer of the government nor army."

Bowie left the army for a brief trip to San Felipe in mid-November. He was back in San Antonio on November 18, and on the twenty-sixth he and thirty horsemen rode out to check on a Mexican packtrain near town, while Burleson followed with 100 infantry. Bowie met the train and charged its cavalry escort. He fought off several assaults by Mexican infantry, and the Mexicans retired with the loss of sixty men. As the train was loaded with bales of grass for the garrison livestock, the clash was called the Grass Fight.qv Bowie subsequently proceeded to Goliad to determine conditions there. During his absence, Burleson attacked Bexar on December 5 and forced the Mexican garrison to surrender and retire to the Rio Grande. The volunteers left for home. Bowie received a letter from Houston dated December 17, suggesting a campaign against Matamoros. If that was impossible, Houston suggested, Bowie could perhaps organize a guerilla force to harass the Mexican army. The Matamoros expeditionqv was approved, but the issue of command was muddied by the political rivalry between Governor Smith and the council, and Houston soon found another assignment for Bowie.

On January 19, 1836, Bowie arrived in Bexar from Goliad with a detachment of thirty men. He carried orders from Houston to demolish the fortifications there, though some historians believe these orders were discretionary. The situation was grim. Col. James C. Neill,qv commander of a contingent of seventy-eight men at the Alamo,qv stated that his men lacked clothing and pay and talked of leaving. Mexican families were leaving Bexar. Texas volunteers had carried off most of the munitions and supplies for the Matamoros expedition. On February 2 Bowie wrote Governor Smith, urging that Bexar be held because it was a strategic "frontier picqet guard." Travis, promoted to lieutenant colonel, arrived with thirty men on February 3; David Crockettqv rode in with twelve men on the eighth. The garrison had some 150 men. On February 11, Neill gave his command to Travis and left. The volunteers preferred Bowie as commander and insisted on holding an election on February 12. The volunteer vote placed Bowie in command, and he celebrated by getting drunk. While under the influence Bowie ordered certain prisoners set free and paraded the volunteers under arms in Bexar. Travis took his regulars from the Alamo to the Medina River to escape implication in the disgraceful affair. On February 13 Bowie and Travis worked out a compromise giving Travis command of the regulars, Bowie command of the volunteers, and both men joint authority over garrison orders and correspondence.

On February 23 Bowie and Travis learned that some 1,500 Mexican cavalrymen were advancing on Bexar, and sent a dispatch to Goliad asking Fannin for help. Within hours the Mexicans marched into Bexar and requested a parley. Without consulting Travis, Bowie asked for and received terms: the Texans must surrender. These terms were rejected. On February 24 Bowie, who was suffering from a disease "of a peculiar nature," which has been diagnosed as pneumonia or typhoid pneumonia but probably was advanced tuberculosis, collapsed, ending his active participation in commanding the garrison. Most historians no longer believe that he fell from a platform while attempting to position a cannon. He was confined to a cot and urged the volunteers to follow Travis. He was occasionally carried outside to visit his men.

On March 6 the Mexicans attacked before dawn, and all 188 defenders of the Alamo perished. Santa Anna asked to see the corpses of Bowie, Travis, and Crockett, and Bexar mayor Francisco Ruiz identified the bodies. Bowie lay on his cot in a room on the south side. He had been shot several times in the head. During his lifetime he had been described by his old friend Caiaphas K. Ham as "a clever, polite gentleman...attentive to the ladies on all occasions...a true, constant, and generous friend...a foe no one dared to undervalue and many feared." Slave trader, gambler, land speculator, dreamer, and hero, James Bowie in death became immortal in the annals of Texas history.

Info On Davie Crockett


CROCKETT, DAVID (1786-1836). David (Davy) Crockett, frontiersman, congressman, and defender of the Alamo,qv son of John and Rebecca (Hawkins) Crockett, was born in Greene County, East Tennessee, on August 17, 1786. In 1798, two years after the Crocketts opened a tavern on the road from Knoxville to Abingdon, Virginia, John Crockett hired his son out to Jacob Siler to help drive a herd of cattle to Rockbridge County, Virginia. Siler tried to detain David by force after the job was completed, but the boy escaped at night by walking seven miles in two hours through knee-deep snow. He eventually made his way home in late 1798 or early 1799. Soon afterward he started school, but preferred playing hooky and ran away to escape his father's punishment. This "strategic withdrawal," as Crockett called it, lasted 2½ years while he worked as a wagoner and day-laborer and at odd jobs to support himself. When he returned home in 1802 he had grown so much that his family did not recognize him at first. When they did, he found that all was forgiven. Crockett reciprocated their generosity by working for about a year to discharge his father's debts, which totaled seventy-six dollars, and subsequently returned to school for six months.

On October 21, 1805, Crockett took out a license to marry Margaret Elder of Dandridge, Tennessee, but was jilted by her, perhaps justly, since local legend intimated that he was a less than constant suitor. He recovered quickly from the experience, courted Mary (Polly) Finley, and married her on August 14, 1806, in Jefferson County; they remained in the mountains of East Tennessee for just over five years. Sometime after September 11, 1811, David, Polly, and their two sons, John Wesley and William, settled on the Mulberry Fork of Elk River in Lincoln County, Tennessee; they moved again in 1813, to the Rattlesnake Spring branch of Bean's Creek in Franklin County, Tennessee, near what is now the Alabama border. Crockett named his homestead Kentuck.

He began his military career in September of that year, when he enlisted in the militia as a scout under Major Gibson in Winchester, Tennessee, to avenge an Indian attack on Fort Mimms, Alabama. On November 3, under Andrew Jackson, Crockett participated in the retributive massacre of the Indian town of Tallussahatchee. He returned home when his ninety-day enlistment for the Creek Indian War expired on the day before Christmas, and reenlisted on September 28, 1814, as a third sergeant in Capt. John Cowan's company. He arrived on November 7, the day after Jackson took Pensacola, and spent his time trying to ferret out the British-trained Indians from the Florida swamps. After his discharge in 1815 as a fourth sergeant Crockett arrived home and found himself again a father. Polly died the summer after Margaret's birth, although she had been in good health when David returned.

On May 21, 1815, Crockett was elected a lieutenant in the Thirty-second Militia regiment of Franklin County. Before summer's end he married Elizabeth Patton, a widow with two children (George and Margaret Ann), and he explored Alabama in the fall with an eye towards settlement. He nearly died from malaria-was reported dead-and astonished his family with his "resurrection." By about September of the next year the Crocketts had moved to the territory soon to become Lawrence County, Tennessee, rather than Alabama. They settled at the head of Shoal Creek, and David continued his political and military career. He became a justice of the peace on November 17, 1817, a post he resigned in 1819. He became the town commissioner of Lawrenceburg before April 1, 1818, and was elected colonel of the Fifty-seventh Militia regiment in the county that same year.

New Year's Day 1821 marked a turning point in Crockett's career. He resigned as commissioner to run for a seat in the Tennessee legislature as the representative of Lawrence and Hickman counties. He won the August election and, from the beginning, took an active interest in public land policy regarding the West. After the session concluded he moved his family to what is now Gibson County in West Tennessee. He was reelected in 1823, defeating Dr. William E. Butler, but was in turn defeated in August 1825 in his first bid for a seat in Congress. In 1826, after returning to private business, Crockett nearly died when his boats carrying barrel staves were wrecked in the Mississippi River. When he was brought to Memphis he was encouraged to run again for Congress by Maj. M. B. Winchester and won election over Gen. William Arnold and Col. Adam Alexander to the United States House of Representatives in 1827. He was reelected to a second term in 1829 and split with President Andrew Jackson and the Tennessee delegation on several issues, including land reform and the Indian removal bill. In his 1831 campaign for a third term, Crockett openly and vehemently attacked Jackson's policies and was defeated in a close election by William Fitzgerald.

By this time Crockett's reputation as a sharpshooter, hunter, and yarn-spinner had brought him into national prominence. He was the model for Nimrod Wildfire, the hero of James Kirke Paulding's play The Lion of the West, which opened in New York City on April 25, 1831. Life and Adventures of Colonel David Crockett of West Tennessee was published in 1833 and reprinted the same year under the more accurate title of Sketches and Eccentricities of Colonel David Crockett of West Tennessee. Much of the same material spilled over into the first few issues of a series of comic almanacs published under Crockett's name from 1835 to 1856 that, as a whole, constituted a body of outrageous tall tales about the adventures of the legendary Davy rather than the historical David Crockett.

Building in part upon his growing notoriety, Crockett defeated the incumbent Fitzgerald in 1833 to return to Congress. The following year he published his autobiography, written with the help of Thomas Chilton, A Narrative of the Life of David Crockett of the State of Tennessee, the only work that he actually authored. It was intended to correct the portrayal given by Mathew St. Clair Clarke in Sketches and Eccentricities and to deny Crockett's authorship of that account, which did not bear Clarke's name. The Narrative was also a campaign biography of sorts, for Whig politicians were touting Crockett as an anti-Jackson candidate for the presidency in 1836. On April 25, 1834, he began a three-week triumphal tour of the eastern states, and his "campaign swing" was recorded in the first of two Whig books published the next year under his name, An Account of Colonel Crockett's Tour to the North and Down East. The second, a negative Life of Martin Van Buren, was issued less than three months later.

Crockett apparently thought himself a serious candidate, but he was likely only a convenient political tool to the Whigs, an independent frontiersman with a national reputation perhaps the equal of Jackson's who opposed Jackson on key political issues. The point became academic, however, when Crockett lost his 1835 congressional campaign to Adam Huntsman, a peg-legged lawyer supported by Jackson and by Governor Carroll of Tennessee, by 252 votes.

Disenchanted with the political process and his former constituents, Crockett decided to do what he had threatened to do-to explore Texas and to move his family there if the prospects were pleasing. On November 1, 1835, with William Patton, Abner Burgin, and Lindsey K. Tinkle, he set out to the West, as he wrote on the eve of his departure, "to explore the Texes well before I return." At this point he had no intention of joining the fight for Texas independence.

The foursome reached Memphis the first evening and, in company with some friends congregated in the bar of the Union Hotel for a farewell drinking party, Crockett offered his now famous remark: "Since you have chosen to elect a man with a timber toe to succeed me, you may all go to hell and I will go to Texas." They set off the next day. Their route was down the Mississippi River to the Arkansas and then up that river to Little Rock; overland to Fulton, Arkansas, and up the Red River along the northern boundary of Texas; across the Red River, through Clarksville, to Nacogdoches and San Augustine; and on to San Antonio.

At San Augustine the party evidently divided. Burgin and Tinkle went home; Crockett and Patton signed the oath of allegiance, but only after Crockett insisted upon the insertion of the word "republican" in the document. They thus swore their allegiance to the "Provisional Governmentqv of Texas or any future republican Government that may be hereafter declared." Crockett had balked at the possibility that he would be obliged to support some future government that might prove despotic.

That Texas had changed his plans was indisputable. His last extant letter, written on January 9, 1836, was quite clear:

I must say as to what I have seen of Texas it is the garden spot of the world. The best land and the best prospects for health I ever saw, and I do believe it is a fortune to any man to come here. There is a world of country here to settle. . . . I have taken the oath of government and have enrolled my name as a volunteer and will set out for the Rio Grand in a few days with the volunteers from the United States. But all volunteers is entitled to vote for a member of the convention or to be voted for, and I have but little doubt of being elected a member to form a constitution for this province. I am rejoiced at my fate. I had rather be in my present situation than to be elected to a seat in Congress for life. I am in hopes of making a fortune yet for myself and family, bad as my prospect has been.

Government service in Texas would rejuvenate his political career and, as he stated elsewhere, provide the source of the affluence he had unsuccessfully sought all his life. He intended to become land agent for the new territory.

In early February Crockett arrived at San Antonio de Béxar; Antonio López de Santa Annaqv arrived on February 20. On the one hand Crockett was still fighting Jackson. The Americans in Texas were split into two political factions that divided roughly into those supporting a conservative Whig philosophy and those supporting the administration. Crockett chose to join Col. William B. Travis,qv who had deliberately disregarded Sam Houston'sqv orders to withdraw from the Alamo, rather than support Houston, a Jackson sympathizer. What was more, he saw the future of an independent Texas as his future, and he loved a good fight.

Crockett died in battle of the Alamoqv on March 6, 1836. The manner of his death was uncertain, however, until the publication in 1975 of the diary of Lt. José Enrique de la Peña. Susanna Dickinson,qv wife of Almaron Dickinson,qv an officer at the Alamo, said Crockett died on the outside, one of the earliest to fall. Joe,qv Travis's slave and the only male Texan to survive the battle, reported seeing Crockett lying dead with slain Mexicans around him and stated that only one man, named Warner, surrendered to the Mexicans (Warner was taken to Santa Anna and promptly shot). When Peña's eyewitness account was placed together with other corroborating documents, Crockett's central part in the defense became clear. Travis had previously written that during the first bombardment Crockett was everywhere in the Alamo "animating the men to do their duty." Other reports told of the deadly fire of his rifle that killed five Mexican gunners in succession, as they each attempted to fire a cannon bearing on the fort, and that he may have just missed Santa Anna, who thought himself out of range of all the defenders' rifles. Crockett and five or six others were captured when the Mexican troops took the Alamo at about six o'clock that morning, even though Santa Anna had ordered that no prisoners be taken. The general, infuriated when some of his officers brought the Americans before him to try to intercede for their lives, ordered them executed immediately. They were bayoneted and then shot. Crockett's reputation and that of the other survivors was not, as some have suggested, sullied by their capture. Their dignity and bravery was, in fact, further underscored by Peña's recounting that "these unfortunates died without complaining and without humiliating themselves before their torturers."

Coincidentally, a work mostly of fiction masquerading as fact had put the truth of Crockett's death before the American public in the summer of 1836. Despite its many falsifications and plagiarisms, Richard Penn Smith's Col. Crockett's Exploits and Adventures in Texas...Written by Himself had a reasonably accurate account of Crockett's capture and execution. Many thought the legendary Davy deserved better, and they provided it, from thrilling tales of his clubbing Mexicans with his empty rifle and holding his section of the wall of the Alamo until cut down by bullets and bayonets, to his survival as a slave in a Mexican salt mine.

In the final analysis, however, no matter how fascinating or outrageous the fabrications were that gathered around him, the historical David Crockett proved a formidable hero in his own right and succeeded Daniel Boone as the rough-hewn representative of frontier independence and virtue. In this regard, the motto he adopted and made famous epitomized his spirit: "Be always sure you're right-then go a-head!"

Hi Blacksnake

and I thought my posts were long.It makes brilliantly fascinating reading thanks for that.



Regards

Arthur

Originally posted by arthurarnell@Apr 16 2004, 07:14 AM
Hi Blacksnake

and I thought my posts were long.It makes brilliantly fascinating reading thanks for that.



Regards

Arthur
Blacksnake extracted his information from "The Handbook of Texas Online" ('http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/'), which is the best place I've found on the internet for learning historical facts about Texas and Texans.

Reading the information about the movie, The Alamo, and listening to a lot of comments about this new version of the same title in 2004, I'd like to hear some information about the 1960 version.

I am aware that John Wayne, when putting this project together, was not planning to be in the movie in a major role. I believe that he was going to play General Sam Houston, which was a very little part in the movie. He wanted to produce and direct this movie with some of Hollywoods big names. As he was putting this together, he had trouble getting a studio back up this project until MGM agreed to finance his picture with one condition. That condition was that Duke was to be a major character in the film.

My question is, was the script rewritten for Duke to play Davy Crockett, and made Duke the hero when indeed Crockett was not a real hero?

The reason I write this is because legend tells us that Crockett fought and killed many and was doing so until a group of Mexican soldiers killed Crockett while he took many Mexican lives. In the current movie (which I haven't seen) he tried to desert the mission before it got too heavy. The soldiers captured Crockett and lined him up to a firing squad, and he pleaded for his life. And many other reasons that I might not know at this point.

I guess what I'm trying to say is did Wayne rewrite the script to make John Wayne to look like a hero and take away the real story of the Alamo?

Ready to hear comments and facts about this topic. I am a history buff, and really don't know much about Texas history or even the story of Texas Independence and the defeat of Santa Anna.

Cheers, Hondo B)

I want to include in this addition to this topic.

I am not asking you if this movie or any historical movie is completely accurate. I am well aware that movie makers adjust the story a little to make it entertaining to the audience. Nothing can be completely truthful, but what I am asking if John Wayne made changes to make this a Duke movie. I hope you understand what I am saying.

Cheers, Hondo B)

Hey Mike

I understand your question completely and its a very good and interesting one.

My opinion is yes the script would have been rewritten but only to an extent, I am sure Duke would have originally wanted to portray Crockett in a positive light but the one we see in the film is very John Wayne and the script writer James Edward Grant new how to tailor the script to suit the big man. Duke also added on little aspects such as Bowies five barreled gun and more significantly Bowies black slave. The slave was added to give greater meaning to the film to show how the cause affected different people and to show the value of loyalty and courage irrespective of colour the Black slave would have been a way to reach out to the wider audience to an extent. I hope this posts makes sense.

Robbie

:agent:

It's on sale at Best Buy for $7.50.....

Hi Hondo

The Alamo is being released in UK in September but interest is already building and most of the large papers are including articles on the film, and of more importance, comparasions between the two Alamos in their magazines. The Sunday Express has included four pages devoted to the new film and does compare the two.

If I can I will try to give my viewpoint of your question:-

To look at the role of Davy Crockett in John Wayne's The Alamo I think you need to look at the various portrayals of the Alamo story. Perhaps ITDO can go farther back that I can, but in order not to complicate things too much I would start with 'Man of Conquest', Davy Crockett-King of the Wild Frontier and of most importance, in my opinion Republic's 'The Last Command'.

Man of Conquest concentrated on Sam Houston the Alamo was important in Houston's life but only as much as a battle is to a field marshal. It is being fought by his soldiers, but he has no control over the outcome and therefore the role of Travis as the mission commander is mentioned, the others Bowie, Crockett and Dickinson are periphery.

Walt Disney's Davy Crockett King of the wild Frontier set the entire world into a frenzy of Crockett mania and it is therefore essential that in the final part of the sequence Crockett should be the last to die going down in a blaze of glory with an empy musket swinging around his head. Again the other two commanders don't figure.

And finally to Republic's 'The Last Command' which was intended to view the Alamo from the viewpoint of James Bowie with John Wayne playing the role of Bowie and two minor actors Arthur Hunnicut and Richard Carlson playing the roles of Crockett and Travis. Ultimately the role of Bowie was played by Stirling Hayden.

In their book 'John Wayne's the Alamo' writers Donald Clark and Christopher Anderson cite the two pictures The Last Command and Davy Crockett as being one dimensional films i.e focused on one hero, I include 'Man of Conquest' again as being a one dimensional picture.

The book also suggests that when Wayne and James Edward Grant proposed to make The Alamo' it would also be a one dimensional picture made from the viewpoint of Crockett who by know, through the efforts of Disney would be a byword in American legend and familiar to every kid who sported a Davy Crockett coonskin cap.

When Wayne left Republic following an arguement with Herb Yates the script for the Alamo was virtually written but the snag was Grant had been employed by Republic and therefore the script belonged to Republic and Wayne could not buy it back. so he had to practically start again.

In the event the script underwent twelve rewrites before it became acceptable and also went from being a one dimensional picture featuring Wayne with Crockett as the main character and Bowie and Travis as periphial characters to a Three Dimensional picture, with all leading characters equal.

Attitudes are also important as is entertainment value. If your hero has to die it is important that he dies late in the picture preferably in the last reel, If Wayne had been killed landing on Iwo Jima it would have been a quick and uninteresting picture, similarly in 'The Fighting Seabees' his heroic death on the bull dozer is probably one of the most memorable scenes in the film.

If your hero has to die kill him off almost at the end, give him time to be eulogised over then leave the cinema with his reputation unsullied.

Although not an expert on heroes, I would venture to argue it dosen't always happen like that. Everyones sees General Custer as the last man standing against the Sioux a blazing pistol in each hand defying the enemy. it may have happed that way but I doubt it. In real life if you take a British example at the Battle of Trafalger, French sharpshooters were posted in the rigging to shoot the officers, Admiral Lord Nelson wearing his full regalia and medels was shot very early on in the battle, kill the officers leave the men leaderless.

Heroes, by their very nature often put themselves in positions where they are in the heat of the action, which is probably why you have so many dead heroes.

With regard to Davy Crocketts bravery the magazine article takes the new version but does include the following:-



[COLOR=red][/B][/I]'....'Over the years the story has grown into an almost impenetrable maze of fact and mythology. Half a century ago, the myths gained momentum as a result of the popular TV series Davy Crockett King of the ild Frontier, starring Fess Parker. The crockett phenonimum swept the US and the UK, for that matter and gave birth to a bunch of tall stories which assumed epic proportions in the Wayne movie.
......Although in the John Wayne version Davy Crockett died fighting bravely on the battlement,s (and my note; even here the magazine is wrong as Wayne died pinned by a lance to the door of the arsenal which blew up) in reality their is doubt over how he fell. A Mexican Lieutenant, Jose Enrique de la Pena, wrote in his diary that Crockett was one of seven who survived and were executed. Naturally this version has been hotly disputed. "In the Unitwed States if you say that Crockett was executed most people would have called him a coward, " says Dr Winders (a historian and curator of the Alamo).
Without giving away the ending of the new movie, it's fair to say that Texas-born director John Lee Hancock has tried to be true to history. "I love Davy Crockett and i would not want to besmich his heroism," he says, "but the mythology of him going down swinging was invented in the fifties.[quote]

Of other aspects only the two version of the Alamo subject made in the fifties have the drawing the line in the sand episode, and of the magazine has this to say.
[quote]
'What there is, of course, is no shortage of well-known tales - like the one that William Travis used his sabre to draw a line in the sand, telling his men that if they wanted to flee the Alamo they just had to cross over. According to the legend, only one man did. Dr Winders attributes the tale to a miner exas Historian called William P.Zuber, who published it in 1873. The story gained so much credence that it was carried in a popular Texas school book - even though Zuber had nothing to support his theory. ..... It dies hard because its a good story'

Here again facts are mixed up in the Last Command the men cross the line if they are prepared to stay not leave . If the facts are right magine the poor sod who got it right and thinks I'm going to have to fight all the Mexicans on my own, but I jest.

In John Wayne's Alamo I think there is a symbolic crossing line ceremony when Bowie and Crockett are on horseback waiting to pull out and Travis gives his the Alamo cannot stand speech to the assembled troops, and, as a result they all subsequently dismount and stand by him. And in this if my memory stands me right Crockett is among the last to dismount and walk over. Not to say that Wayne was reluctant but as the star of the film it was right that he did so.

I've probably gone on longer than I should but its an interesting conversation piece.

Best Regards

Arthur ;)

Hi again

If you are going to crack a joke make sure you get it right. The object of crossing the line at the alamo was if you wanted to leave not stay.

Regards

Arthur :headbonk:

Hi Gang!
just dropped in and saw you have an Alamo conversation going. Good! I have an original shooting script, used in the shoot, one of my crown juwels as they are really rare, so about the question if JW turned Crockett into a Waynian hero:

In the story of the making of The Alamo it's often said that Wayne intended to play Houston (and still wished so afterwards, to do a movie about Houston). Yet when I look at the shooting script - this version has the date 7/21/59 - it becomes clear that Grant was writing the role and the speeches with nobody else but Wayne in mind. Grant wrote several drafts along the years, and in the shooting script, Crockett's description really fit JW's pistol (interesting, every time a person in the film would be described as it would be in the common screenplay, Grant's script refers to the "wardrobe script", a detailed script just for the appearance of the actors!)

If one is interested in how JW MADE the Alamo, then it's thrilling to find out where he added or left something out. First of all, the character of Smitty (Avalon) had more lines, and was really whorshipping the "hero Davy Crockett". Wayne cut that out. And changed the originally intended name for the character COTTON to Smitty (that happend during filming, it's still in the script). What I find interesting is that there is NO character with the name ITDO in the script - Wayne made all that funny stuff up right there on the spot. Also, the character of Seguin's mexican bodyguard (you'll recognize him in many scenes) is not in the script - completely improvised by Wayne. The film was intended to start out with the taking of Bexar, and the Texicans just hanging around there, not knowing where this war would go to, until Houston arrives.
Grant was very short describing the battle sequences - he only scripted the deaths of the 3 main characters - leaving it to Wayne to direct and improvise the action on the spot. The blowing up of the ammo is in the script - this idea Grant "stole" from his previous Alamo script which was made into The Last Command. So they were really sold on the Crockett-blows-himself-up-idea (historians don't disagree that there probably was an attempt to blow the pulvera up as the battle was lost).

Wayne left quite some action scenes on the cutting room floor that involved Crockett - so quite the contrary to the question if he deliberately made Crockett into a Waynian hero.

One scene he cut out himself (which isn't in the director's cut as well) probably because he had to move the plot along in the beginning, is this one: Crockett rides into San Antone. There are stills indicating that he shot it - but never used it.

I transfer from the shooting script (if there are mistakes, blame me, not Mr. Grant)

CROCKETT
It means to get out of these deerskins and into our foo-faw-raw.

He starts to shuck his clothes.

DISSOLVE TO:

EXT. THRESHING AREA - DAY
The grain threshing is again in progress when again the kids break of their singing and come down to the edge of the road. This time there is no excitement whatsovever in their attitude. All look upt the road, smiling.

P.O.V. CROCKETT AND HIS MEN
They are bedecked in finery as per wardrobe plot. CAMERA MOVES to bring them past the grain threshing kids who are delighted with the parade. The Tennesseans are pleased with the reaction of the audience, juvenile though the audience is. They walk their horses past the kids.

CROCKETT
Buenas dias, muchachos.

AD LIBS
Buenas dias, Senor - - Etc. Etc.

The Tennesseans look at Crockett with beaming respect.

COTTON (that would be Frankie Avalon)
The Colonel sure speaks Spanish proud, don't he?

The entourage turns into the next street.

ANGLE - ON THE SEGUINS
They are dismounting before one of the buildings adjacent to the hotel.
Silverio takes his father's horse to the hitch rack. Juan looks off at the approaching Tennesseans. Beekeeper is walking his horse alongside Crockett.

BEEKEEPER
Davy, sling some Spanish at that fellow --

Crockett stops his horse and ceremoniously raises his hat to Seguin who returns the salute. The Tennesseans stop and watch Crockett establish relations with the foreigners.

CROCKETT
Buenas dias, Senor.

SEGUIN
Buenas dias, Senor.

CROCKETT
Habla espanol, Senor.

Seguin blinks a bit.

SEGUIN
Pero si, Senor.

Now that the language difficulties are out of the way---

CROCKETT
Where kin we find a decent place to stay - or anyway half-way decent -
or anyway, a place to stay?

BEEKEEPER
Davy, you sure speak proud Spanish.

SEGUIN (politely in English)
Our accommmodations in Bexar are not grandiose, sir -- One may find accomodations here in the hotel. Rooms and food. And also at the Cantina.

CROCKETT
What's the difference between them?

SEGUIN
The hotel is clean and the food excellent. The Cantina is -- well, not so clean, and the food dubious.
(disapprovingly)
And the cantina is much noisy drinking -- and dancing.

CROCKETT
I'll take a vote.

He turns to take a vote from his men; they are slightly ahead of him

23 TENNESSEANS IN ONE VOICE
CANTINA!

CROCKETT
Guess I'm over-ruled.

EXT. BEXAR STREET - GROUP SHOT
FAVORING Crockett. Cotton leads his horse up alongside Crocketts. The kid adores Crockett.

COTTON
I'll unsling your war-bags, Colonel Crockett.

CROCKETT
Thanks, Cotton.

He steps down and goes into the Cantina, followed by the others. Seguin walks in to Cotton.

SEGUIN
Is that Colonel Crockett? Davy Crockett?

COTTON
Yep.

SEGUIN
Crockett!! -- I've heard of him.

This produces an annoyed reaction in the kid. He is sharp.

COTTON
Of course..! Everybody's heard of Davy Crockett...

He begins to unload the war-bags; he's proud. But he remembers his manners.

COTTON
(my note: this line would eventually be used in the introduction of Travis to Crockett by Avalon)
Me and him's neighbors back in Tennessee, sir. Our places ain't hardly mor'n forty mile apart.

SEGUIN
(sensing an ally has arrived)
He is a very great fighter.

COTTON
The greatest. The greatest hunter and the greatest fighter. There's people that talk about this here Mike Fink and this here knife-fighter, Jim Bowie. But the colonel---

But before he has finished this peroration, Seguin has made a decision and gone purposefully on his way. The kid looks upt to see he has no audience, and heaves down the war-bags and starts into the Cantina.

HERE HE SCENE WOULD DISSOLVE TO TRAVIS' PATROL ARRIVES AT CANTINA.



Since Wayne filmed another introduction of Crockett to Seguin we can suspect that he filmed the sequence but dropped it already as filming progressed.

(BTW, Arthur, if the Texicans CROSSED the line or rather were asked not to cross, depends on the source. In VIVA MAX the late Sir Peter Ustinov recaptures the Alamo - the film was shot in San Antonio - and in disguise enters a tourist tour, where the tourists hear the story that Travis asked them NOT to cross. Funny stuff - that is, if you're not a Texan, they didn't like the movie very much).

Well,

I asked a question and got a load to read. A very big load at that. It sounds like a script was written specifically for Duke, but I heard that Duke wanted Humphrey Bogart to play Crockett. Bogart died in 1957, so he was out, but was there any other person to play the part? Was there a script written before the July 21, 1959 date?

It's interesting to see that Duke's Alamo was picking up where Disney's Davy Crockett left off. And now the irony is Disney's The Alamo 2004 is disputing what 1950's Davy Crockett, The King of the Wild Frontier was showing back then. I wonder what's the deal about that?

Thanks robbie, Arthur and itdo for your insight on this subject.

Cheers, Hondo B)

Hi Hondo

Apparently There was talk in the pre casting of The Alamo that William Holden and Rock Hudson would play Bowie and Travis respectively. Funny but I can imagine Hudson playing Travis. Clark Gable was also mentioned for the role of Houston as was Charlton Heston.

James Arness was invited to play the part of Bowie and failed to turn up for the interview. It was suggested later that the shooting schedule would interfere with Gunsmoke.

Regards

Arthur

There seems that there is great interest in "The Alamo" and the Duke's film and if it tells the true story. I do not think any one will know the real story but I will put my 2-Bits in. Everyone in my family was from Texas but me. My Grandmother came from West Texas to Southeastern Arizona by wagon train and horse back in the first part of the 1900s, and in the storys that she would tell me when I was a young boy in the 1930s the first one would be about "The Alamo" and what her Grandfather had told her about the founding of the "Republic of Texas" and the fall of the Alamo. We all know that as time passes the story changes as it told time after time. I do know that before she passed on I took her to see "The Duke's" film "The Alamo" and it was all I could do to keep her from talking all thru the film and that it was what her Grandfather had told her. If you want the story as she told it to me go to THE ALAMO (http://www.wyntoontrip.com/DUKE16ALOMO.html) I will try to have the second page up that the State of Texas has on the fall of The Alamo soon. Chilibill :cowboy: Remember what the Duke would say when he was upset about what the press would say about him. He would say "What the Hell--when the legend becomes fact, print the legend!!!"

A Mexican Lieutenant, Jose Enrique de la Pena, wrote in his diary that Crockett was one of seven who survived and were executed

I believe this diary you mention has been proved a forgery, so I would seriously doubt that Crockett survived and was later shot. The truth is probably somewhat tamer than the legend, but it is definitely more heroic than the revisionist efforts being put forth recently.

Another resurrected item -

I understand the Duke was greatly impressed by the legend of the Alamo and sought to make a movie of the events for years before he was able to finally accomplish this. Even now, historical accuracy is up in the air and controversies still surround the 1836 events.

John Wayne was an entertainer and movie star and tried to meld historical facts into a story that would entertain audiences. No movie based on historial events has ever been accurate, usually the opposite is generally true. With all difficulties that John Wayne had in the making of "The Alamo," I think he came up with a better movie than most. It is a shame that the original negative has undergone such corrosion that it will probably never be usable in the future.

Jay

:cowboy: I agree with you. I like John Wayne's version the best. I recently saw some parts of the version that just came out which was playing in a movie rental store. What I saw I did not like at all. That movie was based on the now proven and highly falsified De La Pena Documents. I will not ever be watching this version of: The Alamo from start to finish.

Best regards TRK.

Hi -

Just a quick return to "Viva Max." I remember when the movie was being made here in San Antonio. My wife was working downtown at the time and through some circumstance managed to wind up having coffee with John Astin, who played Sgt. Valdez in the movie.

True, though - Most Texans don't look favorably on the movie.

Cheers - Jay ;)

:cowboy: Hi Jay, I saw Viva Max many years ago ona cable Tv station. I thought it was pretty funny being I always likes John Astin.

PS, he made a great anger management teacher in Becker. :)

Hi -

Just a quick return to "Viva Max" - I remember when the movie was being made here in San Antonio. My wife worked downtown at the time and, through some circumstance, wound up having coffee with John Astin, who played Sgt. Valdez in the film. Astin, you might remember, played Gomez Addams on the original Addams Family television series in the 60s.

You're right, though - Most Texans don't care for the movie.

Cheers - Jay ^_^

:cowboy: I was more than shocked when watching The Alamo today on TCM. I saw many many scenes played in this version that are not on the DVD version I have. I saw where the Tenneesseans were celebrating the birthday of Captain Dickenson's daughter (which i had never seen before) Also, Capt Dickenson (Ken Curtis) sang a song to his daughter--something I never saw in this movie before.

As well as extra scenes taking place in that Church that Crockett, Bowie and a few others went into that had the kegs of needed gunpowder and many rifles. They were surprised by that guy w/ the butter colored hair and he winds up getting himself killed by Crockett throwing Bowie's Bowie knife into his chest. (something also not on my DVD. )

Also, I noticed several more minutes of Crockett and "Flaca" being together and it seemed that they were really falling in love.

I did not watch the movie from the beginning and left before they even started fighting Santa Anna's Army.

Now, my question(S) is/are, did the powers that be decide to pur previously deleted scenes back into the movie for re-release? I'd sure like to have this version.

Is this expanded version for sale?

Is there any other extras I have missed?

I would like any input I can get also, if this expanded version is for sale, i'd like to get it before I donate my copy of the movie to one of my local libraries.

Best regards-TRK.

Hi RK

I think an old discussion that was on this message board probably answers your question. It was a very interesting thread, but it seems to have been lost, or at least I can't find it. Some of the thread is cached when you do a google search however. There is still a bit missing. Anyway here is what I found and maybe it answers your question.


> The Last Battle Of The Alamo?, probably lost forever...
Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic
itdo*
Posted: Aug 13 2003, 05:12 AM
Quote Post


The "600th Post" Club
*

Group: Members
Posts: 650
Member No.: 147
Joined: 12-May 03




This was a topic on the "old" messageboard, and I wonder if anybody has new information about that. For those not familiar with the unbelievable story of the finding - and loosing - of the Director's Cut, here it is again:

About 10 years ago, the quest of every JW fan and especially the Alamo buffs finally came to an end: the uncut version, believed to be the ONLY surviving uncut print in 70mm (or in 35mm, for that matter) was found in Toronto! MGM owns the rights, they take over the print. Videocassettes are made, and the Wayne lovers finally get the long awaited Director's cut (my god, to see this was a religious experience! I don't know about you on this board - have you seen the cut version - the gutted 161 minute version - first? And then the glorious director's cut?)

So they made more bucks out of the Duke's labor - who poured 14 years of work in it and got nothing out of it. And what do they do after that? THEY STORE IT IN A WARM WAREHOUSE IN GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA! Every collector of film can tell you that's a death-sentence (Toronto is much colder, therefore the print could survive there. Normally, a film museum would put the print in a fridge). True enough, when Harris, the famed film preserver (he restored Lawrence of Arabia) checked the cans, he found the film had lost most of its color. That's a race against time. The film is decaying. Even Michael Wayne was asked about funds to help restore and preserve his father's film. Last news I heard is one year old: The Alamo is soon to disappear forever. The director's cut is available on the Laserdisc. Now I've just learned they used the old cut version for the DVD which alarms me. That means they really can't use the only original print anymore! And of course, there would never again be a theatrical screening of the film on the big screen. Ruined by improper storage - can you believe that. Harris said the film could only last until mid 2003 to 2004. Until then it would be lost forever. So - anybody has any update what happened?





PMEmail Poster
Top
Robbie*
Posted: Aug 13 2003, 06:57 PM
Quote Post


The "800th Post" Club
*

Group: Members
Posts: 803
Member No.: 117
Joined: 15-April 03




Roland

In the UK it is the 161 minute version that we have on DVD along with a 30 minute documentary and the original trailer. I always wondered why it wasn't the full version. There is one thing the Alamo was recently on TV with the birthday scene included it is my belief however that this scene was cut so I am a little confused.

Regarding the full version is it any better than the 161 minute version and does the Duke have any more action scenes at the end of the movie.

P.s. where was the lost footage of "The Alamo" originally found?




PMEmail Poster
Top
itdo*
Posted: Aug 14 2003, 02:25 AM
Quote Post


The "600th Post" Club
*

Group: Members
Posts: 650
Member No.: 147
Joined: 12-May 03




Robbie, if you don't have it yet, try to get that great book John Wayne's The Alamo, it'll tell you all you ever wanted to know about the making - and tells the full story of the discovery of the uncut print. This was quite stunning. It was noticed by a JW fan who attended a film festival in Toronto. Cleopatra should have been on, but somehow they couldn't get the copy - so they showed The Alamo instead - the uncut version! They never knew they had it there themselves. And even then, it went unnoticed - except for the Wayne fan in the audience. When that same Wayne fan later learned that these scenes are believed to be lost, he contacted several people (The Big Trail editor Tim Lilley was helpful in this, I have told you about the John Wayne club on this board before - and I think it's great that it finally have been the fans who made the discovery). Of course, nobody would really believe him at first - so they set up a private screening. There was a cheering in that movie-theater when the film's first cut scene was on the screen! I wish I would have been there. What a moment. So after that MGM sent somebody over to pick up this valuable print immediately - what followed is what I've explained. Robbie, prepare yourself when you watch the Director's Cut. Action scenes have been cut - even Crockett's death scene has been cut. And there are a dozen more scenes, very very well directed, like Parson's death scene. If you can, get the Laserdisc as long as they're still around, that will give you a better picture for it doesn't seem we're going to get the uncut version on DVD.

PMEmail Poster
Top
Robbie*
Posted: Aug 14 2003, 06:16 PM
Quote Post


The "800th Post" Club
*

Group: Members
Posts: 803
Member No.: 117
Joined: 15-April 03




Roland

Excellent information as usual from you. As you probably know I have been a big critic of the Alamo, I found it disappointing one thing I did find shabby was that Hank Worden(Parson) finale wasnt shown, we jsut see him taken away wounded, now you have told me that its cut I feel differently. One problem I have however with the Alamo and I could become a big fan if this is addressed in the uncut version the problem is the Duke in the final battle. He knocks a man of his horse twice and then blows up the gunpowder room, I found this very flat and if this is addressed I'll be very impressed. I s it possible to get a version of the completely restored film with all scenes in that should be in it.

I really can't believe the Calamitys that occured before the Alamo was found. Roland I am also not familar with the term laserdick could you please explain this to me.

Thanks
Robbie



PMEmail Poster
Top
Hondo Duke Lane*
Posted: Aug 15 2003, 01:07 AM
Quote Post


Hondo
*

Group: Moderators
Posts: 1124
Member No.: 30
Joined: 14-January 03




Roland,

Thanks for the info. I have several questions about this info that you have not mentioned.

-Did Duke make a director's cut in this movie?

-Was it released in this form at theaters?

-Does the John Wayne estate had a copy of the film in its uncut version?

-How long is the uncut version? (Mine is DVD-162 minutes; VHS-202 minutes; according to The Complete FIlms of John Wayne, it total running time is 199 minutes)

Just looking at my VHS copy of this movie, at the bottom of the box, it reads that it's Restored Original Director's Cut. So, I assume that its total time is approximately 202 minutes. I haven't seen my DVD version of the movie yet. I haven't had the time to sit and watch, but just assumed that it was the same as the VHS version.

I'll have to see this again, but I am sure that I will not figure out where the 40 minutes are lost in the DVD.

Thanks for the answers in advance, itdo.

Cheers, Hondo



PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
itdo*
Posted: Aug 15 2003, 03:51 AM
Quote Post


The "600th Post" Club
*

Group: Members
Posts: 650
Member No.: 147
Joined: 12-May 03




Fellas, please study up on the Duke. After all, The Alamo was his most personal project. On this board, we talked at lenght about deleted scenes - The Alamo is The Holy Grail of the deleted scenes. And their available. Please don't ask "Is it any good?". Please, just get a copy. OK. Having gotten that out of the way, I'll be glad to answer all questions and be of help if I can.

Did Duke make a director's cut in this movie?
He was of course in the cutting room, as he had final saying in all aspects of the film. His was the version first shown, at the World Premiere in San Antonio, and then in other capitals of the world. Then requests about cuts came in. The film was long, therefore the distributors couldn't get two screenings per evening out of it (some projectionists even abandoned a whole reel to save time - I think reel number 5 - with the birthday scene in it, among others, scenes which weren't entirely important to plot development, so nobody in the aucience would knew they were "cheated" out of 15 minutes). As financial pressure grew to recapture the cost, JW had to bend to those requests. Then they made those infamous cuts. After that Wayne walked away from it.

-Was it released in this form at theaters?
After the cutting was done, it went to general release in the form we got on the VHS pre 1991. For the re-release in 1967, I believe they did some more cutting away. It was also cut more for the TV releases sometimes.

-Does the John Wayne estate had a copy of the film in its uncut version?
No. Until the discovery of the one single unhurt print it was believed ALL prints were gone.

-How long is the uncut version? (Mine is DVD-162 minutes; VHS-202 minutes; according to The Complete FIlms of John Wayne, it total running time is 199 minutes)

The VHS minutes are sometimes different because PAL and NTSC run at different speed. So if you're looking at the description of a tape, don't let them fool you into believing you have more film than another version.

If you have the VHS with the RESTORED DIRECTOR'S CUT, you'll have a copy from the 90s, made from JW's original version, made from that one print they discovered in Toronto and are about to loose again. If you have the new DVD, you have the old cut version of 162 minutes - because they can't use that Toronto print anymore. No more Director's Cut!

Robbie, the Laserdisc is the forerunner of DVD. Same thing, works with laser. Size of an LP. Silver disc. It grew quite popular in the 90s, but lots of distributors still waited to release their films on this format. MGM wasn't one of them, so they used the UNCUT print to make a special Deluxe Box. Quite beautiful, with booklet, and all the extras: the trailer, and the documentary. There are still some around, you'll find them at Ebay. Should be easy to get a player as they are on their way out. Quite a lot of films which are requested by fans on DVD now I've gotten back then on Laserdisc. So if you want the Director's cut on DISC you should get a Laserdisc. Maybe a wonder happens, but I believe they have lost the 70mm print by now, and therefore it won't be on DVD, at least not in the original quality.

Books to get:
Alamo Movies, by Frank Thompson, covers all Alamo films up to the 90s.
John Wayne's The Alamo, the most complete telling of the making of Wayne's dream, with hundreds of rare photographs.

Most wanted things from the Alamo by fans:
The "Bible", the 186 page News-Release which was sent to the press.
The mug JW gave out to cast and crew.
The One-Sheet from the film.
The Insert.
The complete Lobby set.
Even Alamo stills are generally worth more than other JW stills.

PMEmail Poster
Top
chester7777*
Posted: Aug 15 2003, 10:31 AM
Quote Post


The "1000th Post" Club
*

Group: Moderators
Posts: 1119
Member No.: 8
Joined: 4-January 03




itdo,

Since you are so knowledgeable in this area, I am specifically directing my question to you. Why can't DVDs be made from video (as in the uncut version of The Alamo, which I feel particularly fortunate to own, after all you've shared here)? With all the modern technology available, it seems that should be an option, but I know you'll tell me why it isn't.

:rolleyes:

Chester

PMEmail PosterYahoo
Top
Hondo Duke Lane*
Posted: Aug 15 2003, 06:20 PM
Quote Post


Hondo
*

Group: Moderators
Posts: 1124
Member No.: 30
Joined: 14-January 03




Roland,

Thanks for your information. I am fortunate to have the VHS copy of The Alamo, and it's a shame about the DVD version. Thanks also for listing the books available about it. I will purchase it, and study up, so I won't bother you with such trival questions (at least for you) lol. :lol:

Hopefully, we'll find someone or some company who will find this and get the full version out.

Cheers, Hondo


PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Monique*
Posted: Aug 16 2003, 12:28 AM
Quote Post


Ethan Edwards
*

Group: Members
Posts: 383
Member No.: 223
Joined: 9-July 03




Hello

I also Have the Alamo on VHS but looking to upgrade to DVD* Now you all have me thinking if I want to* Is the DVD that bad

Monique

PMEmail PosterAOL
Top
itdo*
Posted: Aug 16 2003, 02:13 AM
Quote Post


The "600th Post" Club
*

Group: Members
Posts: 650
Member No.: 147
Joined: 12-May 03




Hi!
I never meant to say that a question bothers me. Sorry if it sounded that way. What does bother me though is when people have an opinion which is not based on the facts - and the facts are out there for everyone to get. The uncut version has been available for more than ten years now. The truly well researched book "John Wayne's The Alamo" (Citadel Press) has been around for years. It's just that I can't understand somebody who wants to be a student of Wayne's fine work - already has an opinion - but hasn't done his homework. You simply cannot go hunting for deleted scenes when you haven't even looked into the Alamo director's cut yet - and there we're talking half an hour of deleted scenes, included again! Then I feel my time with writing - and reading - posts is wasted. Sorry, if I get my temperature up a bit! Again: the question doesn't bother me, Hondo, ok? What does bother me is that hard facts have to go up against "opinions" sometimes too often for my taste.

Of course they can use the video to make a DVD. But that's just a 2nd generation copy. To get a first rate copy, you must have the original source. Which is by all means the format the film was shot in. We could have fine copies of the Mona Lisa made, they look pretty much the same. So why do bother to go to the Louvre?
Sometimes, a film won't get released on DVD - or is held up - because they have yet to find the original or just any good copy. In the case of The Alamo they didn't even had the original negative - they had to go from that Toronto print. But what is the true meaning in preserving - or loosing - the last surviving Alamo print, Wayne's labor of love? It wasn't meant to make DVDs in the first place. It was meant to be shown and shared on the BIG SCREEN.


PMEmail Poster
Top
Hondo Duke Lane*
Posted: Aug 16 2003, 02:04 PM
Quote Post


Hondo
*

Group: Moderators
Posts: 1124
Member No.: 30
Joined: 14-January 03




Bravo, bravo!

That is the true meaning of the original print in the first place, to be shown the way it was suppose to be shown. It's a total shame that we who were not born for the original showing of a movie will most likely never get the chance to see it on the big screen, ever!

So we have to resort to the next best way of seeing a movie, and that either on TV or a home unit that plays VHS, LaserDisc, DVD movies, etc. We as consumers of John Wayne entertainment want the best possible product we can get, which includes the original cut from those who made it. The Directors!

When companies go in and slice, slash, and cut to fit a format or time, then I get mad. That's not what movie making is all about. It's about letting a movie maker like the director tell a story the way he wants to in a time frame to convey a story to an audience. Duke's dream was to do the same with his personal project, The Alamo. And now when we live in a time of owning a piece of someone's history or dream, only to find it cut because of their feelings, is like stealing something.

We have a responsiblity to stand up for those who can't any longer and demand that they leave things along, no matter how politically incorrect they are. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Cheers, Hondo B)

PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
chester7777*
Posted: Aug 17 2003, 02:10 AM
Quote Post


The "1000th Post" Club
*

Group: Moderators
Posts: 1119
Member No.: 8
Joined: 4-January 03




You know, we own a set of Little Rascals videos, and they say in a little (advertising) blurb at the beginning of the tape that these movies' original, uncut films have been remastered from Library of Congress' original 35mm prints. After watching that Indiana Jones movie Raiders of the Lost Ark (remember that last scene, where they show some guy rolling the crated Ark of the Covenant down a corridor in some humongous warehouse, never to be seen again), it wouldn't surprise me if our federal government has a copy of The Alamo stashed away somewhere <_< .

Chester

PMEmail PosterYahoo
Top
Robbie*
Posted: Aug 17 2003, 05:31 PM
Quote Post


The "800th Post" Club
*

Group: Members
Posts: 803
Member No.: 117
Joined: 15-April 03




At least "The Alamo" is available on VHS in its original length which is something that would have been thought of as impossible over ten years ago. Mayber if the VHS version is transferred to DVD we may be lucky and find out that is transferred well and has a good quality picture. Does anyone know if any other Duke movies also exist in a Director's cut version as well as the released version?

B)

PMEmail Poster
Top
B5Erik*
Posted: Apr 13 2004, 11:53 AM
Quote Post


Member
*

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Member No.: 581
Joined: 13-April 04




While it wouldn't be MGM's first choice they could still use the LaserDisc master to do a new 2 disc DVD set with both versions of The Alamo.

They may not be able to do an anamorphic enhancement to the directors cut if they do it that way, but so what? Having it in flawed form is better than not having it at all!

This is just a horrible story, and I'm appalled by the mishandling of ANY film like that, let alone a classic like John Wayne's Alamo! I'm going to be looking for the LaserDisc on ebay.

Is the directors cut the 2 disc version that I've seen, or is it a different set?


PMEmail Poster
Top


If the original thread is still here I'm sorry for posting this mess.

Oh andI had to remove some smilies to be allowed to post it.

Regards
Popol Vuh

:cowboy: Well done Popol Vuh, I greatly appreciate your taking time to find this info.

I do hope the powers that be, make the correct decision on this soon. It's a shame neigh, it's a CRIME if they let this film continue to corrode. Well, I hope TCM shows it again soon so I can make a point to set aside time for watching it through full length.

What I saw yeasterday was a treat and I really do want to get to the tootsie roll as well.

Thank you and best regards--TRK.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE UNEDIT VERSION OF "THE ALAMO" ON DVD WITH "THE SPIRIT OF THE ALAMO" ADD AS AN EXTRA. ANY WAY WE CAN GET THE BALL ROLLING?

Welcome to the John Wayne Message Board ZACK613 :D . Stick around and enjoy.
As for your question, there are other topics on "The Alamo" on this board which addresses this. For the present, which you will determine from the other forums, the only way to get the uncut version is on the director's cut on VHS or on laserdisc.
Cheers - Jay <_<

Hey Zack

I brought up the question last year, and someone led me to a link that explained the print of the director’s cut of “The Alamo” was in ruin and in the process of being re-restored. (Anyone have any updates on this? )

I would also like to see the full version on DVD; I have the VHS copy, and even though the extra scenes make a long movie even longer, I think they make it a better movie.

Also there's another version of “The Big Trail” that would be good to have; the restored wide screen version hasn't made it to DVD (as far as I know; I could be wrong). Currently the only one I could find is the flat screen version. I’ve noticed that either ACM or TCM; one of the classic movie networks, has shown both of these restored versions in the past.

ZACK613,

Welcome to the John Wayne Message Board! As Jay has said, further reading on the board will give you quite a bit more information - try a search for Alamo.

Looking forward to seeing you around some more!

Chester :newyear: and the Mrs. :angel1:

Originally posted by Jay J. Foraker@Mar 29 2005, 04:28 PM
Welcome to the John Wayne Message Board ZACK613* :D .* Stick around and enjoy.
As for your question, there are other topics on "The Alamo" on this board which addresses this.* For the present, which you will determine from the other forums, the only way to get the uncut version is on the director's cut on VHS or on laserdisc.
Cheers - Jay* <_<

15638

THANK YOU GUYS. I AM DIEING TO SEE SOME OF DUKE'S TV WORK. I OWN HIS TWO "BASEBALL MOVIES" Rookie of the Year & Flashing Spikes AS WELL AS THE FIRST EPISODE OF GUNSMOKE. I AM DIEING TO SEE DUKE'S EPISODE OF WAGONTRAIN AND HIS TWO TV SPECIALS SPIRIT OF THE ALAMO & SWING OUT SWEET LAND. ANY IDEAS?

I have received the DVD box of Alamo movies containing a documentary and half a dozen of the early silent versions. They are all worth watching not only if you're an Alamo buff but when the Wayne version gets you in the mood for more.

Several points of interest:

The Film DAVY CROCKETT AT THE FALL OF THE ALAMO was produced by Robert Bradbury who would also work with Wayne in the B-movies. The film had his son - John Wayne's boyhood friend) - in one of the co-starring parts (he would later go on being Bob Steele in B-movies and have a part in the series "F-Troop" where his running gag would be that he once fought in the Alamo!) He plays a Frankie Avalon-kind of role, breaking through the lines and actually coming back to die in the Alamo. It was made in 1926 and I could guess that Wayne himself saw it - with his friend in it and all. I know it's a very long shot - but some of the shots of the Mexican Army, all lined up in the hills, marching into town and so on - look a lot like the ones Wayne directed. Extras came cheap in those days, so you'll see a lot of them in this one.

I was surprised to see that in two different silent versions by different producers, Alamo defenders got caught and executed after the battle - in one point, it's Davy Crockett, already wounded. That's what many critics attacked with the new Alamo version (I've already pointed out earlier that I found the new version is worth seeing because it's the historicall most accurate yet). Although most historians agree upon that there might have been executions, things get rather heated when it comes to Crockett. Yet this old version wasn't discussed controversially BACK THEN. Think about it: Walt Disney changed a lot how Davy is regarded today.

The documentary that comes with it: Aaagh! that's really badly produced. No extra lighting, bad editing, you name it. Still: you'll get a lot of information out of it. AND: you'll meet the collector who actually has Wayne's costume, beautifully mounted, along with other great stuff.

Originally posted by itdo@Apr 22 2005, 03:53 AM
I have received the DVD box of Alamo movies containing a documentary and half a dozen of the early silent versions. They are all worth watching not only if you're an Alamo buff but when the Wayne version gets you in the mood for more.
16192

itdo,

Where did you get this boxed set, and does it have a specific name for the set? It sounds very intriguing.

Chester :newyear:

Sorry, I mentioned this box in another Wayne topic and thought you'd already know. Look for it at Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...&s=dvd&n=507846 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001LYFHW/qid=1114426168/sr=8-7/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i7_xgl74/103-1420947-4109436?v=glance&s=dvd&n=507846)

It's made by Frank Thompson who also wrote the book ALAMO MOVIES which holds a lot of info on all of Hollywood's takes on the subject. He's a nice gentleman, I've once traded a book with him.

Originally posted by Robbie@Feb 24 2004, 07:44 PM
Did anyone on this messageboard go to watch this movie on the big screen?
:agent:

7827

Hi Robbie -
I must have missed this question when you first posted it. I did see "The Alamo" during its premiere in 1960 on the big screen (I was still a teenager then) in San Antonio in its uncut state. The seating was reserved and (here my memory is muddy) the ticket price was four or five dollars per. I have noticed from your postings that you aren't a big fan of the movie, but it excited me when I first saw it and I haven't lost my enthusiasm for it. Of course, it would be virtually impossible to see it on a theater screen now, since it doesn't really exist in a form to project it this way. <_<
Cheers - Jay :D

One of the reasons I've always liked The Alamo is all the supporting characters, especially Crockett's Tennesseans. I was watching the Waynamo this weekend and noticed something I'd never seen before.

In one of the morning scenes, Sgt. Lightfoot (Jack Pennick) is waking up some of the Tennesseans for the morning patrol with Capt. Dickinson. One of the men on the patrol is Thimblerig (Denver Pyle) who turns to Chuck Roberson and asks if he'll take his patrol for $2 American. Roberson turns it down, but Scotty takes it and is killed on the patrol.

During the scene, I had the closed captioning on, and saw what Thimblerig says to Roberson. He says, and I quote, "Brown, I'll give you $2 American if you take my patrol." In the cast listing, Roberson is listed as "Tennessean" and that's how I've always known him. This was the first time I even noticed a name being used.

So does anyone have a script that says if "Brown" is Roberson's characters name? Has anyone else noticed this? It was on the Director's Cut VHS if anyone would like to check for themselves. This is nothing big, but it just proves you learn/catch something new everytime you see a movie.

Hi Patrick,
I have the Directors Cut, but as yet, have not been able to pick out that scene!
I do however have, the book,John Waynes THE ALAMO, Clark and Andersen,
and in their expansive cast list, Chuck is mentioned as a "Tennessean".
Whoever is cast as Brown, is not worthy of a mention.
I will try and look at the extra footage,

Keith

I expect that if Thimble Rig was speaking to Ol' Bad Chuck, which I suspect he was since he was looking at Chuck and he answered, then Chuck's name was Brown. It is quite possible that Pyle added the name Brown to the line to make it clearer who he was talking to, or possibly Wayne did, or someone else. I know that Wayne worked many times with Howard Hawks and John Ford, and both would change the script on a daily basis, often writing new lines just prior to the scene, or sometimes a thought would come to them just prior to a scene, and they would say, "In this scene, say this", or "Do this", and quite often these changes would not even be in the "official" script. It is very possible that Wayne learned this technique from them and adopted it. This type of change would not necessarily make it into the film credits.

I guess this is the long way around the barn to say that, Yes, Chuck's name in the film was Brown. Hope this helps.
Best,
Colorado Bob

Thanks for the reply, guys. It was something I noticed and wanted to share with everybody.

As long as we're on topic, the movie geek/nerd in me wants to bring something else up, another difference between the director's cut and the 162 minute version of the Alamo. It is something small and not really essential to the movie, but I noticed this too.

The final attack on the Alamo has some slight differences in the order things are shown. Does anyone know why? Here's the list if you'd like to compare.

Director's Cut
1. Mexican cavalry rides through the gap in the north wall.
2. Chill Wills swinging his rifle at the south wall near the main gate.
3. Chuck Roberson falls next to Ruddie Robbins, the last "It Do" line.
4. Wills falling off the stairs, sword through his midsection.

DVD, 162 minute version
1. Chill Wills swinging rifle.
2. Mexican cavalry rides through breach in north wall.
3. Wills sword through stomach.
4. Roberson falls next to Robbins.
5. Wills falls off stairs
6. Roberson, Robbins death scene.

I thought the Director's Cut flowed better concerning these brief scenes, but does anyone know why it was edited differently? There's also that extra spin JW does after being lanced, but that doesn't bother me. Any ideas fellow JW fans?

Not to change the subject but, what I like to do sometimes, especially in a movie like this, is to pause it on a particular battle scene where there might be more than one thing going on and then, forward frame by frame and watch what is going on in the background. It works better on a dvd since the picture is so clearer. For instance, the scene where it shows Travis at the battlement on the northwest corner and it shows the Mexican beginning to storm the walls, by doing what I said, you can see what's going on behind Travis with the other defenders. Another scene is when it shows the Mexicans coming through the north wall and moving through the plaza and it shows fighting going on on the walls off to the side or behind them, depending on the camera angle. I have alot of fun doing that.

Hi WaynamoJim,
You may have already seen this before, but we also covered THE ALAMO, in the
Bloopers thread some time ago,
http://www.dukewayne.com/index.php?showtop...929&hl=bloopers (http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?t=1929&hl=bloopers)
Keith

Originally posted by Patrick@Nov 15 2005, 06:14 PM
Thanks for the reply, guys.* It was something I noticed and wanted to share with everybody.

* As long as we're on topic, the movie geek/nerd in me wants to bring something else up, another difference between the director's cut and the 162 minute version of the Alamo.* It is something small and not really essential to the movie, but I noticed this too.

* The final attack on the Alamo has some slight differences in the order things are shown.* Does anyone know why?* Here's the list if you'd like to compare.

Director's Cut
1. Mexican cavalry rides through the gap in the north wall.
2. Chill Wills swinging his rifle at the south wall near the main gate.
3. Chuck Roberson falls next to Ruddie Robbins, the last "It Do" line.
4. Wills falling off the stairs, sword through his midsection.

DVD, 162 minute version
1. Chill Wills swinging rifle.
2. Mexican cavalry rides through breach in north wall.
3. Wills sword through stomach.
4. Roberson falls next to Robbins.
5. Wills falls off stairs
6. Roberson, Robbins death scene.

* I thought the Director's Cut flowed better concerning these brief scenes, but does anyone know why it was edited differently?* There's also that extra spin JW does after being lanced, but that doesn't bother me.* Any ideas fellow JW fans?

23156


Actually, I never noticed these differences. I guess this means an Alamo marathon is forthcoming. Cool! As to how these differences occured, I'd have to hazard a guess that it was just bad editing.
Colorado Bob