Anthony Michael Hall Movie:

				Salesrank:
		Used Price: $37.11
		MPAA Rating: Media: DVD

Texas [Region 2] Reviews:
Good novel well transfered to the screen
2007-10-13 - I agree with everybody that has posted reviews about this movie, but the ones that have only 1 or 2 stars. In the style of Gone With the Wind, the novel shows how families were at first united, then separated during the conflict. I am familiar with the historical facts and that is why I could follow the locations and time, but someone who has not read the book or know little about the true facts would be a little lost. I was lucky to get this movie on DVD. The sound and the colors are great, the photography is very good, the landscapes and the sets believable, picture is sharp except for the stolen parts from an earlier movie. I am giving the movie 4 stars because of the battle scenes (the ones made for this movie), even considering it was a made for TV movie, they could have been choreographed an filmed better. In overall for a low budget TV movie, it was very good. I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to rebroadcast it, specially now that the DVD has became a scarce item. I will keep it in my library of history documentaries and movies.

mediocre, underwhelming and American-biased
2006-10-30 - The Texas Revolution of 1835 to 1836, including the periods preceding and immediately following, are depicted in this 3-hour TV movie whose only redeeming value is shedding light and paying homage to Stephen Austin, the "Father of Texas" whose story and contribution to an Anglo-dominated Texas has been overshadowed by the legendary Sam Houston. The rest of the film is the usual "Santa Anna is a tyrant" storyline with short low-budget battle scenes and a weak attempt to show the Mexican perspective via a fictional Hispanic character displaying stereotypical Latin machismo. Anyone who knows Texan history will realize that the Anglo settlers/rebels did not fight just for basic civil liberties like habeas corpus but also for the right to own black slaves, something which "tyrannical" Mexico had abolished but which persisted in the "land of the free" USA. Politics aside, this movie is really talky, boring and showing very little of the Alamo defenders like Crockett, Bowie and Travis. It is recommended only for real history buffs interested in Austin and Houston and who do not come from Mexico. Everyone else should watch John Wayne's "Alamo", which at least has the decency to commend the bravery of Mexican soldiers acting as a tyrant's cannon fodder.

TEXAS
2006-02-01 - We are original orginal of this video and have watched it on tv once an then this set.
It is one of the best movies we havd seen on the Alamo and the start of Texas as a independant State.
Charle Heston really done a great job in his naration.
It is a solid 3 hr movie with lots of action, love story and other things that make it great.
I highly recommend seeing it, you will not forget it.

Racist, Sexist, Untrue, and Boring to Boot
2005-10-28 - While I wouldn't be able to speak to Michener's original work, not having read it, I am nevertheless willing to say that the movie adaptation is the worst kind of media. While purporting to tell the history of Texas, it manages to tell only the story of a few wealthy white men. In the entire movie, there are only four women characters, only two of which have more than one line. In all four cases, their sole goal appears to be the subsumation of their selves in their husbands.

As for the "thirty thousand Indians... mostly Cherokee" that Heston's narration mentions at the beginning, that is more or less all the attention they receive in the film. They are depicted once as raiding wagon train and once you see their aftermath on a homestead they've despoiled. Other than that, the movie treats Texas as if it were totally empty when the whites arrived to "civilize" it. And of African Americans, literally not one word or character. More than odd, considering that Texas was always going to enter into the Union as a slave state, and that the extension of the slave trade to their farms was one of the major boons of annexation for Texas. Lastly, Benjamin Bratt's character is made to deliver overtly racist lines directly aimed at the denigration of the Mexican character and spirit. He does nothing good for race relations, and indeed says things like "Mexicanos and Tejanos can never live together, they shouldn't have tried." Such lines are disrespectful in light of the fact that racism against Latinos is still endemic in Texas. The fact that this remains true is largely the result of depictions like this one, that only further racist views and stereotypes.

All in all, and as a white male whose family has been in Texas since the beginning of the state, I thought this movie made a mockery of my heritage. Simply leaving out the truth of our history to focus on "good, honest pioneering" is to tell far less than half the story.

Historically accurate, maybe...
2005-06-23 - I am no expert on the history of Texas but as a standalone movie, this is laughable. Borrowed clips from old westerns (the battle of the Alamo being the worst offender), cheesy attempts at drama that go overboard (Houston being shot off his horse three times all in slow-mo only to dismount and stumble on the ground immediatly after being put back on horseback), and the predictability of some scenes made this movie feel more like a comedy than historical documentary. If you are looking for a history of Texas, something better must exist somewhere. As others have said this condenses alot into way too little and the end result holds little entertainment value as any sort of drama from my point of view. The only redeemable quality is that it (presumably) provides a basic understanding on the birth of Texas but a strait documentary would probably have been able to convey a more in-depth story in the same amount of time.

Bottom line: while the historical content appears to be of merit, the absurd presentation is too distracting to make it really worth your time.