The Ballad of Davy Crockett

Like a lot of the reviews have stated, this is historically inaccurate. This disappointed me because Davy Crockett is one of my favorite historical figures. To make things worse, the script writing is incredibly bad, and the acting does nothing to make it better. In a strange way, I feel like the producers used AI to create this mashup of bad action and dialogue. Even my wife, who never criticizes poor acting, couldn't help but voice her annoyance with this movie. The only good thing about this movie is it is decent enough to watch with the whole family... the action sequences are so boring and unbelievably bad, but mostly benign, and language is very mild. It is also a good depiction of a strong father figure who sacrifices all he can to protect his family. So that's nice. Overall, just could have been better writing and more believable acting.

If you're going to make historical fiction you should at least try and make it interesting. Most of the actors are sub par and are so reserved and disjointed that they aren't even believable as real people. You took an actual interesting man's life and made it boring. I can't imagine why anyone thought this was a good product. My wife commented part way through that a few of the actors looked like they were animatronics. If you want a movie to make fun of while you watch it this is the movie to watch. If you're hoping for anything else I would save your time. The movie also seems to go for zero violence in an action movie.

I could not continue watching this movie because it has no regard for actual history. Crockett's wife did die in 1815 but then it showed Davy in a meeting with Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren when he got the news that she was ill. Davy didn't even enter state politics until 1821 and was no where near Washington DC until 1827. Jackson and Van Buren didn't win the White House and push the Indian Removal Act until 1831. That is when Davy became and Anti-Jacksonian.

Anyway, others have said how un-interesting the movie was and I agree. But when you can't even get the storyline to match the facts, you have to create it all and that is why the story lacked entertainment. I became suspicious when they showed his boys to be early teens and Crockett was only 29 years old when his wife died. I'll go watch the 1955 version or the 1960 "The Alamo" and at least get somewhat accuracy.

What a dumb movie, full of lies and misrepresentations of a really decent man. In 1815 when this movie takes place Davy has already lost his wife Polly in March, and has 2 sons and a daughter. He didn't support the Indian Removal Act which wasn't introduced until 1830 Nonsense scenes of wolves attacking him and 'taming' horses already so tame they came up to his camp in the woods. Where do these Hollywood directors come up with this malarkey. Davy's life was already so interesting its too bad they didn't make a movie about that! Colm Meaney does a good job of playing an a--hole. The whole Northwest Fur Trading Company in the Southest - hmmm, that company was mostly in Canada. Beautiful scenery though.

I love a western, I can enjoy just about any one of them but this one was tough to watch. I don't care about the historical inaccuracy of it, what was so difficult to watch was the terrible acting and the meaningless and absurd scenes. Davey tames a wild horse by feeding it grass that's everywhere anyway, hops on it and rides away... oh boy.

There were so many other unrealistic scenes but the terrible acting just makes it hard to watch. Jesse Hutch was the only actor that you could say was an actor.

Someone said that all the acting was "very good", I respectfully, completely disagree.

I did like that there was no profanity or nudity which is never needed in a good western but there needs to be a good story to make it watchable.

There's no real plot or point to the movie, there are B movies, then there is this.