Powerful

Fresh and Exciting

best movie i've ever seen.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Wyatt Earp is a movie about a man and his family. The movie shows us the good times and the bad times of one of the West's most famous individuals. Wyatt Earp packs a handful of good punches thanks to Kevin Costner's and Dennis Quaid's amazing performances and especially Quaid that even lost 30 pounds for the role. The running time of 3 hours and 15 minutes wasn't as bad as i thought it was going to be the film is indeed kinda slow paced but it's not a bad one in terms of that it actually has some great action sequences and a great scene where Kevin Costner truly shows his action skills during the ending but also threw out the whole movie his character is easily likable, brave and of course cares for the people around him. The rest of the Cast does a good job as well although actors such as Gene Hackman and Bill Pulman are hardly in the film especially Hackman who is the 3rd top billed in the film and his screen time was less than 10 minutes. Although i gotta say it was great seeing Karen Grassle even for those 3 minutes of screen time that she had in case you don't know who she is she actually starred in 'Little House on the Prairie' as Laura's mother. Overall great actors and a very talented Cast, some great Music threw out of the whole Journey and some really interesting Characters make this film quite interesting and underrated and sure it's not Perfect but it's not Awful either. (8/10)

I'm writing here starting with a clean slate: I watched the film without knowing who Wyatt Earp was, or that there was another film (Tombstone) about the same guy, which everyone has been comparing Wyatt Earp to. So, I'm not prejudiced and I'm not gonna make comparisons. It was just a boring film, with a nonsensical script that dragged on and on unnecessarily, occasionally introduced new characters who didn't have any meaningful contribution to the plot, and little to no sense of adventure and excitement. But the most annoying thing in the movie, I have to admit, is Kevin Costner himself. It seems that Mr Costner has a knack for playing the same character in every movie he stars in: a brooding, smile-less, miserable, cold-outside- but-with-a-heart-of- gold tough macho guy. Well, not such a good guy here, in my opinion. Just a cold-hearted bastard, as one of the characters calls him. But I digress. So, if the film wasn't unbearable enough, Costner's performance makes it even worse. Towards the end I had to fast- forward; I didn't miss anything important, and you wouldn't either, believe you me.

Continuing my plan to watch every Kevin Costner movie in order, I come to Wyatt Earp, his second movie from 1994.It's impossible to talk about this movie without mentioning Tombstone, simply because it was released six months before, and focused on the only part of Earps life people care to know about. The gun fight at the OK Coral. One is a mindless popcorn flick, the other is a serious biopic. Audiences flocked to one, and sadly stayed away in droves from the other.Plot In A Paragraph: a biopic of Wyatt Earp (KC) a man who loved his family, and became one of the Wild West's most famous men.Over long, bloated, unfocused, dull, self indulgent, rambling, too serious and "a flat and uninspired mess" are all expressions I've heard used when talking about Lawrence Kasdans Wyatt Earp. All unfair in my opinion, one review I read said "Wyatt Earps biggest problem is that it isn't Tombstone" what the hell?? When did a movie automatically become a bad one, just because a shorter, flashier version was released 6 months before?? With negative reviews like that, how was the movie meant to have a chance?? With A Perfect World massively under performing and nobody going to see his supporting role in The War, the critics were out in full force to attack KC and they used this movie as a stick to beat him with. It came as no surprise when the movie was nominated for multiple razzie's. Sod the razzie nominations, people often don't realise that this movie was nominated for a single Oscar, one Best Cinematography. I think it should have had more. Wyatt Earp doesn't want to be just one more retelling of the gunfight at the OK Corral. The subject is the whole life span of Wyatt Earp, and is a much more serious movie than the flashier Hollywood pleasing characters portrayed in Tombstone. I don't believe the Russell and Kilmer versions of Earp and Holliday were anything close to real life, I believe Earp was a moody, bad tempered, bad ass like KC plays him, and that Holliday was unpleasant, but loyal like Quaid plays him, not the flashy and fun, but ruthless gambler always ready with a one liner, that Kilmer played. That's not taking anything away from Tombsone and its performances as I enjoy them too, but this movie is more authentic. Whilst it's KC and Dennis Quaid who dominate the movie, from the minute we first see him, KC is in practically everyday scene. Mark Harmon, Bill Pullman and Tom Sizemore all offer solid support, but Gene Hackman is disappointingly under used, and Michael Masden is surprisingly subdued. As well as strong male characters, there are also some strong women too, not commonly found in a western. Catherine O Hara standing out especially. Weirdly though, the only non whore or former one, is the actress Earp falls in love with, and she is often called a whore.I also need to mention the score by James Newton Howard. It's epic.Nobody can accuse KC of playing it safe, he didn't back out of PrinceOf Thieves when another Robin Hood movie was being made at the same time,,and he won. Whilst it would have made sense to pull out here, he stuck to his guns (yes pun intended) but the gamble didn't pay off this time. Despite the negative criticism, scathing reviews and the Tombstone effect, Wyatt Earp still grossed $25 million at the domestic box office (more than the much loved Leon: The Professional) to end the year the 55th highest grossing movie of 1994. Obviously for a movie with a $60 million budget, that was a disappointment. But KC didn't stand still and he was on to his next project before this even opened.

Kevin Costner can Pass as a Movie Star, once in awhile, but Simply does not have the Depth as an Actor to Pull Off this Heavy Study of the Western Icon. Especially when the Script takes Over Three Hours to put On Screen, the Length and Microscopic Details that Focus on the Life of Wyatt Earp ends up Revealing itself as another Kevin Costner Vanity Project.He is a Much Better Fit in "Open Range" (2003) having Grown Out of His Self Aggrandizement and His Film Projects in the Later Years show a Humble Restraint. Lessons Learned.Mediocre and Inconsistent Director Lawrence Kasdan must take Equal Blame for this Elongated, Episodic Epic. It's Not a Bad Film, but Only Slightly Above Average. Because the Better Parts (the Cinematography, and some good B Actors) are Intruded Upon by way too Many side Stories and a Bloated, Wordy Script that Keeps making the same Points, Over and Over.Overall, it's an Obese Film that seems to Never get any Momentum and even when it Manages some Motion, it is Reined In and Slowed Down by rather Boring and Unwelcome Scenes. The Movie Ends a Number of Times and the Train Sequence in one of the Endings is so Mishandled and Unremarkable as to be Anti-Climactic and Nearly Incomprehensible.Worth a Watch for Die-Hard Western Fans, but Others are Not Likely to be Impressed and may have Trouble making it to One of the Endings.