LeonLouisRicci
Stacy Keach and Faye Dunaway give Good Performances as "Doc" Holiday and Katie Elder, and is Central to, Yet Again, a Movie about those mostly Mythological Personalities, Wyatt Earp and "Doc", Climaxing, Yet Again, with The Gunfight at the O.K. Corral.The Point in this one is to Demystify to a Degree about the Motivation and Moral Certitude of the often Predictable Personas of these "Shootist". It's a Gloomy, Murky, Soft Spoken Style with most of the Acting done with the Eyes and a Whisper. Thought Provoking and it does Dusty Duty Covering things with a Haze of Grit. The Tense Atmosphere is Realistic and the Suspense Builds with much Philosophizing and Reflection. The Film certainly has it Moments as well as its Detractors. It is more of an Intellectual Introspection of Famous/Infamous Men. Wild Men, who had to be to Survive, in the Wild West. Some of these Folks had Visions of Civilizing the Frontier. Witness Wyatt's (Henry Yulin) Speech after the Gunfight and "Doc's" Final Act of Violence. Overall, Atypical Western in the Traditional Sense but Typical for its Time Period. Underrated and Worth a Watch.
John Ratko
Before watching this movie I'd never seen a movie with Stacy Keach in it that I didn't like at least a little. If you know nothing about Old West history nor anything about any of the real life persons portrayed in this film, or it's just your wish to get all wildly conspiracy theoretical and therefore would like things to your own pleasing rather than the way they actually are known to be, then you may very well enjoy 'Doc' a great deal. However, real Old West history buffs will almost certainly be appalled by the way this film makes an extremely biased, painfully obvious attempt to rewrite history while completely disregarding all known facts. Heck, it doesn't even bother to even very loosely adhere to only the Cowboy's side of the story and then embellish it a little or even a lot; something which to my knowledge hasn't been done yet and which would have the potential to make for a very good movie, it just flat out ignores every single detail about everything, everyone and every event.Unfortunately, it would be impossible to explain the reasons this film is so unbelievably historically flawed without committing spoilers and ruining things for those who haven't yet watched. So we won't be going there. To sum it all up: Those who will watch this film purely for entertainment value, as well as those who have no knowledge whatsoever of the actual characters and events as well as those who desire history be rewritten to their own pleasing, may well enjoy this film. Alternately, those who are knowledgeable about the Old West and prefer films on the subject to be based at least a tiny bit on anything resembling reality may be very disappointed. As far as facts go the entire film is about as honest as Big Nose Kate's tiny little nose.
jazerbini
This is a very strange film. We have the impression that the mix of characters is not plausible. Katie Elder and Doc Holliday? And a Wyatt Earp (character and actor) mediocre as this? Doc seems to be a character very close to reality, but Katie Elder had lived with him in Tombstone? The screenplay was awarded and must surely have been no previous research on its accuracy but we see Wyatt Earp does not store any resemblance to what we were shown today. In short: the secondary actors are not bad and the script gives us confidence that has real historical background. Saves only the competent Stacy Keach and Faye Dunaway. The rest is just the rest.
wabranty
Ignoring the major historical inaccuracies (Virgil was the Marshal of Tombstone and not Wyatt; Doc and Katie Elder were together long before they both came to Tombstone; etc.), the film attempts to make Doc and Wyatt out as the mob bosses of the Tombstone. "Tombstone" (the Costner film) was much more historically accurate.
AD
