GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

gjkoeppen The Movie whether it follows the book James Michener's book nor not was excellent. I've watched this several times and enjoyed it every time. As far as wlfgdn's review where he implied that several historians agree that slavery was the central issue for the independence from Mexico is horse pucky at best. The fight to become a Republic of Texas was solely based on the fact that the people who once lived under the Constitution of the U.S and moved to Texas wanted the same freedoms that the government of Mexico refused to give. It was the resentment of the Mexican rule not slavery as the central and main reason for the eventual Republic of Texas.

clck2001 The cast is first-rate. No exceptions. But not all of the cast is the best out of the whole movie, because there is only a few of the cast that actually stand out and make themselves different from their own many other roles in TV and movies. The section of the cast that is good, but not as good as the rest is: Stacy Keach, Patrick Duffy, Maria Conchita Alonso, David Keith, John Schneider, and Grant Show. The section of the cast that is great, and towers above the rest is: Ricky Schroder, Anthony Michael Hall, Chelsea Field, Benjamin Bratt, and Randy Travis. The reason Anthony Michael Hall is one of the best actors from this movie is because he plays a coward with a yellow streak down his back that is about ten miles wide, and twenty miles long. However, he is also a show-off, because he is obviously trying to make himself look better so he won't be so much of a coward. But this does not work, because his cowardice shines through, and he knows it, so he ends up trying to look rich and successful by strutting around in his stupidity-ridden uniform with his hair slicked back. Sadly, the only other person that actually does anything about it is Houston, and he does it quite well. Ricky Schroder delivers a powerful, powerful performance. Chelsea Field's character is the most determined and strong-willed, and she knows when to and how to exploit that. Benjamin Bratt is barely recognizable, with all his makeup and facial hair, but his character basically only cares about his own interests, thoughts, desires and wills. But his character is so good because he likes to use others to fulfill his own interests, thoughts, desires and wills, that is, everybody except Otto, who will not be pushed, poked, or prodded one way or the other. He knows what he has to do and how to do it, and he sticks to that. Perhaps "Texas" is not as good as the only other movie that I have seen Ricky Schroder in, which is LONESOME DOVE, and also maybe his Otto MacNab was not as well done as his Newt Dobbs, but in "Texas" his character is given a much more expanded role. What is up with Patrick Duffy and the Michael Landon-is hairdo? Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad!

steven-222 This movie is hokey as heck, but enjoyable if you're interested in the subject. Benjamin Bratt fans should especially like it; his character spans the entire movie and he turns in a charismatic performance. Stacy Keach does fine work as Sam Houston, and Rick Schroder is good as the emotionally conflicted young hero. Production is a bit spotty; quite a bit of the Alamo battle scene is footage from the old John Wayne movie!Of course, the movie does not mention that one of the main "freedoms" the Texas settlers were fighting for was the freedom to own slaves (for some reason the "oppressive" Mexican government thought that was wrong). Funny, how those who exhort others to fight for freedom so often have their eye on exploiting or subjugating other people...some things never change, especially in Texas!

Thund3rheart I rented this movie with really no expectations, other than I like western movies. The fact that it was 3 hours long seemed fine to me, I had some time to kill. To get down to the story I have no idea whether it follows the novel or not, but that's beside the point, since it's the movie we are reviewing not the book to movie relation. After some research on the Internet I found that it did, in fact, follow history very closly. Enough about that. I read in a comment above that someone praised Patrick Duffy's part in the movie, but I do not agree. Duffy can act, yes, but the problem is that it's basically the same character wether it's Step-By-Step, Dallas or any other part. This is a type of character that does not fit into the plot of a western in my view. What's really great is to see Rick Schroeder doing a rather large part and doing it very well. I first saw him in Blood River and was amazed at his acting talent in relation to the western theme.All in all, I do recommend that you see this movie, it's an entertaining piece and does not get "slow" because it's long running time.