MovieChat Forums > Wyatt Earp (1994) Discussion > Tombstone or Wyatt Earp?

Tombstone or Wyatt Earp?


My opinion is that, Tombstone was better. I prefer Kirk Russell as Wyatt, Sam Elliot as Virgil, Val Kilmer as Doc, and Bill Paxton as Morgan. I think maybe Wyatt Earp could have been a better historical account, but Tombstone was just put together better and had better acting. I mean really, Kilmer owned it as Holliday I thought. Quaid, not so much...

What do others think?

reply

I enjoyed both, but would give the edge to Tombstone. A more fun, faster-paced movie.

reply

You’re an IDIOT, Tombstone is all fiction, it’s no wonder a simpleton like yourself would like it better

reply

You're an IDIOT...


Says the person who uses two comma splices but no period.

reply

Kirk Russell? That's a new one.

Tombstone was by far the better movie. Though Wyatt Earp had some admirable aspirations, it was ultimately hampered by hammy histrionics and a cluttered plot. Glaring flaws aside, I will always enjoy Tom Sizemore's performance as Bat Masterson. I swear you can see him exhaling meth smoke in a few shots.

reply

Tombstone, easily.

There is a rather humorous basis of argument that persists on this board, about Wyatt Earp being the better, more accurate film about the Earps. This faulty argument makes its home around nothing more than the extended run time of Wyatt Earp vs. Tombstone. Also, how Tombstone is more fun to watch is somehow proof that it is based in fiction vs. the boring, but 'accurate' Wyatt Earp.

The truth is, Tombstone is a nicely accurate portrayal of events surrounding the Earps and the Clantons, Mclowry. Kurt Russell and company for sure nailed the looks of the characters, vs. the laughable pathetic non-attempt by the Costner crew. The facts are that Wyatt Earp doesn't get much right at all in costuming, or set design. It merely lives on in some people's heads as the superior version because 'it's longer', as if that gives it some gravitas as a film. No, its just crap.

reply

Yeah Quaid was terrible. Kilmer was peaking as an actor and nailed it

reply

Tombstone was a more entertaining movie, and focused just on a short period of time in Tombstone.

Wyatt Earp was more of a biopic, with some good character development, but a lot more slow spots and less jazzed up. Gives you a better sense of who Wyatt really was though.

reply

Wyatt Earp if only for the film score.

reply

Just finished watching Tombstone. What a mess of a movie and historically inept. And what was up with Kilmer who I like. He turned Doc into a loony tunes character. Kilmer’s worst performance by far.
Felt like an old ABC movie of the week.

reply