My theories of why people didn't like the Alamo

Rating: Null/10 (5 May 2004)

I'm not quite sure why everyone (with the exception of a few) is labeling this as "the worst movie ever'. I have two theories:
Only a Texan could really understand the significance of the Alamo. I have noticed that nearly all of the negative reviews come from people who don't live in Texas. This leads me to believe that the negative reviewers, from other parts, either don't know the whole story of the Alamo, or don't really care. If you don't care about the Alamo, then why did you go see it in the first place? But realize that if the Alamo hadn't been fought then Texas might have never gotten its independence from Santa Anna, and therefore may have never joined the United States. If you don't know the whole truth, don't act like you do. I have read several reviews that compare this movie with the 1960 John Wayne movie. I personally have nothing wrong with John Wayne, but the fact is that the 1960 make had many historic inaccuracies, so please don't compare the two. And don't try to make a review about lame parts of the movie, for it is coming straight from history. So, by calling part of this movie lame, you are calling history lame. And something that I read in an article in the Statesman (Austin paper) is that I think people have just been waiting for a chance to say 'Forget the Alamo'.
People don't like it because it doesn't portray the characters in the stereotypical way that the myth does, but remains historically accurate. Many times people mention that the movie doesn't show the characters as the heroes that they were. If this is true then fighting to the last man even when all is lost, is in no way courageous or heroic. Hancock lets you see the internal lives and struggles of those at the Alamo, which makes their deaths even more touching.
I understand that people are titled to their opinions, but when they insult the history of Texas, I take it personally! Don't mess with Texas!!!