A great movie that is more realistic then you think!

Rating: Null/10 (12 June 2000)

This movie is most often criticized for being a typical `Hollywood' misinterpretation of historical fact and seriously distorts the legend of Wyatt Earp and Tombstone. It is often quoted that `My Daugter Clemitine' or `Gunfight at the O.K. Corral' were better movies. In actual fact Tombstone was the most accurate description of the events that took place in Tombstone Arizona in 1880  1882 then any movie before it. A number of Hollywood liberties were taken with the myth but they were made in the interest of making the story more entertaining and broadly appealing then a serious lack of respect for the actual history. Kevin Jarre, the screenwriter, did a lot of research on the legend of Tombstone and the Earps involvement resulting in most of the main plot points being historically correct.
The gunfight near the OK Corral was the most accurate put on screen. If you use the trials - The Earps (Virg and Morgan did not attend because of their wounds) and Holliday were arrested two days after the fight - eye witness accounts plus local newspaper accounts following the event you would find that this was very close to the way that it actually happened. It was also why they were found not guilty of murder.
You will find compromises made to make it a more entertaining movie but even when doing so subtle things were done to increase the historical validity of the film. For instance, Virgil and Morgan were not shot on the same night (a plot point combined to keep the film moving) but as an example of a subtle point related to the history  Morgan's dog was at the scene of the shooting and was howling while he lay dying on the pool table (A newspaper article the next day described the scene of death and mentioned the loyal dog whining for his master). There are tonnes of little subtle things done like this that point to the historical record of events.
Another criticism is the relationship between Josie and Wyatt seemed to be direct Hollywood manipulation with the throwing in of a love interest. Again, this actually happened. Tombstone is where Wyatt met Josie, Johnny Behan was her original boyfriend, and Wyatt's relationship with her did add tension to the situation (Behan was a supporter of the Cowboys) and also complicated the troubles Wyatt had with Mattie during this period. Also based on personal accounts about the kind of person Josie was, I felt Dana Delaney did a good job portraying Josie's personality accurately.
Even some of the questionable events can be argued to be real. For instance, in 1883 Johnny Ringo was found dead under an oak tree with a bullet wound to the head. He didn't have his boots on and his gunbelt was on upside down. It was of wide belief at the time that he committed suicide but some facts refute this. The main of which is his wound did not show any signs (flash burns) one would normally find when holding a pistol to your head. Ringo and Doc did hate each other and there were numerous accounts of run ins with each other while Doc was in Tombstone. It is agreed that Doc often said he didn't want to die with his boots off (meaning while he was asleep) and with his TB wanted to go out with a blaze of glory. Again, the subtle use of dialogue here is evident. Doc's referral to `Daisy' which in those days meant `a person of high reputation' was used to communicate this thought. At the Ok Corral one of the Clanton/Mclaurys says `I have you now' and Val Kilmers response `You're a daisy if you do'. After shooting Ringo he says `Your no daisy' referring to his disappointment in not being killed. So is Jarre incorrect in showing Doc Holliday as the killer of Johnny Ringo? Maybe so, maybe not, but again you can see the attention to detail that lies just below the surface, with a thorough understanding of the facts that allows for some educated guesses around some of the more mysterious and unexplained events of the time.
In terms of the facts, the only thing missing in my opinion is the under representation of the political undertones that existed in the 1880's Tombstone. The representation of the cowboys' as a gang of criminals instead of a gang of democratic (political affiliation) ruralistic cattle herders who were maybe a little more grey then black in terms of crime, and their confrontation with the silver mining republican capitalists that Wyatt Earp was paid to protect. These tensions (personified in number of political battles  e.g. The Earps and Holliday were implicated by the Cowboys to be responsible for the killing of a stage driver in a botched hold up when the facts clearly showed that the Cowboys were behind it) were what ultimately led to the showdown near the OK Corral though the events of Ike Clanton from the night before were correct (Most of the participants in the gunfight did play poker the night before!)
The bottom line is this is a good film with some excellent performances. It is in fact closer to the truth then many of its predecessors and is much better scripted movie then Wyatt Earp, which should have been a documentary. Kurt Russel's Wyatt Earp is dead on in retrospect to the facts given by people who knew him and Val Kilmers Doc is the best ever done. The supporting cast is good at capturing the nature of their real life characters. Despite what has been said about the ridiculousness of the moustaches and costumes, they were true to what was the fashion in 1880 - 1883 Tombstone.
All in all, this is a fun filled entertaining movie that is closer to the truth then any other movie to come out of Hollywood on the subject. In fact, this maybe why there are some Western fans who did not like this movie, maybe it was too much based on reality.