TOMBSTONE or WYATT EARP

[SDBlu]

These two movies were released around the same time...which did you feel was the better portrayal???

I voted Tombstone, as it is one of my favorite Westerns. I thought Wyatt Earp was crap.

[Darkhawk9587]

Tombstone FTW.

[dolphinc]

Tombstone is one of the best Westerns ever made IMO. Way better than the other...

[AKORIS]

no comparison!! TOMBSTONE easily the best

[Psychonaut]

Tombstone easily.

You never hear about Wyatt Earp pizzas and that should tell you something.

[Clark Kent]

Tombstone in a walk. It needs to be released on Blu-ray already.

[Sussudio]

Disappointingly, I think almost everyone will choose Tombstone. Not to say it's a bad movie, in fact it is quite a fun and adventurous western. However, Wyatt Earp really digs into the character and explores so much more about his life, and while it is much slower paced and less action-oriented, I find it to be a fascinating character study that provides a great deal more depth than Tombstone and should not be overlooked. IMO Costner is always at his best in the western genre (as is Hackman, who plays his role to perfection), and while Kilmer is an exceptional Doc Holliday, Quaid still holds his own. The cinematography is gorgeous and the performances are revealing. Tombstone is the more "enjoyable" of the two, but I firmly believe Wyatt Earp to be the better developed

[Steve]

I enjoyed both movies, but I much prefer Tombstone. I do like the more in-depth story of Wyatt Earp, but overall the movie just doesn't do it for me as well as Tombstone.


EDIT: Good explanatioin Sussudio. I completely agree with your assessment.

[toef]

I think they're close, mainly because I don't think Tombstone is nearly as good as a lot of other people do.

But I'd still give it a slight edge over Wyatt Earp.

[GORT]

It's not even close Tombstone

[Iron-Blu-123]

Tombstone

[Elvis]

Tombstone for fun...but Dennis Quades performance was so much better as Doc Holliday. No he didnt have the funny one liners but he did a better job. He trully looked sick...eyes suken and pale (he went down to 135 pounds for the role). Kilmer just looked like he had a fever....

[Col. Zombie]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

Disappointingly, I think almost everyone will choose Tombstone. Not to say it's a bad movie, in fact it is quite a fun and adventurous western. However, Wyatt Earp really digs into the character and explores so much more about his life, and while it is much slower paced and less action-oriented, I find it to be a fascinating character study that provides a great deal more depth than Tombstone and should not be overlooked. IMO Costner is always at his best in the western genre (as is Hackman, who plays his role to perfection), and while Kilmer is an exceptional Doc Holliday, Quaid still holds his own. The cinematography is gorgeous and the performances are revealing. Tombstone is the more "enjoyable" of the two, but I firmly believe Wyatt Earp to be the better developed

Agreed 100%. Two entirely different films. Just because they revolve around the same character is really of no consequence. These films are apples and oranges.

Don't get me wrong I understand the point is these two were made at the same time, but they are very different in so many ways. It was a difficult choice, as I really like Wyatt Earp for many of the same reasons as Sus, but in the end I chose Tombstone, because I'm a sucker for action.

[ZIPPO]

Originally Posted by Psychonaut

Tombstone easily.

You never hear about Wyatt Earp pizzas and that should tell you something.

"I'm your huckleberry"

"your no daisy, your no daisy at all."

[tommyboy81]

should this even be a competition?!?!?! Tombstone!!!!!!!!!!!

[tommyboy81]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

Disappointingly, I think almost everyone will choose Tombstone. Not to say it's a bad movie, in fact it is quite a fun and adventurous western. However, Wyatt Earp really digs into the character and explores so much more about his life, and while it is much slower paced and less action-oriented, I find it to be a fascinating character study that provides a great deal more depth than Tombstone and should not be overlooked. IMO Costner is always at his best in the western genre (as is Hackman, who plays his role to perfection), and while Kilmer is an exceptional Doc Holliday, Quaid still holds his own. The cinematography is gorgeous and the performances are revealing. Tombstone is the more "enjoyable" of the two, but I firmly believe Wyatt Earp to be the better developed

I agree but to me Costners version he tries to much to tell it and they're certain parts where I say WTF! Going to another part of the story without finishing the other. And it becomes really boring by the end.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by tommyboy81

I agree but to me Costners version he tries to much to tell it and they're certain parts where I say WTF! Going to another part of the story without finishing the other. And it becomes really boring by the end.

I definitely understand that, and like Zombie said above, they really are two totally different films and not everyone will enjoy watching Wyatt Earp. I just hope people don't pass over it solely because they think it is too slow or not as entertaining as Tombstone, as I think Earp has a lot to offer to the genre too

[tbizzle]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

Disappointingly, I think almost everyone will choose Tombstone. Not to say it's a bad movie, in fact it is quite a fun and adventurous western. However, Wyatt Earp really digs into the character and explores so much more about his life, and while it is much slower paced and less action-oriented, I find it to be a fascinating character study that provides a great deal more depth than Tombstone and should not be overlooked. IMO Costner is always at his best in the western genre (as is Hackman, who plays his role to perfection), and while Kilmer is an exceptional Doc Holliday, Quaid still holds his own. The cinematography is gorgeous and the performances are revealing. Tombstone is the more "enjoyable" of the two, but I firmly believe Wyatt Earp to be the better developed

Also agree 100%. IMO, wayyyyy better movie in just about every aspect. But they weren't made to be the same. Tombstone is a really fun, less serious version.

[JUDGEMENT 4400]

Tombstone, no competition. Wyatt Earp could have been really good, it was just released too soon after Tombstone

[tommyboy81]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

I understand that, and like Zombie said above, they really are two totally different films. I just hope people don't pass over Wyatt Earp solely because they think it is too slow or not as entertaining as Tombstone, as I think Earp has a lot to offer to the genre too

Tombstone-Hollywood Entertainment
Wyatt Earp-E! True Hollywood Story

For entertainment value it's Tombstone.
For the history and story of Wyatt Earp well it's Wyatt Earp.