Real Texas History is Better Than Fiction
Murray Montgomery - Staff Writer
Sometimes I think being a student of Texas history is a curse. Why? Because it makes it very hard for me to enjoy made-for-TV movies. This history "curse" is an extreme desire to see historical events portrayed with some accuracy, even within a fictional story.
For example, many years ago, I tried to watch the television movie “Two for Texas.” I was doing fine until the character portrayed by Kris Kristofferson pulled out a five-shot Colt revolver. This would have been all right, except that the Colt revolver wasn't even in production until the 1840s. Ol' Kris was on his way to the Alamo, and the year was 1836. Now, don't you know the men inside the Alamo would have loved to have had some of those five-shot revolvers!
I guess I'll never understand why filmmaker folks can't stick a little closer to the facts. I realize this particular movie is fiction, but how hard would it have been to use a replica of a flintlock pistol circa 1836?
Like I said, it's a curse. I had the same problem with another made-for-TV movie, “True Women.” Everything was fine until early in the show when a rider gallops up to people fleeing the Mexican army. He tells them to run faster because Santa Anna had just burned the town of Gonzales. That was it for me. Any seventh-grade Texas history student knows Santa Anna didn't burn Gonzales; Sam Houston gave that order. Now that I think about it, the rider who gave the false report in the movie might even have been portraying Houston.
What were the filmmakers thinking? Were they trying to make Santa Anna look like more of a bad guy than he already was? Believe me, His Excellency didn't need any help being a villain—he took care of that himself. Before you chastise me, please understand that I'm not saying “True Women” was entirely bad. I'm sure a lot of folks enjoyed it. I couldn't because, you see, I have the "curse."
Several of my friends have told me to lighten up and just enjoy the show. They say, "Don't worry about what kind of uniforms the soldiers are wearing or the types of weapons they have. After all, it's just a movie." Believe me, I've tried, but I just can't help it. Sometimes I wish I could go back to being a kid. I remember watching Roy Rogers on TV, and it didn't bother me that Roy's gun never ran out of bullets. It didn't even upset me that while Roy was chasing the bad guys on his horse “Trigger,” that his trusty sidekick was after them in a jeep. A jeep in the Old West! Thank goodness I didn't have the curse back then, or I never could have enjoyed my childhood.
Seriously though, it seems to me that filmmakers should strive for authenticity when portraying history. Anyone who studies Texas history can tell you that the true stories are an adventure all their own.
For example, Noah Smithwick came to Texas as a young man in 1827. He traveled extensively across a land that would soon become the Republic of Texas. When the citizens of Gonzales fired that first shot for independence, he was there. It was Smithwick who helped refurbish the little cannon to get it in shape to fire. On another occasion, he hid all night during a freezing "blue norther" to keep from being discovered by Comanche Indians on Plum Creek near Lockhart.
Smithwick eventually had to leave Texas during the Civil War because he didn't believe his beloved state should secede from the Union. He moved to California and died there in his 90s. Smithwick's memory was exceptional, and a few years prior to his death he dictated detailed accounts of his adventures to his daughter. Those recollections became the book Evolution of a State.
Would-be filmmakers should consider making a movie about someone like Noah Smithwick. Stick to the facts, hire a good cast, use authentic props, and film on location. And just for good measure, make sure the lead actor has the right color eyes and hair. I can't help it—it's the curse.