# Hatfields & McCoys (Two for One)



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

I recently had the chance to watch two interpretations of the classic American feud between the Hatfields and the McCoys. Both were 2012 releases, but were very different projects. I will try not to rehash plot points here, but maybe touch on a few of the major differences, and the strengths and weaknesses of each effort.

Let's go in the order we watched them, and start out with History Channel's *Hatfields & McCoys*.









This version was a TV miniseries aired by History Channel in May. With 3 parts at 2 hours (with commercials) each, this series was a bit more of an investment of time, but after the first episode I could tell it was an investment that would pay off.

The longer of the two, History's version had the luxury of more time to develop the story and characters, which also pays off for them. We see the two family patriarchs fighting together in the Civil War, presumably before there was a feud between them, and are shown what may have been the events to set things in motion for the conflict to come. Kevin Costner's Anderson "Devil Anse" Hatfield, although shown to be a brave and capable soldier, essentially desserts his unit after becoming disillusioned with the war. He goes home to care for his family leaving his comrade, Bill Paxton's Randall McCoy, to stay and do his sworn duty which he refuses to abandon. Fast forward to the end of the war, and we see that it has taken it's toll on Randall McCoy, who bears a great deal of resentment towards Hatfield. Add in a continuous stream of incidents that by bad luck, bad decisions, and bad tempers all add fuel to the fire, and these two families find themselves at each others throats.

I really don't know how much of the story is historical fact and how much is anecdotal, or writers taking creative license and making things up on their own. In any case, Hatfields & McCoys was very entertaining. As mentioned, the characters themselves are fairly well developed, and although it might take a little while to figure out how everyone is related, the characters have a good degree of individuality, and aren't as easily confused as they could be given the amount of brothers, uncles, and cousins running around. At least that is true for the Hatfield family, who this story seems to focus on. The McCoys get a little less screen time and are a little more generic, but there are still individuals who stand out. Costner played an enjoyable Devil Anse, if at times maybe a little sophisticated (I'm not sure, maybe the real Hatfield _was _well spoken and not as much of a stereotypical hillbilly as I have been led to believe), and Paxton's morally belligerent and God-fearing McCoy was well done too. In fact, I think he outshone Costner even with the less likeable character. The rest of the cast was also good with no real weak links that I can remember. Tom Berenger plays a thoroughly unlikable Uncle Jim, Powers Boothe gives his usual stuff as Judge Valentine Hatfield, and the rest do their part to keep the action engrossing. 

Costumes and sets seemed well done, and gave a decent picture of gritty life in the hills. Costner may have been a little too well dressed at times, but again, that might just be my prejudiced views on what someone who lived on the Tug River in the late 1800's should look like. Overall production values seemed high, and it seemed like some care was taken to aim for a degree of realism.

It was easy to get caught up in the story, and the various ongoing drama, and I found myself more than once either shaking my head or murmuring to my wife something like "why would he DO that?" - but all in a good way. I guess the story was largely predictable in its back-and-forth vengeance plotline, but hey, this isn't billed as a mystery. If you have any interest in American history, or curiosity about these two legendary families, I would recommend Hatfields & McCoys.

The other version of this story was *Bad Blood: The Hatfields and McCoys*









This is the direct-to-DVD feature directed by Fred Olen Ray. At about 90 minutes, it was around the same length as one of the episodes of Hatfields & McCoys, and yet somehow it felt much much longer.

This version was quite disappointing, maybe because we had just watched History's adaptation, or maybe because it really was a low budget effort that wouldn't stand on its own in any case.

It hits some of the major plot points of the other version, but tells the story in its own way too. There is an added perspective from the governor of Kentucky (Christian Slater) that really doesn't add much to the story. The acting was painful to watch at times, and I found myself hoping some characters would find a different (sooner) end than in History's version. The costumes seemed bright and unnatural in contrast, and nothing seemed to mesh. There were too many styles and it lost all of the grittiness of the other. The sets were uninspired and the same shots were used repeatedly throughout the film. The script had several instances where modern language and colloquialisms made dialogue awkward and forced. Overall I just found the production values to be low, the acting poor, and was left having found no advantages over History's mini series. Unless you love the genre, want to contrast the two, or might appear in the film yourself, I think it is safe to skip this one.


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

I saw the History Channel version, and had the same good reaction to it. Spot on review.


----------



## wgmontgomery (Jun 9, 2011)

I missed the History Channel's version but plan on getting it on Blu Ray when it's released. I heard _great_ things about it; a friend of mine who teaches HS history/social studies commented that it seemed to be historically accurate.


----------



## ALMFamily (Oct 19, 2011)

Thanks for taking the time to do up a review Owen! :T

I will keep a weather-eye (oooooh - POTC reference! :nerd out for it on video.


----------



## wgmontgomery (Jun 9, 2011)

ALMFamily said:


> Thanks for taking the time to do up a review Owen! :T
> 
> I will keep a weather-eye (oooooh - POTC reference! :nerd out for it on video.


Here's a link to the Blu Ray.  Release date is July 31, 2012.


----------



## ozar (Feb 12, 2012)

I've been watching the pricing on the History Channel version and definitely plan to check it out if it ever goes on sale for a really good price!


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

I bet this would be a good watch on BD. Being able to go through it all uninterrupted would be a nice plus, especially with a good HD transfer.

Also, some really interesting points in the Amazon comments section.


----------

