Texas Rangers (2001)

Simply A Masterpiece

Don't listen to the negative reviews

best movie i've ever seen.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

A decade after the Civil War, Texas is overrun by a virtual army of bandits and cattle-rustlers. Ex-Confederate/ex-preacher/ex-lawman Dylan McDermott is tasked with recruiting a new a new generation of Texas Rangers to take on vicious cattle rustler Alfred Molina.From the director of such classic westerns as Friday the 13th Part 2, House, Halloween H2O, and Warlock (nope, not the one with Henry Fonda and Anthony Quinn), and co-starring cowboy icons James Van Der Beek, Ashton Kutcher, and Usher, this failed history lesson makes the stars of Young Guns look like the The Wild Bunch!All kidding aside, it's not really THAT bad. Production values are good and action sequences are well-made. An economical 90-minute running (featuring eight-minutes of end credits!) may, or may not help. It's hard to tell.The main problem is that the characters are superficial and the youthful cast of very recognizable stars looks painfully out-of-place in 1875 Texas. I'm a bit surprised this actually made it to theaters, instead of straight-to-video or The Hallmark Channel.Though miscast, Molina does seem to be enjoying himself!

Everything is in place for this to be a great movie: stars, good historic subject matter, locations/scenery, photography, costumes. However, it misses the mark when it comes to depth and heart. All the way through I enjoyed the familiar faces and the beautiful scenery, so I kept thinking I'd start to care about the characters, or that something would happen to create depth and pull me in, but no. What a waste of actors and subject matter--The Texas Rangers is a great subject, but this movie doesn't do it 'justice'. If you are home from work, sick, or if it's a rainy Sunday and there's nothing better on, this is better than nothing. It may feel like a waste of your time, otherwise, if you value your time at all.

Although Texas Rangers is a tribute to a force that has a proud tradition of contributing law and order to our second largest state, the story of Leander McNelly and King Fisher just didn't work out the way it did. Perhaps there should have been that way, but just as Elizabeth Tudor and Mary Stuart never met in life, McNelly and Fisher didn't have it out.TV stars James Van Der Beek and Ashton Kutcher are a pair of young recruits that Dylan McDermott as McNelly signs up for the newly reconstituted Texas Rangers. During the Civil War and the Reconstruction period the Texas Rangers had been disbanded. After the carpetbagger government was finished, the newly elected Texas State government reestablished the Rangers and they had a great responsibility as the US Cavalry was dealing with Comanches as its primary mission.King Fisher as played by Alfred Molina was one nasty dude, no doubt about it. But his primary source of income was cattle rustling. He rarely committed crimes like murder north of the border, bad for business to get people madder than they really could be. He stole cattle and sold it to the local Mexican satrap whomever it might be at a given moment. The wanton murder you see here was not really his style though he'd kill you without hesitation if you got in his way.In any event the state of Texas and King Fisher reached a negotiated truce and Fisher became a prominent rancher in the Uvalde area. I saw his grave there and he's one of three prominent citizens Uvalde claims, the other two being Dale Evans and Vice President John Nance Garner.Texas Rangers is a good TV movie about this body of law enforcement in its early days, but it's hardly ever going to be rated a classic.

This movie is terrible. The only value that can possibly come from watching this awful film is the unintentional laughs you'll get from it several times during the otherwise entirely wasted hour and a half you'll spend watching this. Okay here is a good place to give you this advice, don't waste that hour and a half, watch something else or do something else, I kept watching thinking and hoping it would have to get better but it never did. The writing is pathetic but what really stands out is the incredibly pathetic acting, Ashton Kutcher stinks in everything I've seen him in but this performance is by far the worst I've ever seen from him, maybe it's because this is the only non-comedy role I've seen him in so him trying to do drama really stands out as just wrong. James Van Der Beek is very bad in this too but he still shines next to Ashton Kutcher. If you don't believe me and really do have an hour and a half to waste then watch it, you will get a couple chuckles out of watching Ashton Kutcher deliver lines in a pathetic attempt to "act".