Hatfields and McCoys: Bad Blood (2012) Reviews

• After watching the Costner series this one is not comparable at all. Story is very different I say C-.

  cosmo_tiger2012-06-02

  "I don't plan to out gun them, I plan to out kill them." After a son of Anse Hatfield (Fahey) is attacked by a member of the McCoy family a feud is begun. The Governor of Kentucky (Slater) sends his deputy Frank Philips to try and stop the fighting before its too late. I will do my best not to be biased on this one, but I did watch the History Channel series before this one. For some reason there are a lot of movies that come out that are very similar back to back. Examples like "Deep Impact" & "Armegeddon", "Tombstone" & "Wyatt Earp", "Mirror Mirror" & "Snow White and the Huntsman". This one is no exception as this one is released less then a week after the Costner one aired. Of all the movies I listed there is always one that is way better then the others. Unfortunately this is the lesser of the two Hatfield movies. The budget and acting aside the stories are so unlike the other that I have no idea which one is right. While the Costner one made me want to learn more about the history of the fight this one just made me want to watch the other one again. Overall, maybe if I saw this one first my opinion may be different but the History channel series was a hundred times better. I give it a C-.

• You have got to be kidding me!!

  Duke-562012-06-06

  I enjoyed the TV version with Costner I just wanted more of the story, so I rented this when I saw it at Redbox. Amanda B. has lost it and let herself go, though she and Fahey were the best actors in this joke of a release. Why bother with any facts, just rewrite stories, and condense the facts to shorten the movie This was not even as good as a local amateur play or locally shot movie made by high school or college drama club. The cast did a lot of shooting in the movie, but clearly never went to a shooting range to see how to hold a gun. The only visual effects I could detect was the terrible FIRE on the house. Just terrible and a waste of my time. The spoiler is if you read this before you rent it, you won't rent it....and I have done my job.

• Terrible movie

  dorothy0092012-06-24

  This telling of the Hatfield and McCoy feud was horrible, For one thing they only had 2 of the McCoy brothers being killed in revenge of Ellison Hatfield being killed when in fact there was 3, Also this version claimed Asa McCoy was Randall's son when in fact Asa was Randall's brother. Asa was also the father of Nancy McCoy who in fact did marry Johnse Hatfield and later was married to Bad Frank Phillips. This is just an example of how they screwed up the true facts. They took the story of the Hatfield's and McCoys and completely rewrote it. This was just a horrible movie. Please don't waste your money or your time watching this dud,

• Shameless Money Grab...Albeit A Small One.

  AudioFileZ2012-06-10

  Having no idea if the intent of this production is to ride the coattails of the History Channel's "Hatfields & McCoys" mini-series one has to think so. Obviously that one raised the current day brand recognition to an all time post WWII height, why not make a few lousy dollars? Sadly, this seems to be the the purpose of this "K-Mart" version of the tale. I suppose if it wasn't up against the superior History Channel treatment it may look like a much crisper (almost too clear 16:9 production reeks of HD videotape, i.e., no film soft grain) 1970's ABC "Movie of the Week", but since many viewers will be watching this after seeing the far superior Kevin Costner version it pretty much is laughable. In addition to the bargain basement production values we get a much different story. I know from research that The History Channel deviated somewhat, but here we have a very topical story with seemingly even more deviation. There just ain't any meat on these bones and the bones themselves are broken. In the back of my mind I get the feeling Jeff Fahey might have been quite good if given more to work with...That's about all I can say as the other performances were less than "phoned-in" to coin a phrase. O.K., it's watchable if somewhat laughable. That's the only reason I give it a 3 (full disclosure: If I had paid to see it the rating would be less). I don't know how much they paid Christian Slater for his meager role here, but seriously are infomercials next?

• Laughably bad

  nbrainerd32014-03-06

  This movie is awful. The acting is all around horrendous. Frank Phillips struggles with his accent very noticeably. The few recognizable actors in this film must really be hurting for work. These were supposed to be Appalachian hill folk, but you get clean cut pretty boys with brand new, pristine, clean clothing, gelled hair, and even designer jeans in a few scenes. The first 5 minutes of this movie, a Civil War battle scene, are just terrible, and pretty much set the bar for the rest of the movie. It looks like it was cast with overweight man boys straight out of comicon who jumped at the chance for a reenactment. Indoor scenes have doors open to blank green screens, too. This movie isn't worth the hour and a half of your life - not even for laugh content.