Ironically the film Wyatt Earp has a line of dialogue that I think sums up the comparison perfectly. "The stories are always better."

If you want to watch a good kevin costner western, watch open range. He and robert duvall make a very entertaining team in that one.

Tombstone is not historically accurate, but it is historically adjacent. What Tombstone does is capture the FEELING of the town and players in 1880-81. It takes 29 months and condenses it in to a watchable 2 hour movie with a discernible arc.

Tombstone is an ensemble action movie. Wyatt Earp is...well as you said, at worst an ego piece for Costner, but more of an epic about Wyatt. I feel Tombstone is the much better watch. Kevin Costner had a western pedigree then but Kurt Russell has proven lately he is the far better western actor imo.

Val as Doc Holiday is truly the difference maker. What a role, what an actor. BraveHeart even failed in the true legend of William tho but it is a great movie and that's what the goal was. I'd say Billy the kid gives wyatt a run for his money on most popular but that's simply my opinion.

Hey, this was a very good video. I couldnt help agreeing with just about everything you said.

Ty new sub Retired law enforcement and History buff and Researcher Great job

Thank you for the great review !!!!!!!!

One of the main features of accuracy for me in Wyatt Earp was the more correct location of the fight. The alley was only 15 feet wide and there were a lot of people packed close together in that 15 feet. Tombstone widened it considerably to like 40 feet but, that aside, I liked Tombstone better.

Ironically, I just watched Tombstone tonight, it’s just so awesome. Wyatt Earp is pretty good.

Nice video!

I happened to love Wyatt Earp and didn't mind it's length whatsoever. But I also happen to be an avid History Buff and Seeker of Truth. I loved both movies; but I have a greater appreciation for Wyatt Earp. This is because I come from a greater generation than does the narrator of this video. But I do agree with the narrator that Val's role as Doc Holiday was Epic.

You forgot the best 80s Western, Clint Eastwood's _Pale Rider_ (1985).

If I may make a suggestion for you how would a battle analysis video on the First and Second battle of Beruna from the Chronicles of Narnia films or books sound like to you? Does it hold your interest?

I liked Wyatt Earp because it looks more at his personality and faults… also, Costner was great in The Untouchables.

I always preferred documentary's so that may explain why I muuuuch prefer Wyatt Earp to tombstone. I even like Quaid better than Kilmer but you made valid points about it being to long and ponderous.

Nice job on that.

I enjoy Wyatt Earp because it gives you a good look at what the man’s life might have been like. Tombstone on the other hand had a narrower focus on the time period of the OK corral and what happened shortly thereafter. Tombstone. Both movies had great performances Val Kilmer, and Dennis Quaid both played excellent versions of Doc Holliday. Tombstone I would qualify as more of an action Western. Wyatt Earp on the other hand is more of a dramatic western. Personally, I think both films are great.

You really cannot compare these 2 movies ... they were made for watching in 2 completely different moods, just like I don't watch "Airplane!" when I'm in the mood for "The Terminator". Tombstone is the version you get when u hand a western script to the action director of Rambo 2 and Cobra .... and Wyatt Earp is the epic western version of quieter contemplation similar to Dances with Wolves when u get Costner involved .... both great movies (but depends on the mood you're in at the moment)

If you were the leader of a western gang in the 1870s what would you name it? My gang would be called *"The Good People"* (The quotation marks are part of the name)

I’m personally prefer Tombstone. It’s a really fun film and I love watching Doc Holiday. On an unrelated note, may you cover Brunor le Noir and Sir Balin le Savage in your Arthurian videos?

Please do Sir Percival for your Arthurian Legend video I really want to see him

Good call. I had the same problem with Young Guns, couldn't wait for it to be over.

The fight in the lot close to the OK Corral has accuracies and fiction in both films. For instance, in the Wyatt Earp film Costner is portrayed having his revolver in a 20th century Hollywood holster rig, whereas in the Tombstone version, Russell correctly portrays Earp as having the revolver in his coat pocket (which Earp had greased inside). In the film Wyatt Earp, they correctly have Doc Holliday being hit in the hip, whereas in the Tombstone version, he isn't harmed at all. In the Wyatt Earp version, they had one of the Clanton/McLaury faction, I don't remember which, stagger out into the street (they neglected to add that, that individual actually said before dying, "more bullets, I need more bullets." The bit with Clanton getting into a gunfight from the photograph studio was fiction. The final conflict near the end of the Wyatt Earp movie was pure fiction. The fight at the creek/river in Tombstone was more accurate, although not entirely.

Tombstone was just a better movie, actors looked their part! Also, the Hats and Dusters did it for me, lol!

I like both movies. I like documentaries so fact based wise I like Earp. The problem with most all Costner movies is length. I do like the characters more in Tombstone and I agree it is easier to watch Tombstone

I happen to have both Tombstone & Wyatt Earp and I enjoy both of them films. I really don’t go into a debate on who was a better Wyatt Earp, cause I personally never cared. Here’s a fun fact: Kurt Russell & Kevin Costner have have been in film together and it hasn’t been talked about much in years, and it’s none other than “3000 Miles To Graceland” which is my whole time favorites and I’ve rewatched it, god knows how many times. That’s like the only film Russell & Costner have been in together.

Well damn, Wyatt Earp has 6.7 IMDB score and 31% Rotten Tomatoes score. But Tombstone has 7.8 IMDB and 72% Rotten Tomatoes. There will always be outliers but Tombstone seems to have come out on top.

I absolutely loved both films... wyatt for the historic accuracy... and tombstone as the legend... which truthfully is why tombstone is my favorite of the two.

I wonder if there’s a better edited version out there for Wyatt Earp..??

Tombstone with Val Kilmer---I loved his " I 'm your Huckleberry."

I really really love westerns. John Wayne ones are my favorite, like true grit. I like the more modern ones too, but not as much.

You pretty much have to be a history-geek of the 19th century American West to enjoy Wyatt Earp. Also, it helps if you've read the biography "Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshall" by Stuart N. Lake--which I did. I do prefer Wyatt Earp over Tombstone in my imaginings of the reality of the western frontier. Much like I prefer (in fictional Westerns) "The Unforgiven" over "Silverado." However, I enjoy all these movies! But if I want a "good-time" romanticized Western, it's definitely "Tombstone." McClintock, Bend in the River, Fist Full of Dollars, Free Range, The Sons of Katie Elder, and, dare I say(?) Blazing Saddles?! ... Westerns just kick ass!!!

There is no such thing as too long, love 'Wyatt', made me want to go and read up on the actual events.

I could watch Wyatt Earp every week and love it

Excellent review, spot on. I just watched Wyatt Earp about 2 weeks ago, as I've always been a huge Kevin Costner fan. But with filmmaking and storytelling, you need to have ebbs and flows in the pacing and action. Wyatt Earp was very monotone and emotionless most of the time , while Tombstone lays it out and hits the ground running, adding emotion and humor. Its basically like comparing Godfather with Goodfellas. One is more gritty and accurate while Goodfellas is more entertaining and paced better. Not that Wyatt Earp should be mentioned in the same breath as The Godfather 😅

Barbarossa (1982) is a great western that holds up on re-watch.

This video being two years old, there's little point in countering you, but I can't help myself: You mentioned Braveheart. I love that movie it's massively entertaining, and for many years it was in my personal top ten - but if it wanted to invent its own history (which it did in pretty much EVERY scene because except for a couple of names they got right it's fantasy through and through), it shouldn't have portrayed itself as a historical movie. In my opinion it doesn't get to go scot-free just because there's the word "legend" somehwere in there, because from the get-go the narrator, the Bruce, tells you this is the REAL story, and Randall Wallace actually defended his film's "realism" after release. That was actually quite hilarious back then. Historical movies need to dramatize and condense, but they aren't free to make up whatever the hell they want whenever the hell they feel the need to because they're too lazy or too unimaginative to make the facts work with as little artistic licence and contradiction as possible. James Cameron's Titanic would be a great example of how you stay historically accurate (based on the then current knowledge) and still deliver a movie that works. Take 300 which makes abundantly clear that you're watching an overblown legend, not something even remotely related to actual history. A "We're gonna tell a fantasy story, and we're gonna do it as historically inaccurate as humanly possible" disclaimer would have been nice in Braveheart's case is all I'm saying.

Watching Wyatt Earp now lol. I love both.

Tombstone is epic! Wyatt Earp is just good…..long, but good

I agree with you I like Tombstone the best!!! But I also like Wyatt Earp the movie too! I can say Wyatt Earp is my friend and we did shoot out here in Arizona back in the 1990s!!! He did play a part in the movie Tombstone he is a real relative of Wyatt Earp and it is his name too!!!

There doesn’t need to be a winner. I enjoyed both of them.

I loved em both.

I love both movies

I thought Wyatt Earp met doc holiday in Dodge City KS, not texas.

Someone needs to do a Western on John Wesley Hardin. There was one done in the 50s, but Hardin was not the central character. It was more entertainment but less, way less historically accurate.

You know shit about Westerns, UNFORGIVEN(1992) one of the greatest HOSS!

Great video! As one person posted, Wyatt Earp is going more for the epic feel and Tombstone is not. For me both movies had their redeeming qualities but I liked Tombstone more. I seemed to connect more to the characters than I did Wyatt Earp, but that is likely preference. While Wyatt Earp may have the nod on the historic aspect but it too has flaws, that were not covered in this video. (This video felt more like a critical look at Tombstone and less critical on Wyatt Earp) One scene would be the death of Wyatt’s first wife. Wyatt (Costner) walks off in the middle of his wife’s funeral (not sure that is known, I could be wrong) but it sets up a more significant scene, when he than torches the house, that is not historical he simply sold his house and moved. Costner uses this to establish the dark side of Wyatt. Which is played throughout the movie. The house fire is quit a deviation from history but makes makes for a powerful Hollywood scene. I believe someone here noted that Tombstone is more the legend and Wyatt Earp is more the flawed human side of Wyatt. I would agree, and add the truth is somewhere in the middle. The filming of the OK Corral scene which, depending on what historians account you use, is more accurate in Wyatt Earp in its setting, but Tombstone does a better job with the intensity of the scene something that does not come across in Wyatt Earp. Wyatt Earp has a wounded Doc Holliday hit the deck after being shot where actually there is no evidence he did this. (Sadly, Tombstone leaves out the fact Holliday was wounded) With Doc hitting the ground it seems this is more about Wyatt (Costner) last man standing theme. (One thing on Doc and both movies, I think a hybrid of Kilmer and Quaid would be pretty close to correct, that said historically I appreciated both Kilmer’s and Quaid’s performances, though Kilmer’s coolness under fire and his “your a Daisy if you do” line seems closer to correct during the OK scene. To be fair, the multiple hits Kilmer makes on Billy Clanton is pure fiction. In summary I like Wyatt for the full bioptic approach detailing how all the characters meet (Masterson, Holliday, etc.) but it tried to do too much and it feels more like binge-watching a miniseries than it does an epic film. Tombstone may fall shorter on the historic, but I felt a connection to the characters that I did not get from Wyatt Earp. Some of this may be Costner’s ego? Wyatt may be more historical than Tombstone (which I think it is), but if you are watching anything made by Hollywood for a historical version you are, in most cases making a mistake, read two or three - well researched books instead. Why two or three? Because history can be victimized by a historians interpretation. It is often a combination of views where the closest to the truth can be found. Maybe the exercise here would be, what are the more historical accurate scenes for both films, combine them and that may be the closest you would get. After all two newspapers in Tombstone would present two diametrically differing views of events that day. Why? Politics and presuppositions the same enemy we fight 140 years latter.

Val Kilmer as Doc Holliday was the best part of Tombstone. ⚰

Westerns and Baseball movies are where Kevin Costner shines!

Young Guns I & II was more than just good. It was awesome.

For good, old-fashioned Western movie entertainment, Tombstone wins hands-down. You go to Tombstone today, all the touristy shops up and down Allen Street, if they have pictures or posters up, they are from Tombstone. Wyatt Earp was more of a bio-pic. It had it's good points. Dennis Quaid's Doc was probably closer to the real man.

Another thing that drives me crazy is Tombstone makes Morgan look like a person that was weak and that followed his brothers… in reality Morgan was a little crazy and a bit of a hothead.. he wanted to fight at the ok corral (actually Fly’s)

I would argue that Wyatt Earp did a better job of showing the killing of Curly Bill. That part of Arizona is pretty dry and many creeks run dry. Curly Bill was killed in March months before the rainy season. Also I don’t think he would get a bullet in the heel is his boot knee deep in water. Iron springs would be fairly dry that time of year. Water sure but not lush green like they showed in Tombstone. JMHO

Get both...both are great movies

You need to watch a similar video on a channel called little Wars TV Wyatt Earp vs. Tombstone which one is more accurate. There are also some really good comments over there one of them stuck out to me and the guy said tombstone is the MTV Western Well Wyatt Earp is the more accurate depiction. I think that was correct and I thoroughly enjoyed them both!!

Wyatt Was the less Hollywood. Better acting with a more accurate story. Val Kilmer was the best Doc Holiday. That lunger really made that part. The split is because Kurt Russel is an action hero. Good actor. Where as Kevin Costner is a great actor! He lives the role. I'm a fan. Never a bad movie. I was convinced he was who he portrayed as much as any Daniel Day Lewis event.

I love both films as a fan of westerns. That said, for me tombstone is the most perfect western

I liked this it is best comparison

One is more historically accurate, the other has sexy mustaches.

I think Wyatt Earp is a more accurate movie, and Tombstone is a more fun movie. I like them both almost equally, they are both awesome movies, just different ones.

Parry This would do well to preface his takes with , "in my opinion"! I love both movies! Although very different in depiction & storylines both are great on their own merit! Of course, that is just my opinion! ;)

Anyone remember The long riders, with the Carradine brothers ?

The way I understand it Wyatt Earp was originally planned as a tv miniseries, which when trying to be historically accurate is a better way to go. I actually don’t mind Wyatt Earp as a film, my immediate complaint was that Costner’s acting initially seems unusually flat, but i warmed to his performance as the movie went on. Tombstone on the other hand is an out and out classic. Maybe the best movie of the 90’s. Yeah I said it.

Great video but it was Behan not Belan. 😉

Tombstone blows the other away

I can appreciate that the Wyatt Earp movie wanted to focus on the entire life of Wyatt because it is a nice historical reference but that doesn’t necessarily mean that makes it a better movie. I think tombstone is a much better movie even though it really only focuses on a 10 year period of his life. I don’t think a lot of people realize how much time really passes in the tombstone movie. I mean if you just watch the movie and don’t do any research I could see why someone would think that whole movie took place in a matter of months. From the time that they got to tombstone to the time of the Wyatt Watp vendetta ride years had passed. Even more years pass by the time Doc Holliday died. As far as how Both movies presented the man Wyatt Earp I think both movies did a good job of showing us that the man wasn’t perfect and that he did have his flaws. Neither movie makes Wyatt out to be the good guy in the white hat. He’s just a guy living life that made mistakes but tried to learn from those mistakes and become a better person. As far as what is a better movie all the way around I will always pick Tombstone. I like that the first two hours of Wyatt Earp covers everything that happened before he got Tombstone, It’s cool information to have but it’s not more entertaining. And if you’re trying to get someone that has never watched a western in to that time period , I don’t think the Wyatt Earp movie is a good movie to do that because it’s an hour and a half and they are going to be looking at their phones and watches to see what time it is and it’s just really really long. Tombstone on the other hand is a movie that you wish would go another hour long like I could keep watching that movie forever it seems it’s just such a good movie and a grabs you and you never want to take your eyes off it.

Tombstone

I actually liked Wyatt Earp a lot and to me it wasn't chore to watch.

I'd give'em 50-50 tombstone has parts in it that are better in their own way, but wyatt earp has an edge in areas that tombstone is too quick to dismiss that can be uncovered in tombstones deleted scene pack.

Oh I dunno, Pale Rider is an interesting movie, I like it better than Eastwood's earlier High Plains Drifter. As for Wyatt Earp vs Tombstone...yes like everyone else I gotta go with Tombstone, but that's not to say Wyatt Earp doesn't have good stuff in it, the problem is this should have been a 3 part miniseries on like TNT in the 90s with 3 1 hour episodes to cover the Earp story without forcing people to sit through a 3 hour slog. It's the same problem I got with The Irishman, there's a lot of effort, good performances, and great cinematography, but by the time you're hitting that three hour mark you'd swear you have been watching this movie for days on end and did it really need to be 3 hours long? But if you want the superior Costner western with him as a lawman, The Highwaymen on Netflix is a fantastic movie about the Texas Ranger who takes town Bonnie and Clyde

Tombstone all day . Every day .

Tombstone!

As a lifelong Tombstone fan (my fav western and in top 5 movies period). I watched Wyatt Earp for first time yesterday. Tombstone is by far superior but Wyatt Earp is a great film too My dream scenario thoughts: 1. Put Costner in Tombstone as Earp (playing the legend with the script Kurt had) 2. Swap Quaid in as ‘Johnny Ringo’ in Tombstone. Dennis quad is great but Kilmer wins doc easy, nothing against Michael Biehn I just bet Quaid would be fantastic facing off against Kilmer. 3. Sam Elliot STAYS as Virgil 4. Bill pullman (‘Ed Masterson’ in Wyatt Earp) as MORGAN in Tombstone 🤷‍♂️

"...But if you kill a lot of killers, that number steadily decreases." 😄

Tombstone wasn’t just a good Western, it was a great movie regardless of genre. Great cast, great writing, tons of action, and excellent use of scenery/imagery/props. I think I watched 5 minutes of Wyatt Earp.

I like both movies..

US History probably should remember Virgil as one of our top lawmen AND US History should remember Frank James as the romantic outlaw. History remembers the little brothers too much

I agree, Kilmer’s Holiday was perfect

Silverado was a great movie

No mention of the fact that "Unforgiven" won best picture the year after "Dances With Wolves"? It seems pretty clear Westerns were enjoying a bit of a revival at the time.

I liked tombstone much more than Wyatt Earp.

Tombstone! It capture’s more accurate of character personalities. More authentic.

I'm gonna stop you right there about "Braveheart". The opening narration by Robert the Bruce (Angus MacFadyen) begins, "I shall tell you of William Wallace... Historians from England will say I am a liar, but history is written by those who've hanged heroes." The script literally presents itself as being the "real" story; it's script writer Randall Wallace who freely disavows any attempt to write a historically accurate film but rather an entertaining drama inspired by history. Within the fictionalized world of the film, it purports itself not to be a legend but the true story.

Tombstone; not historically accurate. But one hell of a great movie!

Okay.There were two great westerns in the 80 's. Clint Eastwood's "Pale Ridef"and the mini series "Lonesome Dove".

Controversial opinion, Water World and The Postman were both underrated, or maybe I just love Costner

Hello 👋 which is better the 1957 🎥 Gunfight At The Ok Coral with Burt Lancaster as Wyatt Earp and legendary Kirk Douglas as Doc Holiday with an all ⭐ cast is better 🏆 August 30,2021

Oh yeah, tombeatone is about a million times better. I could honestly watch tombestone once or twice a month, ive seen Wyatt Earp twice, and I really never have the desire to watch it again.

I remember feeling at the time that Wyatt Earp felt more historically accurate - ergo, longer and slower paced. Tombstone was a lot more fun.

From what I recall, I thought Wyatt Earp was actually pretty good in its own right, but after seeing Tombstone first, it is a bit of a letdown. Had the movies been reversed, with WE released before TS, I wonder if we would have perceived them differently. WE was somewhat of a "Dances With Wolves" version, which coming on the heels of DWW, may have done well-enough on its own, with moviegoers having yet to see Tombstone. In the end, Tombstone stands out on its own because it is a double-whiskey, whereas Wyatt Earp was more of a tea-totaler

Which was better as Doc Holiday? Both Val Kilmer and Dennis Quaid. They both lost alot of weight to get that sickly look.

Love Tombstone as a kid. As I got older I started leaning more toward Wyatt Earp, because it was accurate and was true to who Wyatt actually was. I treat Tombstone as a dime novel and Wyatt Earp as a true to life performance epic.

I was more intrigued by Wyatt Earp than Tombstone. Simply put, substance over spectacle.

I don't agree with your conclusion as I enjoyed Wyatt Earp too but I would say tombstone and their cast were much better. Kirt Russell and Val Kilmer and the guy who played Ringo (Reece from T1) was sublime

Both are good movies, however Tombstone is simply a cut above. As for the accuracy it kind of depends on your sources.. but tombstone again seems to take the cake, at least as far as the story as it was originally told goes.

Tombstone absolutely

Pale rider 80's?

I love both of them, but Wyatt Earp with Kevin Costner is closer to being accurate

Both movies are great....but Kevin C plays a great Wyatt.." Kill them all "