If “The Alamo” made me remember anything, it was America’s all-or-nothing attitude.

With surprising skill, director John Lee Hancock (no pun intended) extracted this theme right out of the phony plywood sets and sparkling cannonballs. The glory of America was born in the glisten of warfare. It is through such warfare and violence that Americans found themselves. If not for our forefathers demanding we receive everything for nothing, take without giving while kicking and screaming in the process, I never would be able to walk through the self-checkout at Super Wal-Mart.

-Where “The Alamo” fails terribly is in the fact that Hancock wants us to believe this everything-for-nothing attitude is a GOOD thing. Our American heroes fought off Mexican savages who would have come and raped much of Texas. Thank God they won, because Texas wouldn’t be the sane state of joy it is today.

This is about where I’m supposed to give a description of the plot, but is it really necessary? Which begs the question, is this film even necessary? We’ve all heard the stories about the heroic Davy Crockett who stood up with his rifle of will and defended our freedom against the invading army. An army of few stood tall against an army of might, and we prevailed. Crockett even took out 6,743 Mexican bears with his bare hands, all while firing shot after shot with his trusty rifle using his gimpy left foot. And he was a righty.

We are a nation at war, and what this means to American politics and economic policy I will leave to the pundits. What I can tell you is what you will see in theaters in the coming years. First, we’ll see heroes of all kinds save the day, letting all of us audience members know that we, as Americans, can count on extraordinary heroes when things aren’t going our way (see “Hellboy,” “Spiderman” or “The Alamo”).

Then, we’ll see an onslaught of disaster films as the war simmers down. Just as “Independence Day” smashed its way to success in the mid-’90s, other end-of-the-world films will follow Gulf War II, should it ever end. Hollywood even has brought “ID:4” director Roland Emmerich out of the closet for May’s “The Day After Tomorrow.”

Then, after Iraq is “returned” to the Iraqi people, we’ll see an onslaught of government conspiracy films like “Enemy of the State,” where innocent civilians like you and me are stalked and manipulated by a government we used to trust. And then Hollywood will wait for the next war to start the circle all over again.

What’s so refreshing about “The Alamo” is that you, the audience, refused to be suckered into its trap this past weekend. The roughly $140 million (counting marketing) film grossed only $9 million during its first weekend, losing to Jesus (“The Passion of the Christ”) and a demon (“Hellboy”).

Perhaps there is no stopping the disaster film or the Disney remake of American history. “The Alamo” doesn’t even bother to take care in its presentation. The movie clearly is shot on sound stages. Its costumes appear to be from thrift stores rather than the 1800s. It does nothing more than cram its sad ideology and senseless patriotism down the audience’s throat. While there’s nothing wrong with being patriotic, “The Alamo” almost makes us feel bad for doing so.

If you will remember one thing about this column next time you go to the movies, please forget “The Alamo.”