Rating: 
Summary: Adeventurous
Review: This is a family movie thats adventurous. A must have for the dvd
or video library.
Rating: 
Summary: William Wallace's long-lost grandson?
Review: I have a feeling that Mel Gibson was hoping to recreate his Oscar-winning experience that he had with "Braveheart" when he agreed to act in "The Patriot." Either that or he *really* has it in for England.Unfortunately, he didn't quite hit the mark. "The Patriot" is a good movie. There's lots of blood, guts, gore, and swearing (for the men) along with a sweet story of the love a father has for his children (for the women). But it's not "Braveheart." Although I did start to wonder in a couple of scenes - Mel Gibson, atop a horse, waving an American flag... I expected him to shout out "Sons of Scotland!" or the repeated shots shown in the previews of Mel Gibson running towards the camera, grimacing. Perhaps this character is some descendant of William Wallace! But that aside, this movie *is* worth watching - on video. I thank my lucky stars I didn't waste the money to see it on the screen. There's just a certain something lacking from this movie... a certain spark. And for some reason, I found the war scenes more disturbing than I did in "Braveheart." Maybe I'm just getting squeamish in my old age. "The Patriot's" saving grace is Heath Ledger, who is, I'm sure, going to become the new Mel Gibson. Or maybe he'll even rise above that. Heath is an incredible actor with a great grasp of depth and emotion. And he's not all that bad to look at, either. I loved him "Ten Things I Hate About You," and I loved him in this movie. Go out and rent "The Patriot," if only for: 1. Heath Ledger's acting, 2. Mel Gibson's crying (makes you want to cuddle him, doesn't it?), and 3. warm and fuzzy nostalgic "Braveheart" memories. Oh yeah, and England gets her butt kicked.
Rating: 
Summary: Fact or Fiction
Review: I first saw this movie last year. After reading all the reviews it seems that a lot of people liked it and few people hated it. ... Lets get something strait; it's a MOVIE, that's all! Made for entertainment purposes only! Yes it makes the English look evil, and the Americans look like they are the best!! Once again it's a movie! Nothing about this movie is real except for the battle for independence itself. The story is fake the characters of fake and most of the battles were either made up or altered from how they really occurred. Why did they change things you ask, because they were making a film for entertainment purposes, not a film to serve as a history lesson. And if I hear another crack about how come they could not find an "American" actor to play the lead, they did. Mel Gibson was born in NY State and moved with his family to Australia when he was a boy. However, I guess you can tell by now that I enjoyed this film. The story was well written, the cinematography was terrific, the special effects were wonderful, and once again John Williams composed another masterpiece. To those of you that did not like it because it was not historically correct, remember it is a fictional story. Keep that in mind and watch it again with the only intention to being entertained for 165 minutes, it may, or may not change you opinion.
Rating: 
Summary: What could have been
Review: There is a school of thought which maintains that historical accuracy in popular films is not, and need not be a priority. I'm not quite sure why this is so, or what the rational for it is, but as a teacher of history at the elementary and secondary level I find this unfortunate. The Patriot is a prime example. The part of the Revolutionary War which was fought in the Carolinas was fraught with dramas which were quite the equal of, and mostly superior to anything in this movie, and yet were passed over in The Patriot, or so distorted that any recognition of their historical base is problematic (a problem with almost every movie ever made about this remarkable war going all the way back to the '40's). If Hollywood is looking for drama, why not use what is already there instead of consistently pandering to their restricted view of what an American audience will pay to see.
It seems to me, for example, that if the idea of revenge should be key, any half-way decent scripwriter could take the real character of the British cavalry commander, Banastre "Bloody" Tarlton (for whom "Tavington" is a mighty weak substitution), whose slaughter of American militia at The Waxhaws was well revenged by Dan Morgan's combined American force at the Cowpens (which battle the movie oddly and crazily combines with the later British Phyrrhic victory at Guilford Court House). Or perhaps the neighbor-against-neighbor nature of much of the fighting in the south (whose fraternal violence was hinted at but "left hanging" by the strung up corpses seen briefly in the movie) could be hightlighted by a movie about the depradations of Patrick Fergeson's Tory force and its destruction by the "Overmountain Men" at King's Mountain.
It simply pains me that the real drama of American history, which could entertain as well or better than anything Hollywood has so far made about the war that led to our nationhood is so consistently and blatantly ignored by a media whose capacity depicting such things is full of potential.
The Patriot tugs at every conventional heartstring, and its effects are extraordinary. What it could have been, and still maintain it's box office potential is the worst part of this pale costume drama
Rating:
Summary: Reasonably intelligent
Review: I thought this was a reasonably intelligent movie, despite the reviewers claims that it wallows in cliches and violence. It is the story of a man's efforts, though embarrassed by his brave though violent behavior during the French and Indian War, to raise 7 children decently, despite the recent death of his wife. Quite reluctantly, though with a vengeance after the murder of his son by the British,Benjamin Martin becomes a patriot. We see him fighting with the militia ("farmers with pitchforks") as well as, in the end, with conventional troops in the open field.
The most compelling characters in the film other than Martin, though there are many from which to choose, are the evil British Col. Tavington, a ruthless sadist and perpetrator of a number of violent acts which are shown in full detail, and Gen. Cornwallis, a more gentle soul who does not approve of Tavington's brutal tactics but who eventually acquiesces to them, having been humiliated by "the ghost", as Martin is known to the British. The film is visually elegant and if one can tolerate the violence, which is extensive, reasonably informative.
Rating:
Summary: A very stirring look at the Revolutionary War!
Review: Mel Gibson of course is at his best in this film. His love of children is very evident. While by no means an accurate depiction of historical events, this film does give you the feel and look of the war. One of the most impressive scenes in the movie for me was very early in the movie, when Mel Gibson walks out on the porch and the war is right there, live and in action in your back yard. Despite what the critics might say, the film does an excellent job in showing that the Revolutionary War was in everybody's back yard. All of the actors did an excellent job to include Jason Isaac's, playing Colonel Tavington. He rather seemed to be enjoying himself in the role. Overall, an excellent movie and well worth the money for the DVD and time spent to watch it.
Rating:
Summary: Highly Under Rated!
Review: First of all let me say that this movie is a masterpiece. It is one of the best films I have ever seen. ... It simply tells of one man's (Colonel Tavington) brutal war tactics in colonial times and the only reason they tell of his brutalness is to bring the plot together perfectly. This film has terrific action and also very emotional parts. If there is any movie that shows the true brutality of war (on both sides) it would be this one. This is no doubt a film which you and your wife can enjoy together. Once again I highly recommend this film to all.
Rating:
Summary: Stirring
Review: I do not have a single favorite movie, there are far too many wonderful movies out there, but if I did this very well may be it. The costumes are excellent. They are done beautifully and, according to the bonus materials, with a high value placed on authenticity. The movie is shot in picturesque locales and with great camera work. If you didn't see this movie on the big screen then you missed out. Probably the best part of the movie though is the wonderful dynamic between Heath Ledger and Mel Gibson. The two work very well together. There are many good performances to compliment those two, in fact there is not a weak link in the movie. A must see moment is when Gibson's youngest daughter talks to her father the first time. I am an unemotional person, but that scene made me cry. In fact I got teary-eyed several times in this movie. The only time that has ever happened in my life.
Rating:
Summary: They can take our lives but....wait a minute
Review: Haven't I seen this somewhere before?
Oh I remember it was called Braveheart!!! Some very good action sequences and good computer graphics make up for a lot. It gets bogged down in a sense of modern day morality that I feel is just not nessicary. Slavery was a terrible thing however there are certain things that just didn't cut it. A. Out of all the planters on the Santee Mel is the only owner that has freed slaves B. By the end of the film Ben's kids are their own cousins C. The battle of Cowpens was a minor affair and nowhere near as grand as it was protrayed if they were going to try to reinact a battle it should have been the Battle of Kings Moutain. Now let me say that it isn't a wast of time if you just want to have fun, but it isn't history. I beg you to remember that this movie is not history when you are watching it.
Rating: 
Summary: blech!
Review: when i walked out of the theater i was actually angry that i wasted my life watching this mindless garbage. absolutely hitorically innacurate!!...just ooooooozing with this 'god bless america', 'mel gibson the ulimate hero' story and imagery. everything in this movie was just one giant cliche..no kidding!..first of all they made the british out to be these absolutely bloodthirsty monsters :cramming innocent civillans in churches and burning them alive. i forgot that british dodnt have any feelings whatsoever! thank you "the patriot" for reminding me. oh, and i also love how mel gibson just so happens to be the only guy in the movie who doesnt own slaves....not only is he the man to singlehandedly take down the british..he also is the only one to understand the plight of his fellow african americans....blech..gimme a break! my favorite part though was in the end when he actually battles and impales the evil british general with an american flag...yes, he actually battles the bad guy with an american flag......all the while this death and destruction on the battle field is going on and there this the most uplifting and 'patriotic' music blaring. there are hundreds of british being slaughtered and yet there is no indication that (either through music or action) there is all this unecesary waste of life.
and then his relationship with his family was just so mind-numbingly wholesome and unrealistic that i almost gagged. the cheesiness volume in this movie was set to 11 and there is no message here except that "mel gibson can sure kick some tail!" anyone with a brain should avoid this movie at all costs.
| 
