Rating: 
Summary: I loved this movie!!!
Review: This movie is truly a work of art. I really do like war movies with lots of blood, but this was by far the best. The music was awesome, the characters were very believable and it had a good story line. The screenplay was exceptional as well. Mel Gibson could play his character (Benjamin Martin) very well. If I could only say one thing that I liked about this movie, it would be everything. I am a Patriot heart and soul, and this movie is a delight to the heart and soul of a Patriot. I really loved this film. (duh. If you can't tell by now, well where have you been?!) Oh, yeah, Heath Ledger was AWESOME!!! So was Jason Issacs. If I spell this wrong and it bugs you, sorry. Isscas made his character very believable, though. The movie starts in South Carolina in the 1770's, and Benjamin Martin (Gibson) is very firm in his beliefs about the war. He vows not to fight, but is the forced to when his son, Gabriel (Heath Ledger) runs off and joins the army. Enough of me raving on and on about my favorite movie that I've seen only about 13 times. I'll be quiet now. Bye.
Rating: 
Summary: dismally rewritten history for an actor who plays one role
Review: When this movie was first in preproduction, I was very excited, hoping that we would at last see a revolutionary war movie that would elevate this most fascinating period of our history to the status that it deserved. Being quite familiar with the characters of Francis Marion and Banastre Tarleton, I was looking forward to seeing them drawn relistically on screen. When the character names were changed, I knew what was coming, and I wasn't disappointed.Mel Gibson only plays one role anymore -- Mr. Nice Guy who gets p-ed off and goes on a killing rampage. Marion was flattened out. The question of his slaveowning was darted around in an extremely unrealistic fashion to keep the story as morally unambiguous as possible, and Tarleton/Tavington, war criminal though he was indeed, was flattened out into a cartoon. (Jason Isaacs at least has the advantage of actually being a capable and interesting actor, which Gibson hasn't been since "Gallipoli.") If you want to nurture a fascination for the progress of the Revolutionary War in the southern states, or if you are already an amateur enthusiast of that period of time, just stick to the books and give this movie a wide miss. The real story is far more textured and exciting than anything that Hollywood would ever manufacture.
Rating: 
Summary: A good rendition of an old, tired theme
Review: Yes, this is the typical, worn out action movie theme: Retired vicious war hero has nice family, own house, lives peaceful life. Mean bad-guy type shows up and (pick one) kills wife / kills girlfriend / kills dog / blows up house / blows up truck / kidnaps child / doublecrosses / all of the above. Retired vicious war hero comes out of retirement and Gits 'Em. This describes about 95% of the movies in the "Action" section of any rental store. The good news is just because a formula is overused doesn't mean it can't be done better, and this movie does it well. It's also nice that it's set in the time of the American Revolution, which is quite rare for movies. So, very good movie, just an old, tired theme. I considered it to be worth a purchase.
Rating: 
Summary: Mediocre
Review: Simply put, the film isn't terribly good. Gibson can act when he needs to but not it this 2 hour effort.
Rating:
Summary: Forgivaaniss Pleesss.....
Review: This film is terrible....
The Film
The Acting was Poor We are talking Charles Bronson in Death Wishh 3 standard here.Especially that ... little boy!
The Battle scenes were good except for when Mel was killing people with the American flag,that part was sickening.... The music was below average and SHOULD have been better.Overall it was a pretty bad film.
I think the way they handled the Slavery issue was bad,even for Hollywood standards ... according to this film the British are the bad guys when it comes to slavery.I'd like to end it with this question.
What happened to all the Scottish soldiers that fought for the Briish army in the war of 1776???
Rating:
Summary: So It's Not Perfect...Who Cares?
Review: This is one of my favorite historical action/adventure flicks of all time! Sure, if you're a historian, you'll probably pick up some minor details that are off, but aren't most historical action flicks innacuracte in some way? (As long as the basic look is right, then I'm happy!) It's got revenge, it's got a recluctant, guilt ridden hero, it's got a great tomahowk & knife versus (several) bayonets fight (my favorite scene, 'cause it looks like Mel Gibson is doing a frontier colonial American's version of martial-arts!), a pretty love interest who's nice, lovable, & not much else, a ruthless villain, & real-life historical figures interacting with the fictional leads. And it's got a (not so sublte) propaganda message, mixed in mix modern-day politically correct revisionist history. (Slavery is addressed.) Are the dialogue, characters & situations cliches? You bet! But it's an action movie, so that's what we want! (I especially laughed at the fact that all the British were snobs! Sure, it's a stereo-type, but it's funny!) If only high-school history class was this exciting! Buy it!
Rating:
Summary: Griping and powerful!
Review: To be truthful with everyone, I really didn't want to watch this movie. It was 'forced' on me...but am I ever glad it was! I don't really care for explicit violence, this move was very gory to say the least, but in the grand overall view of this film, all I have is praise for it. The fight for this country 'was' bloody...wars always are. This movie smacks you in the face with that fact. But, it was also beautiful, Gibson, plays the loving, widowed, father of seven children. His sins from the French and Indian was haunt him. Now, all he wishes for is peace, but soon finds that impossible when the American Revolution is, literally, fought in his front yard. I was on the edge of my seat through the entire 165 minutes of this griping and powerful film. The acting is super, the scenes or breathtaking, the DVD overall is wonderful with great Special Features. Of course, I had to run out and buy my own copy after watching it. I have to say, its Well worth the ... I spent on it! I am one happy shopper! I cried...I got gooseflesh...I got angry and I got stunned. I highly recommend this film, but must stress that it is graphic in violence, but there is a beauty to this film that overpowers that.
Rating:
Summary: Great
Review: First of all let me say that this movie is a masterpiece. It is one of the best films I have ever seen.The costume are great and so is the battle scene ... 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). This film is not historic accurate howerver, thats why I only give 4 stars.
Rating:
Summary: Could have been so much more
Review: This movie could have been an all-time classic, but sadly had 2 major factors working against it:
1)They absolutely HAD to make it a black-and-white issue, with Americans=good, British=evil, even going so far as to pretend that African Americans in the Deep South in the 18th Century were free men.
2)Mel Gibson reaffirms my belief that he should rather stick to movies like Lethal Weapon, where he doesn't really have to act.
See, the costumes, the battlescenes, the editing, the performances from the supporting cast are all A-grade stuff, and everyone involved there should be applauded, but the whole thing falls flat with Gibson's wooden acting, and the ludicrous attempts at portraying the social values of the period.
One other thing that really did it for me was the scene where the middle-aged farmer and his two small boys wiped out an entire regiment of the Royal Army. If that was the case, why did men like John Adams or George Washington even bother? They should have just sent Mel Gibson in, armed with a wooden stick and a mean sneer, and the Redcoats wouldn't have stood a chance.
Oh yeah, one last thing, the French Revolution happened AFTER the American War Of Independence. The French forces were King Louis' troops and not the men of 1789.
In short, I would really be interested if Hollywood were to remake this movie with a better lead actor, and less revisionist nonsense. Still, you can't win 'em all.
Rating: 
Summary: Watch it for Mel and the bloody battle scenes.
Review: Without the powerful and emotional presence of Mel Gibson, The Patriot wouldn't be too far off from the likes of Hugh Hudson's Revolution, possibly the worst big studio film in existence. Okay, perhaps that's an exaggeration, but you probably get the idea just how crucial Gibson is to The Patriot's success. All the flaws that plague the film would have been less bearable without him. And believe me, there's actually a lot wrong with this film. First off, the war cliches and sappy subplots almost sink this below mediocity. Whether it's the daughter who won't talk to her father or the slave who has to fight off racism and desires to prove himself in battle, little of this drama ever rings true and serves only to bulk up the film's running time. I probably don't need to mention that said slave is going to save the same racist's life in the heat of combat. Funny how this similar situation was criticized by almost every critic in John Woo's Windtalkers, but only mentioned once in a while with this film. Not too much attention is paid to history, with the issue of slavery a bit overlooked and the portrayal of British redcoats rather cartoonish. The one Brit who actually displays genuine integrity is killed off rather quickly, and by the same people he sympathized with, no less! The film is mostly predictable, with only one surprise; the outcome is more or less extremely obvious. The colonial militia, who we're supposed to be cheering on, is a raggedy bunch, all of them filthy and unlikeable with maybe the exception of Rene Auberjonois as the gun-toting reverend. But for all these faults, The Patriot remains a rather enjoyable diversion (albeit, a very lengthy one; 165 minutes!), thanks mostly to Mel Gibson's powerful portrayal of a man sickened by war but knowing no other option but to fight. The script occasionally hampers his ability to truly give us an original character, but Gibson plays the part with charisma and palpable emotion, making up for whatever Robert Rodat's screenplay may lack. The rest of the cast is really quite good, with probably Jason Isaacs standing out the most as the evil British dragoon. I was, however, much less impressed with Heath Ledger. Despite all the acclaim that's been harped on this young actor, I found his performance flat and incapable of any other expression other than stone-faced disobedience. As a matter of fact, that's all his character really does, get into rash decisions that put lives at risk. Director Roland Emmerich crafts two thrilling action sequences, a one vs. twenty ambush with horrific and bloody results, and a large-scale, ten-minute battle between the British and the Revolutionary army. Emmerich may have no idea how to give us good drama, but he knows how to deliver an exciting action scene. John Williams patriotic score works during these moments, making for a rousing experience, but is less successful off the battlefield, sometimes bordering on corny and schmaltzy. Caleb Deschanel's cinematography is beautiful, capturing the elegance of the landscape. Along with Gibson's performance, it's probably the most consistently positive thing the movie has going for it. The Patriot is obviously a summer popcorn flick, working mostly on the basis of pure entertainment value. It's obvious Emmerich and Rodat were aiming for further depth, but alas, it's just not there. You need something more original and complex to accomplish such a task. But I shouldn't complain too much. After all, almost every revolutionary war film ever made has been [junk], so it's nice to get a pretty decent one that can entertain, even if it's ultimately never as good as it should have been. Gibson's crafted and starred in far superior war epics (Braveheart, We Were Soldiers), but The Patriot shows more than ever just how vital and damn good his acting skills are, if only because the film's middling script proves he's one of the few A-list actors who can carry a film on the weight of his shoulders alone.
|
