Rating: 
Summary: Cliche, cliche, cliche
Review: Five minutes into the first time I watched this film I already knew the plot, the story, all the characters, and the ending. It's cliche piled on top of cliche, on top of other cliches that are seen in every action movie since the dawn of time. The only original thing about this movie is the setting. It's beautifully filmed, and Mel Gibson does a great job as the lead character, but perhaps they should have attempted to avoid the same cliches that show up in every movie. Suffice to say, I was very unimpressed by this film, and completely underwhelmed by everything about it. It's not even good enough to be called a rip-off.
Rating: 
Summary: As they say in South Carolina, fair to middlin'
Review: This picture has more in common with DIE HARD than genuine American history. To be sure, there are moments when something approaching genuine history shines through, despite the writer's best efforts to the contrary. But by and large THE PATRIOT leaves us unmolested by fact. It's almost an outrage that the writer should've chosen to create as his hero an amalgamation of several real figures, instead of just choosing one. Apart from being more interesting than the lackluster Mr. Martin, someone like Francis Marion would have grounded the writer in fact. As it is, THE PATRIOT wallows in its own excess. You know the drill: improbable escapes from point-blank shooting, clever repartee with bloodthirsty enemies, a man of peace called back for one last mission of revenge. It's so hackneyed, the script could've been phoned in. Unfortunately, this film looks great. The producers try, and largely succeed, to imbue the picture with an authentic historic look. The costumer, cinematographer and special effects guys, in particular, deserve Oscars ® for their efforts. The problem is they've created a piece of total fabrication that some kids are no doubt going to grow up thinking is true. And it's not. It just LOOKS fabulously real. To be fair, THE PATRIOT gives a general sense of truth. It did happen that the South Carolina militia was vital to the success of the Continentals in the Revolutionary War. Cornwallis was indeed the fashion plate and gentleman of society that is portrayed here. And there was reluctance on the part of a lot of the American aristocracy to enter the war. But where other historical fiction manages to successfully create fictional heroes and put them in historically accurate settings, THE PATRIOT simply misses the mark. Apart from being bad history, it's just bad drama. Both villain and hero are more caricature than character. Worse, the resolution of the personal conflict between them is hopelessly contrived. Having said all this, it's not that you won't have a good time with this movie. It's a watchable film. You might even come out with a visual understanding of why the French were strategically important to the final battle of the war, or what it felt like to be in Revolutionary combat. You'll definitely exit with a sense of the importance of the Carolinian part of the war. But I guarantee you that when the credits run, you'll immediately say that the film could've been much, much better. [DVD NOTES: Frankly, you learn more about the history of the times watching the extra features than watching the movie itself. The "True Patriots" vignette is particularly rewarding, as it gives a sense of the efforts taken by everyone but the writer to imbue the movie with a sense of authenticity. The director/producer commentary is worth hearing, but I found it hard to listen to at times. I found Director Roland Emmerich's accent very off-putting, as he peppers his speech with an unbelievable number of "you know"s and "kind of"s and "like"s. Seriously, for every five words he says, only one conveys actual meaning. It's like listening to Hans and Franz, from SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE . . . for two hours. Plus most of what he talks about, curiously, is history, not filmmaking. It's producer Dean Devlin who gives the most insight into the actual filmmaking process. It's still worth listening to, of course, but it doesn't rank among the best commentaries ever included on a DVD.]
Rating:
Summary: Predicatable Star Vehicle: Could have been so much better
Review: Occasionally pretty, but drasticaly oversimplified and suffering from the "impact group" ending. The British are venal and one dimensional, the Americans scarcely more interesting. The very real conflict faced by loyalist americans was effectivelly ignored, as was the fact that less than 15 percent of the population was political at all. Not a bad rental but probably not woth buying.
Rating: 
Summary: Misnamed Movie, but still Fun to Watch.
Review: "The Patriot" is the story of a family during the American Revolution. One man, the Patriot, has to care for seven children in the midst of this war. He does not want to fight in this War. He, of course, is Mel Gibson. As the war progesses, however, he finds himself drawn into the conflict to protect his family. That's is why, in my view, this movie is misnamed. The hero did not fight for America, he fought for his family. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but the title may mislead you when you see the film. For me, this is important. I like all different kinds of movies. But, when I want to see a "Patriotic movie", it can be disappointing if it is about something else. With that caveat, the movie is well done. It is not as good or as inspirational as "Braveheart", but it far better then most of the films out there. Indeed, if you saw Braveheart, don't expect that kind of film here. The Patriot, is a family/revenge story, not a story about patriotism in a war.
Rating:
Summary: better than Godzilla
Review: this is a step in the right direction for director ronald emmerich after Godzilla, but still not really that good. i like mel gibon's acting though, he tried his best to depict the character torn between taking care of his family and staying away from war. i didn't see the reason to kill so many of the main characters, and the british also seemed rather one-dimensional. emmerich should have taken the Dances with wolves approach and show the bad qualities of both sides as well as the good. overall it was a decent film.
Rating: 
Summary: Mel Gibson@The Peak of His Career!!
Review: For all the people who gave Mel Gibson's epic film, "The Patriot", you should be ashamed of yourselves. Why? This film is the best film that Mel Gibson has made since "Braveheart". Even though this film is so much similar to "Braveheart", it's still an exciting and thrilling adventure to be a part of. After all, Mel Gibson's performance carries this film; but I gotta admit that Heath Ledger was also great. Mel Gibson will remain at the top of my list as the greatest actor of all time.
Rating:
Summary: What were they fighting about?
Review: Can't recommend this movie. They never make it clear what the fighting is about. The director never really figures out whether he is making an action movie or a chick flick. So he tries to do both and does neither well. The first 45 minutes or so are at least somewhat interesting. But after that the fun is over. The British are portrayed as caricatures. The reasons for fighting are never really explained, beyond the fact that one British officer is a mean, nasty fellow. The best line in the movie, where Gibson states that he sees no reason to prefer 3000 tyrants one mile away to one tyrant 3000 miles away is wonderful. But I am sure the point is lost on 99% of the audience. Yes, some suggest that we have to ignore the historical failures of this film. Fine. But simply as a film this movie was not very good. Rather typical of all Roland Emmerich films. BAD
Rating:
Summary: A Spark of Patriotism but Overblown
Review: After a month's begging I permited my sons to rent the video and spend an evening watching it. I was impressed with one point that is lacking in most modern movies - the concept of "patriotism". We expected the gore and violence (being a movie about war), and thought they gave a good depiction of the suffering our forefathers endured to give birth to this nation. So many of our young people have no idea of what true freedom is, let alone how we got it in this nation. Now for the down side: 1. The Church Scenes As a student of history, especially religious history, I find the doctrine taught in the church in the movie to be foreign to the Southern Protestantism that was prevelant in South Carolina during the War for Independence. Gabriel was told upon entering the church that the congregation was "praying for the souls" of the three men hanging outside. The Protestants of that time wouldn't dream of such a thing. It was for the most part a very weak Protestantism, but not to the point of adopting the practice of praying for the dead. 2. The depiction of the British The Brits could at times be a nasty bunch, but the depiction of Tarlton (the obvious historic figure who was the bad guy in the movie) was way overblown. Sure, he was nasty, but not the Freddy Kruger he was portrayed as in the film. In fact, one of the main reasons we won the war was due to the fact that so many Brits, even in Parliament, openly supported the American cause. Cornwallis's attitude in the movie is probably closer to the truth than most - that the colonists were "our brethren" and that normal relations would have to be reestablished after the war. All in all, it was a good time, but the History Channel is more interesting to those who want the down to earth truth.
Rating:
Summary: Jeez lighten up !!
Review: I agree with one of the earlier, most recent reviews, stop nit-picking the thing to death; egads all these gripes and comparisons regarding the plot pace, the scenery, the battle scenes, etc. ad nauseuum, and just enjoy the movie. No it wasn't perfect but it kept me on the edge of my seat and held my interest. The vision and sound of Benjamin Martin using his tomahawk on the English soldier while his 3 sons watched will stay with me for a good long time and his final battle with the murderer of his 2 eldest sons had me rooting him along at the top of my voice.
Rating:
Summary: The definitive film on the American Revolution
Review: Could this film have any more? It gives the human drama that was America's fight for independence. A father's determination to keep his family together. All set to the tune of the American Revolution. By incorporating different real person's into the settings, it adds an air of reality that is awe inspiring. It's length (3 hours) only adds to the excitement. Given the concept that the actual war lasted 5 years it gives it the chance to cover the majority of it. Our failures and successes as well as the eventual victory over the oppressive English. Watch this film with the family. The violence is graphic, but the language is suitable for the entire family. And it's worth the time.
| 
