Rating: 
Summary: Loved it!
Review: Seems people either loved or hated this movie. Put me in the "loved it" category. I too saw several historical inaccuracies: the cannons on the battlefield being to large and heavy to have been moved to their location, the treatment of the slaves, etc. etc. I viewed the film has a good piece of historical fiction with more Hollywood then History.I enjoyed Mel Gibson's character and thought he acted superbly. I thought the battle scenes were realistic while not always being historically acurate.
Rating: 
Summary: DVD quality great, movie mediocre.
Review: There are about four very fine scenes in this movie, but I'm not sure it's worth sitting through the whole film to see them. The revenge plot is insubstantial at best. As for historical accuracy, the real shocker is that advisors from the Smithsonian helped, and still it's full of errors. So much money was spent on this thing, why not earnestly try for some realism other than in costumes? It's a strange world we live in.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent, but could have been even more so.
Review: When I first learned about the Revolutionary War in middle school, the history textbooks romantisized it and presented this conflict as a glorious fight for freedom on a sunny battlefield. But Revolutionary War is a WAR, and wars are horrible and atrocious; they not only take place on battlefields, but in people's homes, in people's hearts. War is as much a psychological conflict as it is a physical one. And this film shows it. Martin, the main character played by Gibson, is not a spotless hero, and this adds to the movie's realism. He is a loving parent yet a merciless and cruel fighter. He bitterly opposes this war yet is eventually drawn into it to settle a personal score. He is not a cliche of a noble warrior who fights for the great cause, but a down-to-earth, flesh-and-blood man motivated by his own goals. The film's only failure lies in Tavington, the antagonist - he is a typical comic-book villain with not a single redeeming quality. The realism that rules the screen in Martin's scenes suddenly dies each time Tavington appears. Tavington represents the ugliness of the war, the human brutality - but nothing more; he is too one-sided and lacks character depth. It would have helped the film a great deal if we could see in him the same inner struggles that we see in Martin. But despite of its shortcomings, this movie is definitely worthy of being seen- the battle scenes are stirring, the music score by John Williams is passionate and vehement, and the acting by Mel Gibson is impeccable.
Rating:
Summary: Could Have Been Better
Review: Yes, there is a remarkable resemblence to Braveheart, which was a better movie, but this film wasn't quite as bad as other reviews would show. Mel Gibson plays Benjamin Martin, a war hero of the Wilderness campaign, now fighting within himself on whether to join his fellow Americans in the Revolutionary War. Gibson was alright in his acting ability, although he often seemed to lack the focus he shows in other roles. The movie is quite long, so I would have expected a little better character development, but the film also seemed to lack this. It was hard to feel for Gibson's fellow militia partners, as the viewer really didn't get a chance to know them. The battle scenes were fantastic though. A lot of care and detail went into making the scenery look realistic. The wardrobe seemed to have a nice authentic feel to it as well. Overall, the film was simply okay. It could have definately been better, but it certainly could have been worse. Anyone looking for a richly developed plot will be disappointed, as the storyline is still a little fuzzy to me now. However, The Partiot is worth taking a look at so you can form your own opinion.
Rating:
Summary: THE MUST SEE FLIM OF THE YEAR ALONG WITH GLADIATOR
Review: I was shocked and supprised to see such a wonder epic from Emmrich the guy who directed godzila. Mel Gibson is great as Ben Martin great camra work from Emmrich wonderfully shot battle sences This should sweep the oscars. BUY NOW!!!!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful!!
Review: I started off watching this picture simply because I like Mel Gibson. Now, after watching it about ten times, I have to say this is a wonderful film. Although I love all types of history, I must admit that our Revolutionary War never held my interest. However, I have become very interested in learning more about this time in our history. The scene where Benjamin Martin rejoins his friends carrying the flag his son had carried was so very moving. I've always considered myself patriotic, but this scene had me cheering "Huzzah" along with everyone else. General Lord Cornwallis couldn't understand how farmers and peasants could win a war. I understand. We were fighting for our country and ourselves. And we would do it again.
Rating:
Summary: This has more bullets for your buck!
Review: Let me just say I've never seen Braveheart so I won't be comparing them. This movie is excellent on it's own. The sets and costumes are perfect and the characters are rich and varied. I especially enjoyed Heath Ledger as Mel Gibson's eldest son. The battles were well done and so were the debates between those who supported or rejected the revolution. Excellent moral questions are raised snd discussed. Then more people get killed. It has fun for the whole family!
Rating: 
Summary: Simplistic story; average battle scenes
Review: The Patriot was touted/reviled (depending on who you asked) as being "Braveheart" for the American Revolution. There are similarities (vengeance against the English being the main one) but the description really doesn't fit that well. This movie suffers from a pretty weak story. Farmer refuses to go to war; farmer's family is threatened and house burned down by the evil English; farmer returns to his soldier's roots. This story has been told a dozen times on film, and usually better. (If you want to see a vengeance story with greater appeal, look no further than Clint Eastwood's The Outlaw Josey Wales.) The battle scenes were touted as being the best part of the film but I found them uninspired and unoriginal. When watching Braveheart, you're really rooting for the Scots to whip the English curs. In The Patriot, I just felt sort of empty. As an American you root for the colonials, but the whole jingoistic feel to the movie keeps you from really caring. The English are just SO evil they become caricatures instead of realistic villains. They're mean just for the sake of being mean. Perhaps if the film were a little more historically accurate? Mel Gibson's character, Benjamin Martin, a widower with seven children, is intriguing, but not developed enough to make him that interesting. He's an aged warrior, slow to act, but once his fire is lit, watch out! As members of his family and his militia fall, we're meant to feel more enraged against the English tyrants. It's an attempt to manipulate the audience, but because of the lack of character depth, it's really hard to feel much of anything for the death of two-dimensional characters. I was disappointed in The Patriot. It doesn't live up to its billing and for the most part, it is a failed attempt to stir false patriotism. Better to watch Saving Private Ryan or Braveheart for great, savage battle scenes and greater character depth.
Rating:
Summary: Stop Analyzing It!
Review: I don't own the movie but I watched at the theatre, and I would like to say stop worrying about if it has historical Inaccuracies and just watch it for the action or to have a good time. It's a movie for crying out loud not a documentary on the revolutionary war. For those of you who like good action movies then I would highly recommend this movie. I would also like to say that I was insulted by the comment that only people with 2 digit I.Q.s would enjoy this movie. What makes you a master movie critic?
Rating:
Summary: Totally Awesome
Review: This is a very well produced movie with an excellent cast and wonderful action. If you liked "Braveheart" then you will love this.
| 
