Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

The Patriot (Patreon)

Published:
2026-08-08 12:00:12
Imported:
2026-08
Tags:

Content

Go to this site: Cinebingers.ca for the unedited versions of all our content.

👉 https://cinebingers.ca/wxSg9B8uF7 👈 for the full reaction where you do not need your own copy.

👉 https://cinebingers.ca/itYU7UcnO9 👈for the full reaction where you need your own copy.

If you are on a phone/tablet, hold down the link above and press "open in browser", or go straight to Cinebingers.ca on your browser app.

Files

The Patriot | Canadian First Time Watching | Movie Reaction | Movie Review | Movie Commentary

Full length/Unedited: https://www.patreon.com/Cinebinge https://www.instagram.com/cinebingechannel/ Merch: https://www.cinebinge.ca BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/cinebinge.bsky.social Simone & George are reacting to The Patriot for the first time! Canadians React! Subscribe | Like | Share | Comment Early Access & Full Reaction available on Patreon! #moviereaction #moviereview #thepatriot Instagram: @cinebingechannel

Comments

newhastings

bring back cinecringe for the one time… watch moonfall…

TheFool

Such a good movie! Happy to see your reaction!

dudewheresmycar

Yet another movie where Mel Gibson hates us English folk! 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 😁

Naj

Oof. I’m sorry they’ve done this to you guys.

Darren Harrison

I have avoided this movie for decades. From what I have heard, it's so historically inaccurate that it makes "Braveheart" look like a documentary.

theycallmekev

Thanks for answering my question! Yes Simone, it really is a serious question for us Disney renaissance fans haha beauty and the beast is my #1 as well! And George, I’m glad you gave me your favorite and least favorite. Turning Red is fantastic, but i honestly thought you were gonna say Soul as your top Pixar film lol

Jay Davis

Been looking forward to this one. BTW, my entire bingo card for this reaction watch is "Simone mentions '10 Things I Hate About You'."

Mastervodo

I would totally subscribe to Simone's OnlyLands.

Nabikon

he just wants his freedom!

OddThomas

(John Hannah) "Americans"

Jeff K.

I appreciate the fact that Jason Isaacs is just straight up playing Lucius Malfoy in this.

Jeff K.

By the way, George and Simone: fun fact about the guy Mel's character is *extremely* loosely based on, Francis "The Swamp Fox" Marion - his story was made into a TV miniseries by Disney, starring a pre-slapstick career Leslie Nielsen as the Swamp Fox.

Frank

I forgot to ask this during the Aladdin reaction, did they watch The Lion King on the channel and it got removed? Pretty sure George mentioned watching it. I doubt he saw it outside of the channel, but maybe he did 🤷‍♀️

Jeff K.

What are you talking about? You don't think a film that includes such unbelievably on-the-nose lines as, "Am I angry about taxation without representation? Why, yes, I am" is... not great? How dare you!

Jeff K.

Hell, Fargo could get away with its "based on a true story" claim more than this film.

newhastings

The little kid you recognized is Logan Lerman, you remember him as machine from fury

Andrew

For more on the French and Indian War check out Last of the Mohicans with Daniel Day Lewis.

newhastings

thank god banshees only lost by like 20 so theyd have to do it asap

UnlicensedOkie

A bullet that’s fired into the air eventually comes back down. People who fire guns into the air, particularly rifles or pistols, are beyond idiotic. You might be alright if it’s a shotgun because shot is less aerodynamic, but it’s still not advisable. Back in those days, they were able to just not load a projectile into the barrel, so when they shot into the air like that, they were just igniting the gunpowder and shooting it out. You get the bang and the flash without sending a projectile into the air.

Tinfoilnation

To answer your question George - shoot a gun straight up (or nearly so) and the bullet just falls down at terminal velocity, ie, about ~100-120mph. Enough to *REALLY* sting if it hits you on the noggin - maybe even enough to cut & draw blood - but nowhere near enough to kill anyone. It's basically a rock. If however you aim your weapon at an angle, and the bullet flies a ballistic arc? Then it's still travelling more than fast enough to be deadly upon impact.

Jeffrey Mitchell

Great intro. Loved every minute of it. Cults, blueberries, great stuff!

Jeff Smith

It’s just entertainment lol. Who cares about any accuracy. I watched it years ago purely with that in mind and enjoyed it.

Jeff K.

I forgot that Donal Logue was in this (the racist militia guy who kept giving the Black dude shit). If y’all ever want an excellent single season TV show that absolutely never should have been canceled (it had a generationally bad marketing campaign), highly recommend his show Terriers. It’s kind of a more grown up Veronica Mars. So good.

OddThomas

October Sky for more Chris Cooper. Payback for Mel Gibson. The Last Mimzy for Joely Richardson. The Ghost and the Darkness for Tom Wilkinson.

Matt88g

Did this movie just argue that slaves are happy and love their master?

Ashton Lewis

They were actually free men, working on that nice mans plantation, in South Carolina, in 1776... It all definitely adds up, trust me bro

Maiki

+1 Payback

Leigh P

My understanding is that muskets were so inaccurate, they had to stand in lines to get any result.

Nabikon

Joely Richardson was indeed in Event Horizon, as Starck

Jeff K.

And since Simone was talking about how good the score was here… holy shit is the Mohicans score incredible. “Promontory” will forever be on my playlist for when I go on runs.

Mike FromOz

Watching this just reminds me of how great "The Last of the Mohican's" is.

OddThomas

Looking forward to Glory. Another great film about the American Civil War to watch is Cold Mountain.

Brandon

Intro: I can't help but wonder what Simone would think of Terrence Malick's 'The New World', his adaptation of the Pocahontas story that sticks closer to history. Knowing what happened, and not the Disney-fied version makes it very hard for me to like that movie at all. I can't hold it against anybody who grew up on that movie, though. I think even the Malick version sanitizes it somewhat.

Jeff K.

That just reminded me that Mel was born and spent the early part of his life living in upstate New York, in the general vicinity of where some of Last of the Mohicans takes place (he was born and grew up in Peekskill, which is about three hours from one of the main locations in that book/film, Lake George/Fort William Henry, before moving to Australia). I'm dying for them to finally check out Last of the Mohicans. I think it's my favorite Michael Mann film, and has one of the greatest scores in movie history.

djKENTO

This film isn’t claiming to be a true story though. It’s fiction with a historical backdrop

djKENTO

That is exactly what happened.

djKENTO

When they’re firing into the air in this it’s just powder tho. They’re not fully loading for that.

thomas king

Great movie. U need to check out Ransom.

Jeff K.

Sure, but it's based on real people. Benjamin Martin is based on/inspired by Francis Marion, Tavington is based on/inspired by Banastare Tarleton, Villeneuve (the French dude) is based on/inspired by Lafayette, Cornwallis was obviously a very real person, etc. I think the movie is super entertaining, to be clear. It's absolutely one of those movies where, if I'm scrolling through channels and it's on, I'll watch it just about every time. But it's still kinda funny how wildly far it strays from actual history.

Jeff K.

I think I've only ever seen this addressed in one movie, ever (I believe it was The Mexican, with Brad Pitt and Julia Roberts, but I might be remembering wrong).

Tay Schumaker

Man am I over the mean spiritedness of people insulting things they don’t like. People have different tastes. They like different things. It’s fine. Things I don’t like regularly win polls on here. I don’t feel the need to go in and say it’s bad and people are dumb for liking it. Just let people enjoy things.

Arthur 'Two Sheds' Jackson

"Not very realistic" what did you expect from the director of Independence Day and Stargate?? 😂

Matt88g

Yes this 100% propaganda, the depiction of the treatment of black people at the time, the British all being scum, the American are all saints and never did anything wrong

Frank

Damn of course it is. Thanks for the heads up

Life in the cave of Garanoga

One of the many factors that contributed to us winning the war was the antiquated war tactics. In general the crown refused to alter proven tactics and adapt. Meanwhile colonial troops would use guerilla tactics, ignore old unspoken rules of war, and even had military brought in from other nations to train troops how to use small forces to disrupt and beat larger and better armed forces. In fact, the British viewed these tactics as evidence the colonies couldn't win the war saying it showed we were just a group of undisciplined rag tag fighters. As the war dragged on it slowly turned into the British making complaints about the tactics but never actually acknowledging it was one reason why they were losing or making any adjustments. It's a great example in history of an empire getting so used to just steamrolling in conquest that they refuse to admit they can lose. Pride before practice.

Michael Langille

@Simone - show us some of your garden pics!!

REDR58

Yes, many people think that Mel Gibson is Australian. He is not. He is an American.

Jay Davis

Yeah. I'm always surprised by people that just ascribe the same velocity on the way back down that the bullet had when it left the muzzle in their minds without really considering it. Common, I guess, if a bit annoying.

Sledge

While the film is entertaining but an inaccurate mess, I have a few notes if anyone cares to read, if not, all good. 😅 One thing I wanted to help bring light to a query made by you guys (that better folks have explained online at length) is that the reason musket fighting was stuck in being in close lines was because its about maximizing firepower with inaccurate weapons. Muskets were smooth bore, which was cheap to mass produce unlike more expensive more accurate rifled weapons. So it's cheaper to arm massive amounts of troops than make small rifle weapon squads. Just imagine line fighting as them trying to get the effect of a machine gun. Also, the marching was FAR less slow during actual battles, and the point was to get close enough to do maximum damage, fire too early, you miss most of your shots, fire too late, a quarter of your men were dead. Normally they were not waiting to fire but firing as soon as possible/most effectively. And usually they were not -that- close before firing There is a whole slew of video essays on this that I highly recommend if a deeper dive is interesting to you guys 😁 (Also, love your videos guys! Keep it up!)

REDR58

People absolutely have died from celebratory gunfire and the rounds striking them on the way down: https://www.annalsthoracicsurgery.org/article/S0003-4975(06)00831-9/fulltext “Bullets fired into the air during celebrations return at a speed fast enough to penetrate the skin and cause internal damage to other organs in the path of the migrating bullet. The bullet’s velocity required for skin penetration is between 148 and 197 feet per second. A velocity of less than 200 feet per second, which is easily obtained by a celebratory gunfire, is capable of fracturing bone and even causing intracranial penetration. Spent bullets have the capability of reaching up to 600 feet per second during their downfall, and thus they have the ability to inflict damage to multiple body cavities. The larger caliber bullets (ie, .45-caliber) reach a higher terminal velocity compared with the smaller caliber bullets (ie, .30-caliber), because of the proportion of their weight to their diameter. Terminal velocity is difficult to calculate with falling bullets because wind resistance and updrafts can cause a spent bullet to land miles away from the initially fired site. Celebratory gunshots perforating through and through injuries to the chest occur in less than 3% of total celebratory injuries. The documented morbidity and mortality for celebratory chest injuries is each 50%, which is similar to the 80% morbidity and 40% mortality rate of patients who have sustained head wounds from celebratory fire. Data show the 77% of reported celebratory firing results in injury to the head, 12% to the shoulder, 5% to the upper back, 2% to the posterior chest and neck, respectively, and 1% to the upper arm, leg, and foot each. Of the 2% of the bullets hitting their victims in the chest, only a fraction of those injure the heart.”

BC

Did you just watch The Fat Electrician video too? 🤣

Russell Massey

First, let me apologise for being British. The reason that closely formed lines of soldiers were used in battle through the American Civil War of the 1860s and into the Franco-Prussian war of the 1870s was mostly a matter of command control. If you scattered men so that they were dispersed you would not be able to easily command them to advance or drill as needed, and since muskets were incredibly inaccurate it was necessary to fire en masse and in close order in order to get shots on target. Rifles were better, and you could have skirmishers in open order with good training and good weapons, but these would be very vulnerable to cavalry attack.

jmundt33a

Yes, in this fictional version they were all free and fairly paid. Be skeptical but Gods and Generals actually sells all the Antebellum and Lost Cause myths.

Sledge

Who else wants to join me in posting a call for Last of the Mohicans again? 😆

Ari Ramirez

George: "There's a noise in the background" Simone: "Nuh uh" George: "TF YOU MEAN NUH UH"

REDR58

It’s not just that non-rifled muskets are less accurate than a rifled one (literally, “rifled” guns have spiraled grooves in the barrel imparting a spin to the round as it is fired, stabilizing it in flight). Firing from line formation was used to provide a large, relatively synchronized volume of fire. It also was used to boost morale and as psychological warfare to terrify the other side. Close line formation also helped to protect against Calvary charges. https://youtu.be/J-GybrfE42U?is=9ICmf0nz-t84ZTY7

Jeff K.

Trying to decide whether to yell GEOSTOOOOORM or FUCK THE MOON! FUCK THE MOON! FUCK THE MOON! right now. (IYKYK)

Jeff K.

Yep. One thing that this movie absolutely DOES get right is that the Colonists learned from their experience in the French and Indian War the ways that the indigenous tribes fought using ambushes and the element of surprise, and utilized those guerrilla tactics to their advantage.

Jeff K.

+1000 for October Sky. God, that's such a great movie, and it might be my favorite Chris Cooper performance, which is saying a lot because he's never anything but excellent.

OddThomas

I think you'd enjoy Roland Emmerich's Godzilla, it's very much a similar tone to Independence Day

OddThomas

Another great Jason Isaacs villain: Peter Pan (2003)

Tom Hess

Surprised to see so many negative comments here. I haven't watched The Patriot in nearly 20 years, but I have fond memories of it. The only thing I remember not liking about it is how they tried to inject civil war elements into it, even though the film takes place ~80 years before it. (paraphrasing) American - If we win the war against the British, we'll build a better world, free the slaves. Me - No you won't, mate. Not for a while XD But hey, it's not meant to be a documentary.

Jamie

Apology accepted. I'd like to also apologise to you for being British.

deskmerc

Missing from all this consideration is that they are firing black powder pistols, not cartridge, into the air...you don't have to load the ball to get the bang. A quarter or half charge without a ball, just a wad, is sufficient to make noise. You don't have to actually shoot a ball, and keeping the barrel vertical the whole time keeps it from pouring out.

CouchCheese

Peak American slopaganda. And it ain't even July 4th.

Twiska Brand

Why were you guys actually like the worst thing Adam Baldwin's character did was give up the family? Did you forget he was the one tasked with burning the church with everyone inside? He was conflicted but he was the one to throw the very first touch.

Spacedone

I don't think you're supposed to analyse what actually happens in this movie beyond 'America - Good, The British...EEEVILLLLL! BOO! HISS!" because if you try looking for any historical accuracy in what it depicts you'll just end up laughing your ass off at how bad a movie it is. This is basically Jason Isaacs' casting tape for playing Poppa Malfoy a few years later.

REDR58

Mass produced rifles (vs smooth bore muskets) did not appear until the 1840s, decades after the time of this movie’s setting.

blerbaberpaterb

i think you misunderstood them? they said that action alone made him a bad guy from that point onwards, at no point did they say that was the worst thing.

REDR58

Probably the best modern filmed rendition about the American Revolutionary War is “John Adams” (2008), the HBO miniseries, starring Paul Giamatti as Adams.

Twiska Brand

Simone said she didn't wish death on him, but wanted to see him get some comupence. Then they went on to discuss him giving them up but made no mention of the church burning. So it sounded to me like that was the only thing they took exception to.

Twiska Brand

My issue is the depiction of the British. Sure the British committed some war crimes in reality but so did the rebels. And even in this film, they fucked over a prisoner exchange and were fighting without wearing uniforms, so they would lose POW rights. I get that the film is more focused on the fictional family dynamics, so that is fine, and it's a good story, well acted and chorographed, but I wish they film wasn't so propagandised.

blerbaberpaterb

she says that about every one, Simone just isnt that blood thirsty in general, also not mentioning something doenst automatically mean they see it as not terrible... its like you dont understand how conversations work and think everything they talk about must be compared to everything thats ever happened in the movie, rather than just whereever a conversation leads... i notice you do this quite often actually in nearly every post. you find a thing they say or dont say, or didnt say 100% entirely completely and cover every corner and variable and you just run with it, aggressively too. like theres 10 things and they talk about 7 of them so there for it must mean they dont care about the other 3 or is in fact in support of it.

Twiska Brand

I'm not saying they don't think it was terrible. I'm saying they literally forgot about it. Looks to me like they have it in their minds that it was Jason Issac's character who threw the first touch. Also, I found your last comment kind of rude. And lastly, Simone can *definitely* be bloodthirsty. I'm not saying there is anything bad with that, but there has been plenty of times she was blood thirsty and wishing death on a character.

blerbaberpaterb

and i find you to be pretty rude every time your comment pops up taking a single thing either of them said in casualness and turn it into an accusation 🤷🏽‍♂️i should also mention i dont expect you to admit to it or even have any sort of self reflection on why you may come across that way, if you had that capability you wouldnt be doing it in the first place and become defensive immediately. so im really saying all this to let S&G know that its fine for them to not mention every aspect of everything in every sentence they say in the fear of "leaving things out = dont care" in the eyes of people like you.

Twiska Brand

That really made me sad. I'm gonna go now.

Jaaahn

...honestly both of you are very aggressive in the comments...one is aggressive towards the hosts and the other towards other commenters....

Twiska Brand

But I'm not trying to be aggressive to them. They are my favourite people on the internet.

Cisko

Such an amazing period film and so well put together. I won't throw shade on enjoying the Patriot, but Last of the Mohicans is far superior.

Ashton Lewis

Oh yeah I absolutely love this film haha, you do just have to suspend disbelief a bit. If you can do that, you're in for a treat.

Jobbe Smit

Since George asked for engagement, lets talk about the development of guns and it's integration into (modern) warfare. The tactical choice of colorful uniforms was actually a result of the massive amounts of smoke early black powder weapons produced. After a while you're effectively fighting in heavy fog so the bright uniforms stand out a little. Yes it was tactically superior on an individual level to take cover but that would scatter the troops making it nearly impossible to centrally command them. Europeans at the time still firmly believed the common man needed an officer of noble blood to lead them. For that he needed to be able to see and hear them. Hence close knit formations in colorful uniforms. An additional benefit was volume of fire. Early non rifled firearms were quite inaccurate and lost their lethality quickly over distance. Hence we have stories of Alaskan natives stopping Russian musket fire with wooden armor. If you have a large block of men all fire at once you both get a wall of lead and a massive explosion of violence, which is much more effective at breaking enemy morale than a constant trickle of shots. Native Americans very quickly realized the potential of skirmished fighters in cover, they already did that with bows. One could argue that infantry tactics of the Eastern Woodland tribes were more advanced than European tactics in the first 100-200 years or so. Europeans were far slower on the uptake. The real moment we stopped charging into enemy gunfire was WW1 once machine guns made that utterly ineffective. The colonial troops actually realized it first, they had experience with Africans and Asians doing as they lacked advanced firearms of their own. The American war of independence was really one of the big shifts away from line warfare with guns and WW1 was the death of massed infantry charges as a practice. Interesting tidbit, the first adoption of massed firearms in the modern sense was another war of independence, the Dutch. General Maurits realized that making the majority of his formation firearms instead of pikes and crossbows was very effective. We can be a stupid species.

Jaaahn

oh im not saying youre actively trying to do so but the way you comment some times can come across as such. and i think people on here get pretty defensive towards simone and george, especially since stranger things s5 where the toxic fans made them shut down and stop saying whats on their minds for a while.

Twiska Brand

I'm sorry. I don't want to upset people.

Darren Harrison

It’s pretty convincing ….”Gallipoli”, “Braveheart” and “The Patriot”…all three cast the English in an unfavorable light. Even the villains in “Lethal Weapon 2” were played by English actors.

Tay Schumaker

Simone’s nodding in vengeance at the end got me

parker469a

The actual reason he hates the British is because they are Protestant.

parker469a

Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Lindsey Brigman, from The Abyss (1989) does look like an older of Lisa Brenner, Anne Howard, in The Patriot (2000).

Emily G

Yess!!! I hope they react to Peter Pan (2003)

Emily G

You should also watch Peter Pan (2003) it’s the best film adaptation of the story of Peter Pan IMO! Plus Jason Isaacs is great again as villainous Captain Hook.

Emily G

@TaySchumacher Seriously, I agree with you. That’s why I don’t comment on here often because of all the negativity. I don’t want to hear that my movie taste is shit and that for liking what I like I am dumb. Especially when it comes to female led/female leaning movies, God forbid. Thank you for saying something. Also, I quite enjoy this movie. Rip Heath Ledger.

Darren Harrison

Watched the reaction. I thought its portrayal of Tavington was so far off the mark if it was based on Tarleton. There are statues to Tarleton all over England as a renowned national hero. He was nowhere near as villainous as portrayed here (though he was no saint) and went on to have a long military and political career, eventually dying of old age. All in all, I didn't think much of the movie. Pure propaganda BS IMHO. Before you ask, yes, I was born and raised in England.

Thall

Modern bullets shot into the air are dangerous, because they maintain a lot of speed because of rotation and being at least conical. Old style lead balls are basically harmless, like a light rock thrown in the air. Could still hurt a bit, but won't actually wound you, because they are round and irregular, not allowing them to gain a lot speed from gravity Edit: Holy fuck thats Odo

doe555

@Emily G: Yeah, some people really have nothing better to do than bring toxicity in every community.

REDR58

Don’t forget the introduction of the Gatling gun (1864) during the US Civil War, though it was hand-cranked and not an automatic weapon and then the first true automatic machine gun, the Maxim Gun of 1884.

xeve

tbh, this is one of Gibson's worst movies imo. The series Turn would've been better or even an Oversimplified animated youtube video reaction.

Stan the Man

This is 100% true. Mel’s dad is anti British and blames em for breaking up the Catholic Church so King Henry whatever could divorce and re marry. Thus Anglican’s became a thing.

Stan the Man

While I don’t think anyone should say people are dumb for enjoying anything, there’s zero wrong with expressing an opinion that a movie is bad and why it’s bad. That shouldn’t negate you or anyone liking a movie. But some movies are just dumb fun. There’s no issues pointing that out. It’s not mean spirited to insult a movie. It’s a movie. When it gets personal and people start insulting each other? That’s when a line is crossed.

deskmerc

An interesting historical coda to the actual events....you guys ask "where the hell are the French?" Before the battle of Saratoga, France was officially neutral. Openly supplying the rebel states would result in direct British intervention in those efforts, and they have the capacity, at least in the terms of naval forces, to put a stop to it. Marquis de Lafayette served alongside Washington and was an open advocate that the French should intervene directly, and through his efforts and others, France covertly supplied the US with bullets and beans and other things that we simply couldn't produce in large quantities (yet) , extending credit, keeping the war effort afloat. (France would pay a lot of money to put a stick in the British eye) After Saratoga, France decided that it was possible the British would actually lose, and sent troops, ships, and direct military assistance so when Cornwallis was surrounded at Yorktown, the French navy prevented him from getting any reinforcements or allowing him to escape, so not only did he face American regulars during the siege, but French artillery, French soldiers, and the French navy, all of them shooting in his direction. Left with little choice, he surrendered. Up to 1781, France was able to provide the logistics that the US could not provide itself, and thus won the war, here's money, guns, ammunition, military specialists, thousands of soldiers and eventually an entire fleet. Also we'll declare war on Britain and fight them around the planet. (And that was a huge contribution, by tying up the British navy in dealing with the French all over the world, they could not focus on America) Fast forward across almost 130 years and into World War 1. France was in big trouble in 1917. Russia was leaving the war because of their communist revolution. Germany was bringing forces that were dedicated on the Eastern front to France. The French had been fighting for years, mobilizing everyone of military age, and it wasn't enough...Germany had more men to loose. The troops had enough of suicidal charges across no man's land into machine gun fire. A million men were dead, several million more wounded and unable to fight. The US declared war in April 1917, France looked West, and knew if they could hold on just a little longer, we'd show up. And we did. It took a while to build an army and convert industrial capacity to wartime needs, but the US had a population of 100 million at the time and more importantly, an untouched modern industrial base. When General Pershing arrived as the lead elements of the American Expeditionary Forces, one of the first things he did was have a small ceremony at the tomb of Lafayette. His aide, Colonel Charles E. Stanton, gave a speech that ended with “…we pledge our hearts and our honor in carrying this war to a successful issue. Lafayette, we are here!” 17 months later, on the eleventh day of the eleventh month at the eleventh hour, the war was effectively over. And we repaid the debt owed from 1781, providing France with what she could not do for herself, just they like did for us.

Maxime

Never seen this movie, just scrolling through comments to make an opinion, but seeing how people who liked it react I'm gonna avoid it I guess. Nobody insulted you they just said they didn't like the movie and you took it personaly. Seriously ? It's not toxic to formulate an opinion, you know

G P

Jesus this was as bad as I remembered

Michael Rawson

My only real gripe about this movie is the lack of slavery - It would have made Mel Gibson a much more grey character and it would have aloud us to understand how complicated slavery was in the 1770s-1820s when major political leaders both supported and were disgusted by it. Jefferson's original draft of the declaration of independence include an attack on slavery. Washington thought some method was needed to gradually end the practice. Jefferson actually compared slavery to holding onto the ears of wolve "you don't want to hold on but you don't dare let go." If my memory is correct all the early presidents from Washington to Madison and Monroe (excluding the two Adams who were both abolitionist) had some desire to end it but couldn't solve their own internal conflict. So the idea that the hero of this movie only hires freedmen whilst living in the Mecca of North America slavery (south Catholina) really took me out of the movie if there was one state that from day one was all in on Slavery it was SC. Before I get attacked you see a major shift in southern attitudes toward slavery in the 20s to the civil war where propaganda ran rampant and slavery was largely supported by everyone - from The Chief Justice Taney of Supreme Court and about 9 presidents as well as the entire southern Senate delegation. Even those who did not "own" slaves were supporters of it. Really can't recommend enough Taubmin, Lincoln, 12 years a Slave etc

dys

"a heroic warrior who defied the English to free England from the English"

dys

Not mass produced, but they did exist and saw plenty of use during this war. Just not in the numbers to be the weapon of the common infantry.

ash

A lot of angry people in this comment section about a movie. There are plenty of historically inaccurate movies but its always the patriotic ones that get under certain types of peoples skin. Interesting. Almost a reddit comment section.

dys

Highly recommend that. Certainly far more accurate.

JumpTroopC5

Gettysburg might be a good watch. I am not sure if it is too much fighting or too long but you might enjoy it.

Armchair Rizzard

I agree. Its a good movie as far as movies go, but every time someone watches it, there is a loud minority of complainers. Same with Independence Day.

Jared Petty

George and Simone, Ohio is a part of America so backward, boring, mean, and awful that young people throughout the country use the word "Ohio" as slang for something terrible. Kind of like when you two make jokes about Edminton.

Brandon

RIP Skye McCole Bartusiak who played the youngest daughter Susan, who wouldn't speak at first. She looked familiar to me (she was in The Cider House Rules), so I looked her up and learned that she passed in 2014 aged 21.

Els

Actually if you watch the movie very carefully you will see that every time they kill one of Mel Gibson's kids or burn his house or whatever, that horse is standing off to the side with a look on his face of "yeah, do it to them."

akaTheBAY-AY-RON

What is not explained by patrons this is a prequel to Independence Day? That's why Roland Emmerich directed it, it's because they're connected. The Patriot is basically about the birth of the nation's "Independence Day" and then ID was about how it evolved to no longer be an American holiday. But as the day when the world declared in one voice: They would not go quietly into the night! They would not vanish without a fight! They were going to live on! They were going to survive! And on that day, they celebrated their Independence Day!

Els

An excellent battle movie is ZULU (1964), with Michael Caine, Stanley Baker, and over 1000 genuine Zulu warriors. Both thoughtful and action-packed.

dys

I'm from Massachusetts and my dad was from Ohio and I've literally never heard this. Florida, New Jersey, Alabama get a lot of insults. Ohio is thought of as boring yes but I've never heard of it being slang for something terrible.

Karl Ries

In many ways this is an adaptation of Braveheart set in the American War of Independence. Mel Gibson, playing a highly fictionalized historical figure, wants to remain at peace amidst rising tensions and a desire for independence from England but loses a loved one in an act of petty collateral damage to an overzealous, evil English officer and is launched into a journey of bloodthirsty revenge shifting into unorthodox military conquests. They are both only historically accurate in very broad strokes with a few minor details here and there and a few understandle liberties (like kilts and red coats neither of which were so universally worn by a side, kilts not at all yet). Braveheart, at least, to its credit, it less based on the historical events and more on a fictional late medieval, hagiographal poem (still doesn't excuse Sterling without a bridge or Isabella being present and of age during that time).

dys

Their workers somehow all being freedmen in 1770s South Carolina is the cringiest moment of the movie for me too (in a movie I like but has plenty of cringe). Glad they're doing Glory next week for a more accurate and unflinching look at American history.

xeve

didn't see it, how does it compare to the 1980 mini series shaka zulu

xeve

This is complete bs and ignorant. If this is true of youth it demonstrates how uninformed youth and yourself (for repeating it) are. Try learning actual history instead of respewing nonsense.

Els

Well I haven't seen the 1980 miniseries so I can't compare, but it is excellent on its own terms. It looks like the miniseries covers a much longer span of time. The movie treats a single battle over the span of two or three days.

Jared Petty

It's fairly new as a slang adjective among youth... started a little after COVID with school kids. As for Ohio culturally being seen as a joke to much of the rest of the US, that started decades ago. It's older than the Cuyahoga River burning. Heck, I'm FROM Ohio and I've seen it played out all over the US.

Jared Petty

Xeve, as stated above, the adjectival slang is fairly new, I'd estimate 5 years among kids. But the sentiment goes back decades. Ohio is legendary in much of the US for its considerable negative attributes and anecdotal history. The only people who don't seem to know this in the US are about half of Ohioans, who are frequently told and immediately refuse to believe that perception exists. I have watched this happen too many times to count. Anyway "tell me about Ohio" is a wonderful line.

funky weapon

This is the best bad movie of the 90s. It's so shit, the script is shit, the cliches are shit, the paint by Numbers plot is shit, the slow motion oohrah John Williams heroic score set the scene of hundreds being slaughtered in a straight line is shit, but goddamn do the cast sell the crap out of this turd. Gibson, Isaacs, ledger, everyone deserved every accolade and kudos they got for this movie. As George and Simone alluded to in the video, in the hands of lesser actors this movie would be rightfully forgotten as the whitewashed, sanitized horse apple that it is. I struggle to think of another bad movie that was executed so skillfully.

Dan Holmes

pretty sure this war and how we won it is largely responsible for the death of that style of battle.

Maxi_Rad

Mythbusters did do an episode about "What happens to a bullet fired into the air?".

Dauerempoerungskommentarspaltenkrachmacher

I'm not angry about the movie, but "other movies are historically inaccurate too" isn't really a rebuttal. If the criticism is that The Patriot distorts particular historical events or people, pointing out that other movies do the same doesn't tell us whether those criticisms are right or wrong. It would be more interesting to hear why you disagree with the specific criticisms rather than speculating about the motives of the people making them.

Patrick Waldeck

Line infantry combat seems ridiculous and insane with hindsight, but it was by far the most effective way to fight back in the 1700/1800's. Smoothbore muskets had a very short effective range and, unlike how this movie portrays it, hand to hand combat in this era was pretty rare. Most formations would usually break and run long before they got into bayonet range, mainly because people REALLY don't like being stabbed. Big blocks of men with pointy rifles were also very good at dissuading cavalry from slamming into them. There were rifle brigades with more accurate weapons (Daniel Morgan is of particular fame in the US, his sharpshooters were absolutely devastating to the British at Saratoga) but those units were rare and equipped with relatively expensive weapons. Bunker Hill was a pretty rare exception. The Brits absorbed an insane amount of casualties to take Boston, to the point that the Continental soldiers literally ran out of ammo and had to resort to hand to hand combat until they were overwhelmed.

Adam X. Luke

I put a curse of pestilence and plague on whoever voted for this film to be the next reaction. And I also put a curse on your families.

xeve

I'm well traveled and have heard jokes about many places including Ohio, but I've never heard the it referred to "as a joke" which very different than hearing some jokes about it as well as many other places often around thins like sports rivals. But, if you feel that, then you're wrong and ignorant of the State's history and culture like the childish slang you repeat.

Daniel Griffith

We deported 20% of our population (Tories) after the war. Most went to what is now Canada. That explains the sour grapes in the comments. Be thankful that your ancestors got to be Canadian and didn't get the French Revolution treatment. Everyone got lucky that it didn't devolve into that.

Dauerempoerungskommentarspaltenkrachmacher

Would you still consider it a bad movie, in terms of the production, acting, directing, and everything else that goes into it, like the story structure, special effects, cinematography, etc., if, for the sake of argument, it were about rival Viking clans, Germanic tribes, or even pirates? Or are you mainly disappointed by the way the historical events have been fictionalized? Personally, I'm anything but a fan of Mel Gibson, but if it's the latter, I don't think that necessarily makes the movie itself bad or detracts from Gibson's performance as an actor.

xeve

It's too long, glorifies/white washes slavery (which was universal and not just the South at this point), and yes that's important to the context of the narritive which matters. He is also playing the same tropes as Baveheart where he might as well called the character MacWallace.

Jared Petty

Dude, I'm here for the movies. If you don't believe me re: the slang usage of Ohio among kids in greater America, just Google it... confirmation is a few keystrokes away. I'm from Ohio, I know it well, and weirdly, for reasons too long to get into here, I probably know its history even more than its present-day culture. I'm glad you like it there, but it deserves some of the well-founded criticism it gets and, yes cynicism from those young folks and escapees who recognize the legendary inflexibility and cantankerousness of some of its residents.

REDR58

Gods and Generals is a trash fire of epic proportions. It’s one of the few movies I’ve bought on disc that I’ve gotten rid of. Watching once was too much and it’s quite astonishing that it’s from the same guy who made “Gettysburg” which, while not perfect, is not nearly as fawning of the Confederacy.

REDR58

Me! I haven’t seen it since it came out and would love to revisit it here.

REDR58

Gibson is a sedeprivationist or a believer in “Traditionalist Catholicism” and is quite a nut about it. This was all discussed in the comments of “The Passion of the Christ” on here but most of that was unfortunately lost when the comments YouTube/Full length reactions were combined.

dys

Lafayette is probably second only to George Washington in the number of things named after a historical person in the United States... maybe tied with JFK and MLK.

Naj

Hey, sorry I upset you. I was just making a joke before work because George looked like he was in pain in the thumbnail and I remember this being very a-historic.

Lone Desert Bones

Regarding flintlocks burning or blinding people: I had the opportunity to shoot a couple reproductions of Napoleonic muskets and rifles, and yeah, that shit burns. I had powder burns on my cheek for a hot minute, and the Baker rifle set my hair on fire. Good fun, though.

dys

If you watch past the end it's actually pretty funny that George mentions this reminds him of the anti-British propaganda in the Chinese films he saw growing up. I bet every country that was colonized by Britain has propaganda like this, I mean RRR has a lot in common with this though of course the British did real atrocities in India which they did nothing remotely like against the American revolutionaries. Villeneueve might be partly inspired by Lafayette btw but only in that he's a French officer training Americans; the real Lafayette was working with Washington to train the regular army, not part of a swamp militia.

deskmerc

Heh, you aren't wrong. My family farm is in Fayette county, Texas, and when it was incorporated by the Republic of Texas in 1937, the city of La Grange was designated the county seat...which got its name from Lafayette's chateau in France, the Chateau de La Grange-Bleneau. You can't throw a rock around here in Texas and Louisiana without hitting something named Lafayette or a derivative

xeve

Yes it deserves criticism, but so do you. If "here for the movies", you wouldnt have used insults (you weren't making a joke) in such a blanket manner about an entire State. It's obviously personal to you, you had bad experiences and as misery loves company you sought out those feel he same way. Also, I never claimed to "like it there", but I don't trash people "backword,boring,mean,awful" nor do I promote childish slang. I'm quite certain if I quoted all the slang from when I was a kid, everyone would be insulted.

EMB

I see many people have elaborated on infantry doctrine of the time. As they said the point of forming ranks and firing in volleys is to have a high volume of fire. Usually the goal was to use of the shock of the volleys to break the enemy ranks and make them flee, then cut them down with cavalry. This doctrine only died out because of a combination of technologies with better manufacturing of rifled barrels, shaped shot like the Minie ball, smokeless powder, catridges (like what we see now with bullet, powder charge and primer all in one) and repeating weapons (revolvers, lever or bolt action and semi-automatic rifles). Even then it took a while for military doctrine to catch up to the technology. Kind of like how some countries tried to fight WW2 with the same doctrine as WW1 and quickly found out they were left behind. The one advantage of the musket ball was you only needed a mold and lead to melt and shape to make more ammo, the issue then becomes getting the black powder to shoot them. On another note, as much as I love TNG I'm really looking forward to you starting DS9. It's maybe my favorite Star Trek despite being so different from the Entrerprise formula. Edit: I thought of more stuff to say about firearm technology 😅

EMB

Moonfall is great! Not exactly, but it's like a high budget B movie and that can be a lot of fun 😂

EMB

I would love to shoot a black powder musket. Now I'll make sure to tie my hair back and wear a thick hat 😂

EMB

But that would interfere with the propaganda if we made him too realistic

gfixler

Came here to say the same thing. She looks a lot like her, to the point that when she ran out of the room, just before the dad pretended he couldn't hear Heath say he'd come to call on Ann, I thought it was her. It was the first time we saw her without her hair covered (I think).

ash

It's a rebuttal, just not one you like.

Tim Miller

Two far superior movies IMO. Although I still have a soft spot for this one because I watched it a lot when I was younger.

Tim Miller

Yea, John Adams is an excellent series!

Tim Miller

Gettysburg is another great one, probably my favorite civil war movie and definitely one of the most accurate. It is a long watch though.

Glenner7

"tired of your fuckin puns, bitch!" :-)

xeve

you could grow up, or projecting ...

Cinebinge

alright folks, lets please keep things civil and help keep the peace in the community. there is no need to continue into personal insults and arguments, walk away from this now please before we have to take action. thank you.

Matthew Maxon

The Poles also sent advisors to GW. Here in Chicago, there is a street named after Gen. Cassimer Pulaski. There are many Polish people here. Its actually a quite a major N/W street on the Near West Suburbs.

Matthew Johnson

Adding to the chorus of people asking for The Last of the Mohicans. Agreed that score is amazing, but I can never hear it without remembering that my drama teacher in high school used it as the soundtrack to our production of The Crucible - the music was so recognizable people laughed when it came on (which didn't really help keep up the vibe of the play).

Frank

I get that people don't like Mel Gibson. That's fine, but please watch Apocalypto. To this day, it may be the best movie I've seen in theaters.

EMB

Glory is a far more compelling movie, I'm looking forward to that

Gizmo_Mogwai_

Why are so many people angry on a fictional story that never claimed to be tied to any historical event?

MacGuffinStuff

Absolutely agree with the assessment of Roland Emmerich given free reign, and I haven't even seen Moonfall. But I was pleasantly surprised by this, I actually liked it, I do like his other stuff like 2012 and TDAT, but mostly as things I watch when I'm doing chores and stuff. That was better than I expected so good on him. Also makes me have to ask, when are we reacting to "The Last of the Mohicans"? 😆 We. No bur it's the tomahawk fighting that reminded me of it so much.

DJS302

MythBusters Episode 50: Bullets Fired Up Premier Date: April 19, 2006 In the case of a bullet fired at a precisely vertical angle (something extremely difficult for a human being to duplicate, the bullet would tumble, lose its spin, and fall at a much slower speed due to terminal velocity and is therefore rendered less than lethal on impact. However, if a bullet is fired upward at a non-vertical angle (a far more probable possibility, it will maintain its spin and will reach a high enough speed to be lethal on impact. Because of this potentiality, firing a gun into the air is illegal in most states, and even in the states that it is legal, it is not recommended by the police. Also the MythBusters were able to identify two people who had been injured by falling bullets, one of them fatally injured. https://mythresults.com/episode50

DM DC

Jean Villeneuve the French Soldier, was portrayed by Tchéky Karyo. He's in another movie that I really love and would recommend. The Core (2003). It's out there but it's a really good time. The French Soldier also reminds me of a film that doesn't have anything to do with this film or the other recommendation but it's also pretty good. The Man in the Iron Mask (1998). It has a pretty stacked cast. It's one of many versions of The Three Musketeers tale. Speaking of which, a really good Disney Take on The Three Musketeers is Disney's The Three Musketeers (1993). You'll have to get past the fact that there are no French speaking main cast in a French Story of course. But if you can do that, then it's a great time. If not you may not like it, but it does have a really great cast including Oliver Platt Tim Curry just to name a few. It's pretty stacked cast. I really love this take The Three Musketeers and highly recommend it.

doe555

@Naj: No hard feelings, it wasn't personal. I just often notice that some people get upset when “their” movie didn’t take first place, and then they flood the comments section and bash the winning movie. Very often, the movies I vote for don’t win, but I’ve never felt the urge to complain about it. I’m sorry if I might have overreacted.

Mikey Sea

I enjoyed the movie, and the reaction G&S; thanks!

dys

I saw Gods and Generals in theaters in Massachusetts and I remember having a positive reaction to it, after a lot of my schooling being in Georgia where they didn’t try that hard to hide that they were teaching Lost Cause mythology. But yeah it is full ahistorical Lost Cause myth.

Mike FromOz

It's not mean-spiritedness to point out this movies glaring flaws. It's media literacy. The way the family is shot in the early scenes, with that fuzzy warm glow around them; the soundtrack that all but waves an American flag in front of you; the way the realities of actual slavery is glossed over, and how 'freedom' didn't actually mean freedom for everybody, just a select few; how one-note the bad guy is for the film's want of a villain; and how basically a-historical this film is. I agree with others that the field combat scenes are well done, but that is in service less of historical reality, and more as a method to wring out sympathy for the protagonists because of the brutality of war. Nobody has called anyone dumb for liking this film. Instead, it's important to know when you're being sold something. Compare this to "The Last of the Mohican's". Who is the bad guy in that film? The colonists? The British? The French? Magua and the Huron tribe? Hawkeye, Chingachgook and Uncas? Well, probably not the last three, but in that film it shows the stakes each of these groups were playing for. The ending being a solemn examination of what it means to see the end of one civilisation as it is subsumed by another. The music is intense and powerful, but not overly saccharine or solipsistic towards the portrayal of one group vs another. That's where better movies prevail over this one. It's ok to like this film if you want. It's just as ok to dislike it because the meta-narrative that stamps itself all over the film is exhaustingly one-note and propagandist.

Matrim

Putting Hunchback at the bottom makes me very sad. You made me very sad.

doe555

@ Mike FromOz: I understand your point of view and agree with you, but historical films constantly gloss over things; ultimately, it depends on the perspective from which the story is told. Films about Winston Churchill, for example, always portray him as a shining hero, even though during World War II he issued orders that today would be considered war crimes—such as the bombing of Dresden, in which 25,000 people, mostly civilians, women, and children, lost their lives within two days. Gandhi is portrayed as a saint, while the fact that he supported apartheid (against black people, not against Indian people) in South Africa in his younger years is often glossed over. Some movies receive extreme criticism for inaccuracy, while others, just as inaccurate, are praised—that bothers me personally a bit. I think if one's concerned with historical accuracy, documentaries and books are still the best option. Movies based on historical events allways create some level of fiction, sometimes more, sometimes less.

Sailingcats420

One of the best movies ever made!!! Mel Gibson is the GOAT

Thall

I forgot how much of a blatant propaganda piece for the US this movie is, lol. Fuck history! The Americans are saints and never do anything wrong!

CinOps

As for when the British stop using the tactics of marching in a straight line up to the enemy, I don't know an exact date, but I do know that as an Aussie, the British still used that tactic in WW1, ordering Australian troops to straight line charging into machine gun fire...absolutely crazy! But that's the craziness of hereditary entitlement where one group thinks they are superior to another.

Cc Decc

Interesting point made by Dan Holmes down below. He mentioned this war's influence on ending the "line" style of fighting. But while the Patriots were often said to have "invented" guerilla fighting (which has actually been around for thousands of years), and the man who Gibson's character is based upon (Francis Marion) was a master at it, "line fighting" persisted for another 100 years after this war. Was the dominant style throughout the Napoleonic Wars, and notoriously got hundreds of thousands butchered in the American Civil War (you'll see next week in Glory) when new technologies finally started to make it obsolete. But they say generals are always fighting the last war, because they learned their lessons with older tech and tactics.

Cc Decc

Oh it wasn't, or at least not entirely, about privilege. It was about changing technology and aging generals. That's a very old story -- and how, for instance, we had the Poles charging German tanks with cavalry in the next war. WWI was the first truly industrial age war, and kind of shockingly new science for the 50, 60, 70 year old generals who had learned how to fight in the 1800s. They had to learn the hard way just how devastating machine guns were. Then early tanks and airplanes able to drop handheld bombs and scout. Then the chemical warfare. None of that stuff existed when they were young and of fighting age.

Cc Decc

And for the patriotic/jingoistic debate below. I am going to briefly expose my leanings here and say that I am absolutely pro-patriotic stuff and have real problems with the highly politicized "settler/colonial" "stolen land" twisted nu-history of the past 10-15 years flowing out of a captured academia etc. BUT, that said, I still never really loved this movie and never recommended it to kids I taught because its not playing fair either. Its not just slanting things, its flat making up defamatory lies, and that marks it more as a Mel Gibson thing, a later sister movie trying to redo Braveheart except in the American Revolution. So the bad guys (the English as always for him) are turned into supervillains, the hero is a superhero, and you're only supposed to think one way. I always consider that a bad sign in a history movie. It is entertaining, has some great action scenes, but I'd hate anybody to learn history from it. These movies, even the ones with fictional main characters, all get the background history much better, and tell tales full of complex characters finding their way through as best they can: Last of the Mohicans (1992) Belle (2013) Amistad (1997) The Outlaw Josie Wales (1976) Black Robe (1991) Rob Roy (1995)

Nabikon

don't forget, he did the first American Godzilla too

OddThomas

He was in Harry Potter one year later so this film 100% got him that gig.

OddThomas

Aliens. It needed more aliens.

Jobbe Smit

Yeah the Boer Wars taught the British specifically their impact but most of the other great powers of Europe paid little attention to such wars. It was the colonial forces who understood the power of the early machine gun.

Jared Petty

You're right and I'm sorry if I caused any distress.

Jamie

One of the Militia (the guy talking about eating the dogs) was the obnoxiousness business man in Star Trek TNG, one of the three earth people that got taken out of stasis in The Neutral Zone.

Armchair Rizzard

The answer (for them) is no. They're mad about it being about Murrica. It is a good movie all those things aside.

Dauerempoerungskommentarspaltenkrachmacher

It's only a rebuttal if you're arguing that The Patriot is being held to a different standard than comparable movies. In that case, you'd need to demonstrate the double standard. Otherwise, "other movies are historically inaccurate too" doesn't address whether the specific criticisms of The Patriot are valid. That's really all I was getting at. You don't have to agree, but dismissing the criticism by speculating about the people making it doesn't actually address the argument. And that's the irony here: you criticized the comments section for being "Reddit-like," but then responded to criticism by speculating about motives rather than addressing what was actually said. No hard feelings, but I just don't think there's much point continuing this. Our understanding of what constitutes a discussion is apparently too far apart.

China Andronicus

Gettysburg is a fantastic historical war film that doesn’t get its due. I highly recommend it. Unrelated recommendations: Dog Day Afternoon Serpico Rebel Without a Cause A Streetcar Named Desire

Christina Doxstader

Here's the thing about how battles were waged back then end for many years after. Guns, while obviously deadly and effective were not accurate. So the most effective way to fight was to line up and basically shoot at the enemy all at pmve and hope you take enough of them out, maybe get another shot or two off and switch to hand to hand. Guerilla tactics would be effective for smaller skirmishes or to be annoying but you weren't going to win that way. This is why when the American Civil War is fought nearly 100 years later they are using the same tactics, the biggest problem though is that rifling is invented within that gap and those deadly by inaccurate muskets now become accurate and the death toll skyrockets.

Bstan45

Are you really that naive? It all depends on what the movie is inaccurate about. I would suggest you do your research on how slaves were honestly treated bud.

Bstan45

@Armchair Rizzard Don't be so obtuse, you know the reasons why. You're just triggered that a movie you think, for some odd reason, is good but people are calling it out for being terrible for accurate reasons.

Bstan45

Lol what? It used the American Revolution as a backdrop dude. What movie did you watch?

Matthew Langley

A great movie, dubious history. At least compared to Braveheart they gave fictional names for many of the main characters rather than the historical names they were inspired by. I'll give it that. The worse part is the "free" black workers. Definitely trying to soften the blow as if that were a common thing. Mel Gibson's character is inspired by the historical figure Francis Marion. Nicknamed the "Swamp Fox" (hence their scenes being in the swamp so often). A lot of the concept of the movie isn't far off (just don't hang your hat on the details and assume some diet coke Lost Cause in the mix). My ancestor served under Francis Marion during the American Revolution in South Carolina, a 6th great grandfather. His grandson (my 4th great grandfather) was named Elisha Francis Marion May in honor of that service.

xeve

I literally named 2 alternatives to this movie on the same subject, 1 is a 4 season series. Also, if I can't stay immersed, it's not good.

Chris Kimmel

I didn't know people actually watched this movie for historical accuracy? People just watch it because it's a great movie

gfixler

Simone asked at the end about who produced this. I noticed him in the opening credits. It was Dean Devlin, who also worked on TNG, Independence Day, Stargate, etc. Brent and Jonny just interviewed him a few months ago on their podcast, Dropping Names: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ea_3bETFSU

Michael Rawson

another good pick would be the HBO miniseries John Adams. Oviously its about the first abolitionist (not formally but a lot of his writings and ideas formed the core of the abolitionist movement 20 years later) and a family from New England where slavery has been outlawed for generations - still as a founding father slavery is an issue brought up repeatedly over the series and certain scenes give a great view of how complicated the range of opinions are - and it does a great job humanizing Thomas Jefferson who has been an enigma to me my whole life - how does a slave owner become the first man in history to write "all men are created equal" - he could have qualified it to white men, or all Caucasians or even "all citizens" are born equal but he used the broadest term he could and one that courts would obviously interpret in the wider sense. Sorry for the rant, Jefferson my not be my favorite president but he is the most intriguing.

Michael Rawson

not sure anyone would care but favorite president is Lincoln and FDR (tied for first) most intriguing is Jefferson, and the "was killed before he could achieve greatness and surpass FDR was President Garfield. Most underappreciated President Grant. Most overweighted JFK, Woodrow Wilson and George Washington

Critical87

Wow you guys have a bunch of anti American crazy folks in your comments. Real nice. Extreme lack of Historical knowledge to boot and a hard on for the USA that taints their critical thinking skills. Def the type of people you don't want to engage with. It's a movie and a good one at that. A lot of you need to grow up.

Vinnero

Great film, fictional story set in the middle of a historical event.

REDR58

The other son, Nathan, played by Trevor Morgan, would go on to do Jurassic Park III as Eric after this movie.

REDR58

Fayetteville, North Carolina, was the first US city named for him. Lafayette returned to the US in 1824, about 50 years after fighting for the US in the Revolutionary War, and he toured all over the then-24 states of the US. Neighborhoods, cities, schools, warships and other memorials to him could and can be found all over. His gravesite in Paris has US flags on it full time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquis_de_Lafayette#/media/File:Sépulture_la_Fayette.jpg

REDR58

Perhaps the biggest thing "The Patriot" gets right about the experience of black people during the time of this movie is that they did indeed fight for both sides of the US Revolutionary War, in unsegregated units (on both sides) which is frankly remarkable. By the time of the US Civil War, Black soldiers were back to serving and fighting in segregated units in the US, under the command of white officers and that would continue all through WW1, WW2 and until the Korean War when the US military was finally desegregated.

REDR58

It's still happening today as we see with the massive use of drones and the slow reaction to it in some quarters...

REDR58

That's Leon Rippy, seen in that episode also called "The Neutral Zone."

REDR58

The production company that Simone asked about, Centropolis Entertainment, is still around and did "Stargate," "Independence Day," "The Day After Tomorrow" and a number of other Emmerich films: www.centropolis.com

Yvonne Sabel

For your confusion about the line firing tactic. Muskets do not have a long range and are not very accurate. apart at short distance. The order of firing in a volley was to have a higher chance of hitting multiple targets. (super simplified explanation)

jmundt33a

I think the accolade for Gettysburg gave him the courage to go for what he really wanted the next time out.

Stephanie Bedworth

This comment section was way more entertaining than the movie.

blerbaberpaterb

interesting you lump not liking a movie = not liking a country. but more interesting is you automatically group anyone who doesnt like your country as crazy, as if people have no right to not like the US. how 18th century British of you

John Suire

Nice comment! A lot of fighting in this way is dictated by technology of the time. Big formations are easier for command to grasp what’s happening on the field. Drumming and fifing serve as a way to communicate orders, if I remember correctly. Also, formations would sometimes be in lines, other times in boxes, to defend against cavalry charges (the movie Waterloo I think depicts these formations quite well). Even all the uniforms are meant to convey information to command and soldiers, as radios weren’t a thing yet. Who is who, what are their roles, that kind of thing. A lot of these tactics started fading out with the US Civil War (at least in the US), as machined rifles and gatling guns started to become more common. By WWI, with the invention of automatic machine guns and more accurate artillery, these old tactics were obsolete, but armies clinging to them devolved quickly into massacres and static trench warfare. Uniforms started changing to drab colors for camoflage rather than bright colors for recognition. Even the venerable cavalry charges, which were a mainstay of land combat for centuries, finally fell off around WWI until they were taken over somewhat by tank warfare.

Happy Hanukkah

Is this my cue to request a reaction to Hair (1979)? :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_(film)#Cast Maybe for George's birthday... :-P "Hallelujah! I adore it!" (I am incredibly disappointed in myself for not having realized that Hair's Hud = The Warriors' Cleon.)

John Suire

It definitely does a better job explaining why the colonies decided to declare independence, but also that they weren’t monolithic, and had various reasons for their choices.

Critical87

I guess you can't read and also lack comprehension skills to understand what you are reading.

Critical87

No he hit the nail on the head.

Alexander C Chalk

The reason that the Armies fire in lines, is because smooth bore muskets are inaccurate after roughly 80 yards. (roughly 75 meters). this is due to high tolerances in the gun to allow for "rapid" reload and to minimize cost of a mass-produced weapon. Roughly three shots a minute, instead of one shot per minute for a rifled musket. So, to actually hit anything, the men need to create a volley of shots in a line, creating a large volume of bullets. This changed around the US civil war, with the mini' ball, which allowed for rapid fire of rifled muskets. Though the removal of standing in lines in bright uniforms did disappear until the beginning of The Great War, when the Germans machinegunned the French formations.

Gizmo_Mogwai_

Yes, but it never claimed that any part of the story /movie was remotely tied to any actual historical events. There's fictional scenes of real events like the "tea party" boat scene, people hate because it's not accurate to actual events? Baffling

Dauerempoerungskommentarspaltenkrachmacher

@Bstan45 Even though your comment wasn't directed at me specifically, I'd still like to respond to it, because I partially agree with Armchair Rizzard. I don't think "they" are upset because it's about "Murrica", but rather because the film distorts historical events and, possibly deliberately, obscures it to the point where an uninformed viewer can no longer tell the difference between fact and fiction. I find that extremely problematic and fully support criticism of it. From a technical standpoint, however, I think it's a very well-made film. If you set the historical context aside, I think it's unfair to the filmmakers (and by that I mean everyone involved, across every department) to call it a bad film. That implies that the work itself was poorly done, and I don't think that's the case. Put another way: I think it's a well-made film, but I still wouldn't give it a positive rating on a review platform because of the issue mentioned above. I believe that one can (and perhaps even must) separate the two, because I also believe that in art it must be possible to fictionalize facts, including historical events. What I would like to see, however, is a content warning at the beginning of movies that fictionalize historical events, scientific facts, or similar matters, whenever this isn't made explicitly clear within the film itself; similar to what is already in place, to some extent, in some countries, on social media. Until then, I personally welcome any criticism on the subject, as I consider it important; provided, of course, that it is nuanced.

Hasan Ahmad

This is one of the first Gibson acted films where he was coming out as an out and out right winger with how he dealt with minority characters in the film. You can tell why he signed on to act in it . as a movie its very good, not his best . But this is around the same time Gibson's issues in hollywood started

ExoPrime 270

Gibson was on a generational run at this time.

REDR58

It's also the second-to-last new Gibson movie I watched, before "What Women Want."

David Haettich

You realize there were free black people during slavery right? There were even black slave owners. Many would try to find a guy like this who wasn't in favor of slavery but had land to work so they could be safe from being forced into slavery by actual slave holders. Charlotte is 100% a slave holder I'd even bet the free men and women on the Martin homestead were brought by his wife and they freed them not by law but in practice.. This is like people acting like there were no white slaves.

David Haettich

To answer the question if what happens when they fire those muskets in the air it's simple nothing because they aren't loaded with bullets. You can load that gun with just gunpowder and wadding and it's like firing a blank today.

This Justin

The guns back then could fire without a bullet, just gunpowder. So there was no projectile being shot into the air that could come back down. The gunpowder just burns up and makes the flash, smoke, and bang.

Craig Motbey

A wildly ahistorical garbage fire of a film starring an utterly vile man. Pass.

Jason Harris

Is there a way to watch the edited YouTube version without the text obscuring the movie since we are Patreon members without watching the full reaction?

Bill

"Can I sit here?" "It's a free country. Or at least, it will be." Has remained in my Top 3 worst dialogue lines in cinema history since its release. Just unbelievably ridiculous. OF COURSE its Roland Emmerich. Good lord.

Matthew Maxon

Think aboutr the oldest sister. She just watched her brother die on the grass. The oldest led away by soldier. Dad just ran into the her burning house and handed the other 2 older brothers weapons and run away into the forrest after being told to hide in the fields until nightfall and work her way to her aunts house. How many miles? Shes like 10 and her sister is what 6? Think of all the trauma all of those kids have had to endure in just one day. Susan MAYBE young enough to not remember. She will.......

Derek

You know watching all your movies on youtube is great but when you pay for your patreon how is it that we get the same length in the movie reactions? I paid to watch the full movie reations and paid for it but i see that there are no length difference from youtube