The Patriot (The Movie)

[jedi]

So which is better 1 or 3,000?

 

[eldirector]

I haven't seen this in a while - might need to NetFlix it. I did really like it, though.

I think Mel's character was a true 3%-er. He had seen enough death in his life, and wanted nothing more to be left to care for his family. the Brits couldn't allow that, and forced his hand. To protect his family, their lifestyle, and his county, he knew what needed to be done - and was willing to do it.

 

[R3ydium]

I think that the Patriot was a great movie. But lets not all forget that it is, in fact, fiction based on true events. I think this movie did a good job at portraying certain things, but if you REALLY start researching the time period and the things that men endured in this time frame, I would argue (hands down) that the REAL LIFE stories trump Hollywood fiction every minute of every day. I also think it’s very important to research and learn about the leaders that lead these men, and to know what type of “army” they were really working with. The British army of that time was the premier force on the planet. Very disciplined, very well trained, and very proud (which worked against them at every turn) What they most often faced on the other side of a battle field were men in tattered clothes, “un-groomed”, and (seemingly) “un-trained” (which is why most British officers UNDER ESTIMATED the power of resolve) - I am VERY proud of my American heritage, the good, and the bad.

I have always had a fascination with history of the late 1700’s and history around WWII. I also think a lot of pro 2A people would do well to REALLY dig into things. History has turned some of the 1775 figures into things they aren’t, and I also think that we would do well to understand why the British did what they did, and why those men fought the way they fought. I guess I get burnt out on people that say “our founding fathers did this and that and this and that” when all they are doing is reciting general “facts” (or lack there of) learned in grade school. I think people do themselves a grave injustice by not learned all they can about these men.

Actually, the statement that was said by the main protagonist in the move; “I will not go to war, and I will not cast a vote to send someone in my place”. That statement can sum up the view of a fairly large number of men. A lot of men didn’t join the fight until it spilled into their laps, affected their families, or affected their lively hoods. I think this was a great statement to the general American opinion. People generally do not shy away from things that NEED to be done, and will rise up when the time comes. The story (real story) also tells of men that literally devoted their LIVES, LEARNING, and MONEY to join the fight and were ready to fight the moment war was declared.

As for the movie itself, I think the movie was great, and I VERY clearly remember when it came out. I saw it in theaters and I thought it was a shame that the movie didn’t win anything at the uber-liberal award shows.

 

[rambone]

He is blatantly anti-English. He doesn't even try to hide his bigotry.

He is also was very anti-Roman in The Passion of the Christ, anti-Viet Cong in We Were Soldiers, and anti-Mayan in Apocalypto.

 

[lashicoN]

I liked this movie a lot too. It's good to watch this coupled with HBO's John Adams. I love that mini-series. I highly recommend it to everyone here who is interested in the founding and early years of our nation. I certainly prefer John Adams over The Patriot, though. Once you've seen them both, they don't really even compare. The Patriot is entertaining. John Adams was enlightening.

 

[Eddie]

Boo to Mel Gibson. The Good Guys are always made to be the Bad Guys in Mel's "Mel Gibson Kills the English Part whatever". Now we just need his Boer War movie and he'll have a complete set.

Mel Gibson could always star in a remake of Zulu Dawn. They killed loads of British in that one.

 

[Jack Ryan]

So which is better 1 or 3,000?

Well how much taxes were they paying when they had 1 and how much do you pay today?

 

[jedi]

No idea Jack. But would need to account for inflation, std of living at the time, and a slew of other numbers. many math wise want to take a stab at it?

 

[CarmelHP]

Mel Gibson could always star in a remake of Zulu Dawn. They killed loads of British in that one.

He'd have a hard time passing for Zulu.

 

[HICKMAN]

That's because it is a story about Americans, being ruled over by a tyrannical government, who take up arms and eventually throw out the evildoers, and establish a new government based on freedom.

I do believe that topic is against forum rules.

IBTL.

ROFL

 

[Bapak2ja]

One thing has always bugged me about this movie. Mel Gibson's character declined to join the war for independence at first. He only joined the fighting after his house was burned and his son was killed by British soldiers. It seems like he is seeking revenge more than independence.

To me, a better name for this movie would have been "The Avenger."

I hold in much higher esteem those in our military today who, with families at home and everything to lose, still volunteer to put their lives on the line in order to protect us here at home. Thank you to all of you!

I do not think revenge was his primary motivation. He advocated peaceful resolution of the grievances until it was clearly impossible. Then he joined the war for independence. He did have a personal matter of honor with the British cavalry commander, but i think that issue was secondary to independence. Consider that he held his temper when challenged by the cavalry officer when arranging the prisoner exchange. He did not allow his personal vendetta to override his duty to the greater cause.

 

[Coach]

I do not think revenge was his primary motivation. He advocated peaceful resolution of the grievances until it was clearly impossible. Then he joined the war for independence. He did have a personal matter of honor with the British cavalry commander, but i think that issue was secondary to independence. Consider that he held his temper when challenged by the cavalry officer when arranging the prisoner exchange. He did not allow his personal vendetta to override his duty to the greater cause.

I have always thought of the Benjamin Martin's unwillingness to fight was due to his single parent status and the phrase in the Declaration of Independence of trying to suffer evils while they are sufferable. But circumstances changed. He tried to avoid the war but it found him anyway. I am ok with revenge being his true calling, if that was the case.

 

[ocsdor]

Perhaps Ben Martin figured he had already put in his time fighting wars, and now it is time for all of those chickenhawks screaming "war with England" to put up or shut up.

(OK, probably not, but it still would have been a valid point).