The actor who portrayed Colonel Tavington the British bad guy you wanted dead is the same actor who played Lucius Malfoy in all the Harry Potter movies
" Colonel Travington " is based on Lieut. Col. Banastre Tarleton. He led the British Legion, a brigade of American loyalists. So, when you see " Travington's " unit committing atrocities, those men are also Americans. Americans don't like to admit that a good deal of the fighting had American regiments on both sides.
Quote from Mel on this movie: "This is not historically accurate. In the broad strokes, yes-on other levels, it is sheer fantasy. It's a good thing that historians are going to harangue this and say, 'It's not accurate.' Good. It'll make somebody pick up a book."
Yeah people who expect and look for movies to get the 200% correct historical recap all into a 1.5-2.5hr movie are absolute fruitloops. The point is to get people interested enough to read about it.
@@Labyrinth6000 Actual history major in college. Mel Gibson movies are my favorite historical movies. Watch Braveheart and then compare it to Robert the Bruce (played by the same actor that played Bruce in Braveheart). Robert the Bruce is much closer to historical fact--and it is sooooooooo much more boring. It's a difficult movie to get through from just sheer boredom. It does not bother me at all that there's not even a drop of water in Braveheart at the Battle of Sterling Bridge.
@@ToreDL87it’s not the plot points - I don’t think most history buffs have a problem with Master & Commander or Rome even though they are relatively fictional. The difference is staying authentic to the time. This movie does not do that
Reasons for why armies of this time period fought like that. 1. There are no radios. Officers have to issue orders via shouting, flags, drums and other instruments. Troops had to be formed up so close together to actually see and hear their orders. 2. Muskets are inaccurate and slow to reload. Trying to hit anything past about 80 metres was extremely difficult. Having the men grouped up into dense lines like that maximized the chances of hitting a target. A literal wall of lead. Most soldiers would be able to load and fire 3 shots in a minute but that assumes a calm environment. In battlefield conditions the rate of fire would drop significantly, usually to only 1 round per minute. So to get around the low rate of fire officers would usually have the first line of men step to the side or kneel after firing to allow the second to fire, while the third rank (line) of men handed the ranks in front of them loaded muskets to fire while they recieved fired muskets to reload. The process would thus be repeated. This allowed for a workaround regarding the slow rate of fire of muskets. 3. Defense against cavalry. Scattered infantry are easy targets for horsemen. Being formed up into line formations allowed them to unleash concentrated volleys of musket fire. If the cavalry attempted to flank the formations then the infantry would form a square with bayonets fixed. The all round defense allowed the men to fire in all directions and prevented actual charges from forming. Horses are not stupid and will not charge directly into a wall of bayonets. Only the most aggressive horses and suicidal riders would charge down infantry squares. And just to clear up a few myths. The British did use specialists whose job was to specifically target officers and spread out and use cover. These light infantry skirmishers wore camouflaged uniforms and used rifles. Rifles of the time were more accurate and have greater range but were more expensive to manufacture and maintain. Hence only the elite skirmishers using them until the mid 1800s. The idea of the Americans being the first to use this type of warfare is a propaganda myth spread after the war. The French had light infantry skirmishers, the British did, the Russians, Austrians, Prussians, all of them. The militia lost almost every single battle they fought against the British regulars. George Washington even has several famous quotes regarding the unreliability of the militia. He complains in one that they break far too easily and often refuse to listen to orders. He viewed them as expendable cannon fodder. The actual regular American army, the continentals, were trained by Frenchmen and Prussians and was turned into a proper fighting force able to take on the British in open combat. The French were involved from the very start of the conflict. They provided the majority of the Americans' weapons, uniforms and gunpowder and sent advisers to help train the American army. Fredrick the Great of Prussia even remarked that Britain should have launched an attack on the French fleet before the war dragged on for too long. Britain eventually also had to fight the Spanish, French and Dutch besides the colonists. The Americans did not beat Britain on their own. If you taken your time to read this then thank you.
The American use of guerrilla warfare against regulars is what Americans are known for even though they weren't the first. While light infantry could be used in this manner skirmishers are typically used as an advance screening picket and not directly used a guerrilla. Also aimed shots are slower than volume fire, muskets can be surprisingly accurate, however the key to European tactics was typically shock the enemy with rapid volley fire then charge with the bayonet to break the line.
Brits only adopted rifles more then ten years after this war, after encountering americans armed with rifles. Prior it was thought that the slower reloading more precise rifles were wasted on regular infantry troops.
@@hernerweisenberg7052 both the Pattern 1776 Infantry Rifle and the Ferguson rifle were in service with the British light company regiments. While you can argue the Ferguson breech loader was still experimental at least 100 saw service in the American revolution and the Pattern 1776 Infantry Rifle was saw service in several battles during the revolution. You was taught an old wives tale.
@@flyingmonkeydeathsquadronc968 The first british rifle adopted was the baker rifle. If you think 100 experimental firearms did anything in this war, your concept of scale seems questionable. Its a well knowen fact that rifles were very controversial in the british army and only after this war did they put in any real effort to pursue this tech after being tought its effectivenes by the americans use of their kentucky rifles. Washington alone had some one and a half thousand rifles under him.
@@flyingmonkeydeathsquadronc968Bear in mind, only 1,000 of the Pattern 1776 were issued. It, much like the Baker Rifle of the Coalition Wars, was very much a specialist weapon. But bear in mind, the British were also exposed to the use of long rifles by American militiamen in the Seven Years' War, so it's really not unfair to say that experiences in the Americas prompted the British to take rifles seriously as a marksman's weapon.
Accuracy? The general situation and the order of events are accurate. The character Benjamin Martin is patterened loosely after Francis Marion, The Swamp Fox, who had a nephew named Gabriel. The character Colonel Tavington is patterened after Lt. Colonel Banestre Tarleton. The final battle is patterened after The Battle of the Cowpens in South Carolina, insomuch as the tactics. The terrain is completely different. Cornwallis was not involved. It is possibly the first time that the American Army used a defense in depth. Lt.Colonel Tarleton's forces were decimated and routed. Disney did a TV series called The Swamp Fox. All episodes are on TH-cam. It stars Leslie Nielson of NAKED GUN fame.
The burning of the church never happened though. They took something that happened in WW2 when the Germans did it in the French village of Oradour-sur-Glane on June 10, 1944 and used it to make the British look more comically evil than the character of Tavington already made them.
@@SadPeterPan1977 True, but it also happened about 100 years prior to the revolution in Battle of Knocknaclashy in Ireland. It was a common tactic around that time and earlier. Being it's a film done by Mel Gibson, it doesn't really shock me a lot of the film was inaccurate.
ok little boy trying to educate everyone, None of this is true at all it was literally the other way around with americans tar and feathering british loyalists, the americans even shot first at the boston tea party in which the brits got the blame which is also bs, americans spread propaganda like no other. americans that exist today are rebels to the crown and have no place in our ancestory
The character of Martin is loosely based on 4 real real life leaders. Andrew Pickens, Francis Marion, Thomas Sumter (The Fighting Gamecock), and, for Cowpens, Daniel Morgan.
The final battle is a mash-up of Cowpens and Guilford Court House. Both battles used the feigned retreat. Cornwallis won the battle of Guilford Court house. At Cowpens, the battle was largely American Patriots fightly American Loyalists of Tarleton's British Legion. So, the " Nazis " in this movie were Americans not British.
Mel Gibson and Clint Eastwood are two of my favorite actors turning to directors ever. They just know how to make great movies and what the ingredients are.
My favorite complaint about this film is when Brits complain, "We never burned civilians alive in churches! There is no evidence anything like this ever happened anywhere... never ever!" Except it was a common tactic from the Scottish suppressions, well documented, and Cornwallis specifically requested troops familiar with the practice - his official requests are on the record. The fact that they left no survivors to testify against them is not absolution.
“Aim small, miss small” is something my family and friends still say when shooting rifles, especially when hunting. Such a great movie about an incredibly important time in history
Growing up I had hardly even fired BB guns (my parents were afraid I would put my eye out with that thing I guess) but when I went to Boot Camp in USMC I turned out to be a crack shot coming within just a couple points of a range record for recruits. In pre qualification one the range instructors asked me if I was a hunter and I said I had never fired a rifle before this week. He said that explains it, your lack of prior experience means you have no bad habits. I did it using basic BRASS and never shot anything other than expert for my annual qualifications in my entire time as an active duty Marine with my best score being 239/250 at Edson Range. They also teach to find the natural position, which is where you can relax your body and the sight picture remains on target, because if your using a lot of muscle to hold a position the aim wanders (aim small, miss small). If you can relax your body and still be on target that sight picture holds for you while you squeeze (not pull) the trigger.
I spent 31 years in South Carolina. A friend who worked in Charleston saw some of this filmed. The island that Benjamin Martin(partly based on Francis Marion, who was known as the Swamp Fox) used for a hideout was a popular wedding site for years after this was filmed.
The girl that played Susan/Skye McCole Bartusiak, the daughter who wouldn’t speak at first, died here in Houston, Tx in 2014. According to the M.E.’s office she died of an accidental overdose, she was 21 years old. 😢
She appeared in Season 2 of the TV series "24" (around 2002) as a child of a physically abusive father. She is rescued by her Nanny, but her father falsely accuses the Nanny of kidnapping.
Tom Wilkinson (RIP) and Jason Isaacs -- amazing actors who can play anything. The former played Franklin in the Adams miniseries, Mrs. Surrat's original defense attorney in The Conspirator, and dozens of other roles. I've gotten to where I finally can pick out Isaacs -- he played Mr. Darling/Captain Hook in the live-action version of Peter Pan, and played the Cajun officer who sent Bad Pitt & tank crew to defend that crossroads in Fury. Last I've heard, Isaacs is playing Cary Grant in a bio pic.
15:00 This is a very simplified ELI5 summary. You're watching how western wars were fought until after the American Civil war. They still fought like they did with swords, horses and archery but now with firearms. It wasn't until after the trench wars in WW1 that wars were fought differently. This is due to the tech of military weapons outpaceing war tactics.
This story line is an extremely accurate account, with names changed. Benjamin Martin, portrayed by Mel Gibson, was the life and battles of the leadership of the Militia led by Francis Marion (also referred to and known as "The Swamp Fox"). His legacy still thrives to this day as South Carolina has many businesses, streets, highways, towns, schools and even colleges named after him.
do you really think the USA are the only ones that had to make sacrifices and were dedicated to their fledgeling country ? well that would be typical for americans, who play the "world series" with only their country participating.... it´s either arrogant or ignorant....
It's the birthing story of pretty much every country on the planet. We, the Dutch, fought a 80 year long War against the then super power of the world Spain. Obviously we won👍🇳🇱💯
Early in the war the Continental Army suffered loss after loss. They were dealing with the most powerful army and navy in the world. Horatio Gates who was assigned the task of battling Gen. Cornwallis was full of himself as he thought he should have been leader of the army and not Washington, his ego inflated further after with the aid of Washington, won at their battle of Saratoga. However following a disastrous defeat at Camden, he overestimated the strength of his militia, and failed to retreat properly, Gates was replaced by Gen. Nathanael Greene, Gates was facing a court martial.
@@jessiemeisenheimer8675 The fact is that to fight the war, the British military had to rely on German troops (Hesse, Hanover, Brunswick) who were available since the Royal Army itself was relatively small.
@@jessiemeisenheimer8675 - Actually, the British military (army and navy) was indeed the most powerful in the world during that era. However, the issue with the British was that their forces were spread around the world, thus diluting the strength of that powerful military. And yes, the French were also extremely powerful at that time with the rise of Napoleon. But remember, that same powerful French military, only a few short years later, was defeated by Haitian slaves in Haiti that successfully revolted and overthrew the French overseers (which included French military forces stationed there). Thus far, that has been the only successful slave revolt in the modern era (the modern era being the era of the Transatlantic slave trade).
When Gabriel lies to his father about what Susan said, always gets me. There's a time for hard truths and a battle camp in a losing war might not be the best moment to stick to some truths. Shows how much Gabriel has matured and how with his new love he thinks more in a family way and not just a young man fighting in a war
The charge-halt-charge tactic, although counterintuitive to modern thought, was sound for the time. Martin saw the British were about to fire a volley, so by having his men halt the charge, he maintained a level of distance to make the shots slightly more difficult to the British. It also allowed timing such that his men would reach the British line while they had their rifle down for reloading, and thus less likely to be in a proper bayonet defense posture.
Bundling bags were an old tradition. If a young man came calling on a young lady and had to stay over, he would be sown into that bag until morning to ensure he did not get up and "have his way" with the young woman.
Great film and great review. Thank you. You mentioned not being familiar with Heath Ledger's work, so you might want to check out "A Knight's Tale" from 2001. A great film and personal favorite. Selfishly, everytime I see it, I wish we had more of his work to enjoy.
The final battle scene depicts the Battle of Cowpens in Jan. 1781. My 7th & 8th generation ancestors, William Lane Candler & his son, Henry, fought in that battle under Gen. Daniel Morgan. The Tavington character is based on real-life British officer Banastre Tarleton, nicknamed "the butcher" by the Americans. Morgan decimated Tarleton's forces at Cowpens using the feigned retreat tactic portrayed in the film.
And this movie is a perfect example of why your reaction channel is my favorite Centane, you're both inquisitive and insightful and I love watching every reaction of yours.
This is not based on any specific story, but it does embody three historical truths. First, it is true that the fighting in the southern theater of the American Revolution was especially vicious, much more than in the northern theater. Second, Francis Marion, known as “The Swamp Fox,” was a highly effective guerilla leader who hid in the swamps of South Carolina (where the movie is set). He is obviously the model for Benjamin Martin, in a general way. Third, Martin’s statement just before the final battle, about having the militia fire just two shots and then withdraw was a real tactic. It was devised by Brigadier General Daniel Morgan, who led the Continental army to a huge victory at the Battle of Cowpens in South Carolina. I recommend an American history movie with a similar vibe and spectacular cinematography: "The Last of the Mohicans" (1992). It is based on a famous, early American novel, and is set during the French and Indian War.
People always seem so baffled about the way battles were fought, understandably, but the line formations and volleys didn't usually last very long, just for the beginning of battles, and if you think about it this is the way battles have always been fought except instead of arrows, spears, and shields there's rifles and cannons having been invented and innovated relatively recently..
Also, the bundling bag tradition has multiple purposes, but it's basically to test compatibility by sleeping to together but ensuring no sex by bundling the man and since he's immobile in the bed she has to care for him..
When you had to concentrate fire with a short range weapon that took a long time to reload you needed coordinated group tactics. Bayonets often shed more blood than bullets.
The tactics were very much driven by the innaccuracy of the rifles of the time. You needed to mass alot of rifles to prevent the enemy from just running straight at your position. To only counter was for the enemy to mass a bunch of rifles and bring them toward you. You see them stop occasionally because the closer you are, the more damage the enemy volley will do. Better to let them get their volley off and then charge them with bayonets. If just a few men on either side lost their nerve and ran, it would cause panic and your line would collapse. That's why the British kept winning.... their Soldiers were far better trained and conditioned than the Continentals. The tide shifted when the Continentals developed new tactics and generally just wore down the British Army.
The scene where Gibson and his two youngest boys take down the British unit. Shows how the British Army had no idea how fight a Guerrilla War. The colonists knew from multiple battles with and against the Indian nations in the areas of each colony. It was the first time European armies had seen such tactics and really didn't know what to do about it.
This movie both crushes and uplifts my soul as a patriotic American. And also.....small detail. Am I the only person who noticed that when Benjamin Martin cast his final bullet with the last toy soldier of his son, the one imperfection was a crater in the shape of the Liberty Bell?
I've noticed some similarities between this movie and the Gladiator. • Both protagonists' sons are murdered. • Both protagonists have a face-to-face with their son's killer, where they promise vengeance. • Both protagonists kill their son's killer by stabbing them in the throat with a dagger-like weapon. Gladiator was released about 3 months after the Patriot.
"The poor horse, man!" I knew that was coming like five minutes before it happened, hah. But it's like my grandmother always said..."Sometimes, you have to kill a horse." Grandma was weird.
For such a moving film, I must admit I almost started laughing a little when she said, "His head fell off". All I could think of was Dumb and Dumber, lol.
Did you notice that at the end when they were up front in the wagon, she was holding a newborn?! Their brief stay and first kiss at the beach sanctuary turned into a bit more, obviously!
This is such a good movie! I remember watching it in theaters when it came out June of 2000! Mel Gibson did a phenomenal job! You will love this movie Centane!
Kamilla, if this time period and the American Revolution is of interest to you, I highly recommend the HBO Series John Adams. Its HBO so you know it meets a pretty high standard. It's only around 7-8 episodes I believe, but it's a very well done and informative series during this time period.. I am a new sub to you channel and over the weekend I have already watched many of your reactions. You have a sweet disposition and seem to value quality productions, keep up the good work and I look forward you many reactions to come, thank you!
Wheather it's Col. Tavington or Lucius Malfoy, Jason Isaacs plays the best weasels/villains. You need to see Mel Gibson's "We Were Soldiers" which is true battle early in the Vietnam war.
For a different flavor of Jason Isaacs yet with the same arrogance - Armageddon is a good one. ‘The President’s Advisor is wrong. I’m Right.’ The man with the plan.
NOTE: I will periodically submit a comment before proceeding to the next one. More on THE PATRIOT inaccuracies of which I will only mention the major ones. 2. Tavington's character is supposed to represent Banastre Tarleton, British Cavalry officer, and a member of Parliament. I doubt a British officer would shoot a defenseless child in the back. Honor and reputation was a big part of British elite culture. Tarleton would have been considered a Parrish back home. The biggest objection I have to this movie is the Church burning scene. There is no documented account of a church in North America packed with the town's people then set on fire. The Patriots were very good at spreading propaganda to gun up support. Just look at what the pro-patriot press did with a mob scene outside the customs house in Boston where the mob threw rocks at the Red coats and the British fired in self-defense. Our press called it The Boston Massacre instead of a riot. 3. Towards the end of the movie, there are 2 battles. In one Benjamin Martin lays out the winning strategy by telling the militia to only fire twice then retreat. This is supposed to be the Battle of Cowpens. George Washington sent Maj. General Nathaniel Green to take command of the South forces. Green was a brilliant military genius and it was he who laid out the plans, not only for Cowpens but for the Southern Campaign that eventually led to Cornwallis retreating first to Wilmington, NC, then to Yorktown, VA. 4. Cornwallis was not at the Battle of Cowpens, only Banastre Tarleton was there. He was in command of the British troops and he got royally beat. Cornwallis was at the Battle of Guilford Courthouse in North Carolina (just a few miles down the road from where I live. I also taught NC History). Cornwallis won that battle but suffered such severe casualties that he had to withdraw first to Wilmington then to Yorktown. Tarleton was not at Guilford Courthouse. 5. There were atrocities committed during the Revolution but the worse ones were between Americans. Americans were divided on the issue of Independence as accurately depicted in the movie. 1/3 favored independence, 1/3 were loyal to the crown, and 1/3 didn't give a crap. Loyalists were often beaten, tarred and feathered (hot tar sometimes resulted in death), hanged, shot, and/or had their houses burned. This happened on both sides. It's been often said that the Revolution in the Southern Colonies was America's first civil war. 6. The Patriots would have probably lost the Revolution had it not been for France. We received a great deal of foreign aid, advisors from France plus military advisors and money from other European countries. 7. Slaves were offered their freedom if they fought for either the Americans or the British. Slaves actually preferred the British because they didn't trust their masters to actually set them free. This lack of trust was well founded as most slaves were just returned to their masters. My biggest objections to THE PATRIOT were shooting the boy and murdering an entire town. The town especially was way over the top.
the real Swamp Fox was a great man. He once took a British fort without firing a shot. He built a tower and placed a cannon atop it. This gave the gun greater range than the guns of the fort. teh British understood he'd be able to shell them with impunity due to the height advantage, and thus surrendered rather than suffer needless losses.
The real Swamp Fox was a great tactician but an absolutely horrible man. Originally they were going to do a straight portrayal of Francis Marion, until pre-production research revealed that he was an arrogant, violent, sadistic man who worked and whipped his slaves to death. Far from being an American hero, he was despised by his superiors but kept on solely because of his effectiveness.
@@isaackellogg3493 I can't speak on his personality as I don't know about those aspects, but yes, my choice of words could have been better in calling him a great tactician. " Far from being an American hero, he was despised by his superiors but kept on solely because of his effectiveness." Wrong, he is an American hero for the results he got. Personality has no bearing on that. Also, nearly all of the greats in history ruffled the higher-up's feathers. Innovative people do that as a direct result of being innovative. And, the higher-ups were wrong, and he was right. His methods worked.
I still find this to be an entertaining movie ever since I saw it when I was a kid. I think all the criticisms of it take it a little too seriously... It's not supposed to be a look at the real politics of the American Revolution, or a social commentary, or any type of scholarly examination of the period.. It's just an action-adventure movie with the backdrop of the American Revolution -- fake characters, fake events (larger events are real of course, like the British capturing Charles Town)... It's like Gladiator isn't supposed to be a seriously accurate depiction of Ancient Rome... It's just a fun movie, with fun costumes and fighting and such. Idk but I feel like it is usually pretty obvious what the filmmakers' intentions are with these things... like if you have a movie like Charlie Wilson's War, then yeah it's probably trying to actually tell you about a piece of history.. but if you have an adventure like Lonesome Dove or True Grit -- probably not trying to seriously explain what the American West was like.. it's just a fun setting to make an adventurous tale in.
Martin is a mix of a couple of people in History. The final battle is the Battle of Cowpens, the tactic used in which was considered by some to be the turning point of the war.
The way war was actually fought, 1v1 and face to face. We have came a long way from those types of battles and I'm thankful for it. But it takes true bravery to fight in those days, very few that these days.
Good reaction, Kamilla. Although this movie is a work of fiction, it is not far removed from the reality of how many of the British soldiers conducted themselves against the then-American colonists. This is why we have a US Constitution, a contract that binds the government into recognizing the natural-born rights of We the People. Natural born 'Rights' that would indeed exist even without the existence of the US Constitution. Freedom of speech, Right to bear arms, Rights against illegal searches and seizures, Rights against the government entering our homes and forcing us to house their soldiers etc etc etc. Those natural-born rights of We the People articulated within the first 10 Amendments of the US Constitution were part-and-parcel inspired by the brutal horrors that Americans suffered at the hands of the British in that era.
Its often hard for people to understand the warfare of this time. But simply put, these early guns were not super accurate, and didnt have as long a range (despite what you see in movies like this) so the best way to ensure you hit a target was to put large concentration of fire in that general direction. This meant lining troops up and fireing volleys. More often then not, victory came down to whoever could hold their formations together the longest. To break the enemy, calvary and artillery were used to tactically break or reposition enemy lines. This often lead to "moving battles" that took place over sometimes miles of land. Honestly, at a time before computers and instant communication. . . Its an impressive feat to pull off.
Correction. The British guns weren't very accurate. The British used muskets with unrifled barrels. However the Americans mostly used Kentucky rifles which did have rifles barrels. Which is why they didn't have to line up and could use ambush tactics.
@@hernerweisenberg7052 at the start of the war the north was using old weapons. By the end of the war the north was using the Winchester repeater and the colt navy for sidearms. In the south people were either using personal weapons or hand me downs obtained mainly from British and French forces.
Benjamin learned to fight like that in the French and Indian War (7 Years War) and adopted the fighting techniques of his Native Americans enemies who fought alongside the French. The battle of Fort Wilderness was a brutal example of hand to hand combat.
I'm so glad you finally watched this movie! Great reaction as always. I've never watched this movie for historical accuracy. I think it does perfectly capture the idea of what the American spirit and dream should be. I bloody love the soundtrack. Also, if you're interested in seeing more of Mel Gibson you should watch "We Were Soldiers" you will cry a lot. I'm a full grown man and it makes cry. But totally worth it one of my favorite war movies of all time.
Colonial sharp shooters targeted British officers as a matter of course. Officers wore a silver or gold plated gorget that hung down from his neck via a chain and rested over his heart. You actually see Washington wearing one in one of his paintings. By targeting officers the command structure would break down. It was said that British officers headed for the colonies often filled out their last will and testament.
You would think that they would have the foresight not to make themselves so conspicuous in battle. Tom Hanks's character in "Saving Private Ryan" also had a very conspicuous Captain's rank on his helmet (though I'm told in real life WWII Officers didn't do that). Such an appearance clearly puts a target on every officer's head. I notice both modern Canadian and American soldiers have their ranks in the front center of their uniforms instead of on their collars, or their shoulders. Their ranks are also blended in dark green instead of yellow to make it harder to see anyone's rank unless your up close and in front of them. IOW much less conspicuous.
@@x_trio_3_po333In WW2 officers had the choice as to whether or not to display their rank. Personally I would have refrained from showing my rank if I were an officer.
@@x_trio_3_po333Remember that this is an era where there are no radios. Severe limitations regarding command and control meant that officers needed to stand out for their men to see them. Another example would be Roman centurions who often wore brightly coloured cloaks and ornate helmet crests to help their own soldiers identify them better.
General's names, cities, and tactics are close to events. Muskets were smooth bored, so hitting your target was almost a game of chance. At 100 meters a successful shot happened only half of the time. Hence, you pack all your people together, and perhaps they would hit something. The frontier rifles, while of smaller caliber, were accurate to about 300 meters. "Aim small, miss small." Only about 25% of war deaths came on the battlefield. You were more likely to die as a POW through neglect. Being wounded was bad because of infection, but disease was the big killer. The real Swamp Fox was a commander, not an on field leader. This movie's evil bastard was based on an engaging fellow named Tarleton. Due to his killing of prisoners, Tarlton's Quarter, was used as reprisals. There is no record of him burning an occupied church. He retired in comfort after the war. For a more fanciful Swamp Fox, watch Disney's episodes from the 50s. Keep up the good work, Kam.
I don't know if someone has commented on that detail, but while this movie starred Mel Gibson, it is not directed by him, but by Roland Emmerich. Outside of this detail, it is one of my favorite movies and my favorite Roland Emmerich's movie. I'm fan of History but I also knew this movie took some liberties with the real History. I love this movie with how well the actors played their characters, the costumes, John Williams's soundtrack and the story (especially as I now see this movie as both a war fable and some kind of hero's journey tale. I advice everyone to apply the steps of Campbell's story circle, I think you'll see what I mean). And I have no issues with the liberties taken because this movie never outright announced at the start "this is what happened" or the cursed "this is the real story of..." (like "Braveheart"). No, it is a story that is happening in the context of the American revolutionary war that however depicted a part of the events that are not necessarily known of the big public. This movie is underrated in my humble opinion. Not perfect, but a good story.
Just watched this movie again and I noticed something I never noticed. Movie was made in 2000, and in the very beginning when Mel Gibson is making the chair he weighs it 9lbs/11oz (9/11) and says "perfect." Then the chair breaks when he sits in it 🤔
It's actually quite historically accurate, generally. All Mel's later works are epic, and set in iconic times. If you haven't done We Were Soldiers, it's quite good, as well as Conspiracy Theory.
Historians have called it one of the most historically inaccurate historical movies ever made. So no. It is not quite historically accurate, generally. Quite the reverse in fact.
@@benkelly2024Yeah these replies are bad but expected. Many want these fantasies to be real. All of his movies are historical fiction. Like Gibson’s character keeping “free men” who simply worked for him on his plantation… I mean come on.
@@leatherman665 For one it was in South Carolina. Highly unlikely. Only a tiny fraction of blacks in the state’s history were documented as free. Second Mel’s character was based on a literal slave-owner who raped his “property.”
Im French , We are proud to have helped you, even if it cost us the French Revolution and the death of the king and then the arrival of Napoleon's empire. you lived free after that, we returned to France was catastrophic consequences The Revolution The end of the Monarchy The 1st Republic The end of the Republic The empire of Napoleon The wars against the Britains, the Prussians, the Italians, the Austrians
Every time I see this movie, I remember what my late wife said. It was Braveheart but in America. She was so right. Still liked the movie, but she was right.
Movies over 2.5hrs in my day like Lawrence of Arabia, a great film too, had Intermissions for the audience so they might use the restrooms and get more goodies at the concession counter. I miss those days and the big old beautiful theaters.
Pro tips... RIP to the guy who played the general. Too many great parts to mention, tho he did a hillarious role in a movie with Vince Vaughn! The evil Colonel did a bit part in Armageddon, and roles in Blackhawk Down and Fury!
Kamila, for Mel Gibson's early standout movies: Mad Max, The Road Warrior, Gallipoli. The last one is a little bit of a heartbreaking war movie (if you made it through The Patriot you'll be ok) but SO good and put him on the road to stardom.
If this period interests you even the slightest, I would encourage you to watch the HBO series John Adams, which pretty acutely depicts John Adams journey as a legislature and attorney during the Revolutionary War. It also gives a fairly accurate account of many of the other founding fathers, particularly George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and let us not forget Abigail Adams contributions to John’s decisions. They also have an episode depicting his time asking the Dutch for a loan. Very interesting and despite a few possible overdramatized moments, it was very historically accurate. You would enjoy! ❤
Little boys as old as 10 to 12 years old were able to enlist in the military during the revolutionary war as drummers, which all they did was walk into combat and play the drum
Centane: "What kind of actual training did you all have?" Me: From the same commanders that thought wearing red coats, which paints them as an easy target, was also a good idea.
The character of Tavington in this movie is based on the historical war criminal Col. Tarleron of His Majesty's Dragoons who committed far more numerous and heinous atrocities than can be depicted in a movie. Tarleton was the greatest recruiter for the Continental Army in the entire war. Alas, he escaped the Battle of Cowpens by running like the coward that he was. Under their bravado, all bullies are cowards.
well both main leads, heath (born and raise in perth, western australia) and mel are aussies..... mel grew up in australia since the age of 12 years old (as he was born in america NY, and his grandmother is australian), as mel's natural real way of speaking is australian accent and with american twang using aussie choice of words, and his career was help by aus entertainment companies to get him his initial international standing..... mel lives in US hollywood being his base of work, but at same time he and his first wife back then prefer raising their young family in australia, because aus is very family oriented country (ideal for his back then traditionalist catholic; this is also common trait to most aussies working in hollywood), oppose to career-rat race-status quo environment, mel was married to an aus nurse for 30 years and they have 7 children, he was also given the order of australia (highest honour given to an australian) in 1997, because mel opened many doors, opportunities and he actually help established australians to become dominant leads in hollywood entertainment industry, as he was like an ambassador promoting aus .....
They halted because muskets where extremely inaccurate past a certain distance, getting closer when you know that the enemy is ready to fire just increases your chances to get hit...
Kamilla, another entertaining Heath Ledger movie, if it hasn't already been recommended, is "A Knight's Tale".........It is a comedic, romance/ adventure movie, that I am positive you will enjoy!!!
35:36 the script called for Tavington to walk in and give his speech on foot, but Jason Isaacs insisted that barging into a church on horseback was much more intimidating. The director Roland Emmerich agreed.
Hi 😉Great to see you again 😃I’m getting ready to watch this review and Back to the Future for a double feature so hopefully you’ll love both of them ✨There very good movies So Enjoy and have a Nice Day ❣️
The main inaccuracy in this film is the supposed accuracy of the shootings that take place. Warfare was fought at such close quarters precisely because muskets were extremely inaccurate. They were only accurate up to 100 yards and only lethal up to 175 yards. Tactics dictated that 25 to 50 yards was the optimal range for volleys to be fired.
The actor who portrayed Colonel Tavington the British bad guy you wanted dead is the same actor who played Lucius Malfoy in all the Harry Potter movies
Yes, one of the most evil roles ever. But check him out in the modern cult classic "Death of Stalin". Trust me on this recommendation.
" Colonel Travington " is based on Lieut. Col. Banastre Tarleton. He led the British Legion, a brigade of American loyalists. So, when you see " Travington's " unit committing atrocities, those men are also Americans.
Americans don't like to admit that a good deal of the fighting had American regiments on both sides.
Why do you people always come up with these details and yet LEAVE OUT THE MOST IMPORTANT DETAIL OF ALL, THE NAME?
His name is Jason Isaacs.
@@phila3884 Yeah, Jason Isaac's owns as Zhukov... Death of Stalin is one the best political black comedy / Satires I have seen in past 20 years.
He was also great in Blackhawk Down.
Quote from Mel on this movie:
"This is not historically accurate. In the broad strokes, yes-on other levels, it is sheer fantasy. It's a good thing that historians are going to harangue this and say, 'It's not accurate.' Good. It'll make somebody pick up a book."
History Buff when he hear's Mel Gibsons name: 😡😡🤬🤬
Yeah people who expect and look for movies to get the 200% correct historical recap all into a 1.5-2.5hr movie are absolute fruitloops.
The point is to get people interested enough to read about it.
@@Labyrinth6000 Actual history major in college. Mel Gibson movies are my favorite historical movies. Watch Braveheart and then compare it to Robert the Bruce (played by the same actor that played Bruce in Braveheart). Robert the Bruce is much closer to historical fact--and it is sooooooooo much more boring. It's a difficult movie to get through from just sheer boredom.
It does not bother me at all that there's not even a drop of water in Braveheart at the Battle of Sterling Bridge.
@@ToreDL87it’s not the plot points - I don’t think most history buffs have a problem with Master & Commander or Rome even though they are relatively fictional. The difference is staying authentic to the time. This movie does not do that
"You're MY child!" is such an underrated line in this movie.
LOL, "He just woke up his Braveheart."
Reasons for why armies of this time period fought like that.
1. There are no radios. Officers have to issue orders via shouting, flags, drums and other instruments. Troops had to be formed up so close together to actually see and hear their orders.
2. Muskets are inaccurate and slow to reload. Trying to hit anything past about 80 metres was extremely difficult. Having the men grouped up into dense lines like that maximized the chances of hitting a target. A literal wall of lead. Most soldiers would be able to load and fire 3 shots in a minute but that assumes a calm environment. In battlefield conditions the rate of fire would drop significantly, usually to only 1 round per minute. So to get around the low rate of fire officers would usually have the first line of men step to the side or kneel after firing to allow the second to fire, while the third rank (line) of men handed the ranks in front of them loaded muskets to fire while they recieved fired muskets to reload. The process would thus be repeated. This allowed for a workaround regarding the slow rate of fire of muskets.
3. Defense against cavalry. Scattered infantry are easy targets for horsemen. Being formed up into line formations allowed them to unleash concentrated volleys of musket fire. If the cavalry attempted to flank the formations then the infantry would form a square with bayonets fixed. The all round defense allowed the men to fire in all directions and prevented actual charges from forming. Horses are not stupid and will not charge directly into a wall of bayonets. Only the most aggressive horses and suicidal riders would charge down infantry squares.
And just to clear up a few myths. The British did use specialists whose job was to specifically target officers and spread out and use cover. These light infantry skirmishers wore camouflaged uniforms and used rifles. Rifles of the time were more accurate and have greater range but were more expensive to manufacture and maintain. Hence only the elite skirmishers using them until the mid 1800s.
The idea of the Americans being the first to use this type of warfare is a propaganda myth spread after the war. The French had light infantry skirmishers, the British did, the Russians, Austrians, Prussians, all of them.
The militia lost almost every single battle they fought against the British regulars. George Washington even has several famous quotes regarding the unreliability of the militia. He complains in one that they break far too easily and often refuse to listen to orders. He viewed them as expendable cannon fodder. The actual regular American army, the continentals, were trained by Frenchmen and Prussians and was turned into a proper fighting force able to take on the British in open combat.
The French were involved from the very start of the conflict. They provided the majority of the Americans' weapons, uniforms and gunpowder and sent advisers to help train the American army. Fredrick the Great of Prussia even remarked that Britain should have launched an attack on the French fleet before the war dragged on for too long. Britain eventually also had to fight the Spanish, French and Dutch besides the colonists. The Americans did not beat Britain on their own.
If you taken your time to read this then thank you.
The American use of guerrilla warfare against regulars is what Americans are known for even though they weren't the first. While light infantry could be used in this manner skirmishers are typically used as an advance screening picket and not directly used a guerrilla. Also aimed shots are slower than volume fire, muskets can be surprisingly accurate, however the key to European tactics was typically shock the enemy with rapid volley fire then charge with the bayonet to break the line.
Brits only adopted rifles more then ten years after this war, after encountering americans armed with rifles. Prior it was thought that the slower reloading more precise rifles were wasted on regular infantry troops.
@@hernerweisenberg7052 both the Pattern 1776 Infantry Rifle and the Ferguson rifle were in service with the British light company regiments. While you can argue the Ferguson breech loader was still experimental at least 100 saw service in the American revolution and the Pattern 1776 Infantry Rifle was saw service in several battles during the revolution. You was taught an old wives tale.
@@flyingmonkeydeathsquadronc968 The first british rifle adopted was the baker rifle. If you think 100 experimental firearms did anything in this war, your concept of scale seems questionable. Its a well knowen fact that rifles were very controversial in the british army and only after this war did they put in any real effort to pursue this tech after being tought its effectivenes by the americans use of their kentucky rifles. Washington alone had some one and a half thousand rifles under him.
@@flyingmonkeydeathsquadronc968Bear in mind, only 1,000 of the Pattern 1776 were issued. It, much like the Baker Rifle of the Coalition Wars, was very much a specialist weapon. But bear in mind, the British were also exposed to the use of long rifles by American militiamen in the Seven Years' War, so it's really not unfair to say that experiences in the Americas prompted the British to take rifles seriously as a marksman's weapon.
Accuracy? The general situation and the order of events are accurate. The character Benjamin Martin is patterened loosely after Francis Marion, The Swamp Fox, who had a nephew named Gabriel. The character Colonel Tavington is patterened after Lt. Colonel Banestre Tarleton. The final battle is patterened after The Battle of the Cowpens in South Carolina, insomuch as the tactics. The terrain is completely different. Cornwallis was not involved. It is possibly the first time that the American Army used a defense in depth. Lt.Colonel Tarleton's forces were decimated and routed.
Disney did a TV series called The Swamp Fox. All episodes are on TH-cam. It stars Leslie Nielson of NAKED GUN fame.
The burning of the church never happened though. They took something that happened in WW2 when the Germans did it in the French village of Oradour-sur-Glane on June 10, 1944 and used it to make the British look more comically evil than the character of Tavington already made them.
@@SadPeterPan1977 True, but it also happened about 100 years prior to the revolution in Battle of Knocknaclashy in Ireland. It was a common tactic around that time and earlier. Being it's a film done by Mel Gibson, it doesn't really shock me a lot of the film was inaccurate.
ok little boy trying to educate everyone, None of this is true at all it was literally the other way around with americans tar and feathering british loyalists, the americans even shot first at the boston tea party in which the brits got the blame which is also bs, americans spread propaganda like no other. americans that exist today are rebels to the crown and have no place in our ancestory
The character of Martin is loosely based on 4 real real life leaders. Andrew Pickens, Francis Marion, Thomas Sumter (The Fighting Gamecock), and, for Cowpens, Daniel Morgan.
The final battle is a mash-up of Cowpens and Guilford Court House. Both battles used the feigned retreat. Cornwallis won the battle of Guilford Court house.
At Cowpens, the battle was largely American Patriots fightly American Loyalists of Tarleton's British Legion. So, the " Nazis " in this movie were Americans not British.
Mel Gibson and Clint Eastwood are two of my favorite actors turning to directors ever. They just know how to make great movies and what the ingredients are.
Ron Howard as well
Tom Hanks too
My favorite complaint about this film is when Brits complain, "We never burned civilians alive in churches! There is no evidence anything like this ever happened anywhere... never ever!" Except it was a common tactic from the Scottish suppressions, well documented, and Cornwallis specifically requested troops familiar with the practice - his official requests are on the record. The fact that they left no survivors to testify against them is not absolution.
Vinegar Hill would like a word.
I’ve never heard any British people say that about the film. Am British. Where are all these people you speak of?
Dude the brits were around before america and they STILL have an accent
The White House is white washed because it got burnt to shit, that’s a truth.. America sued for peace, ain’t that some shit
Someone would have wrote about it
“Aim small, miss small” is something my family and friends still say when shooting rifles, especially when hunting.
Such a great movie about an incredibly important time in history
When I taught my niece to shoot I told her this saying
Growing up I had hardly even fired BB guns (my parents were afraid I would put my eye out with that thing I guess) but when I went to Boot Camp in USMC I turned out to be a crack shot coming within just a couple points of a range record for recruits. In pre qualification one the range instructors asked me if I was a hunter and I said I had never fired a rifle before this week. He said that explains it, your lack of prior experience means you have no bad habits. I did it using basic BRASS and never shot anything other than expert for my annual qualifications in my entire time as an active duty Marine with my best score being 239/250 at Edson Range. They also teach to find the natural position, which is where you can relax your body and the sight picture remains on target, because if your using a lot of muscle to hold a position the aim wanders (aim small, miss small). If you can relax your body and still be on target that sight picture holds for you while you squeeze (not pull) the trigger.
@@larrybremer4930 Tbf USMC range qualy is a joke. It’s super fucking easy
@@crispy_338 Shooting a target from 500m with a weapon that has an effective range of 400m is easy eh?
@@larrybremer4930 Is that what they told you? L M A O. We regularly shoot 700m with our ARs. Regularly.
This is next-level tear-jerker movie! Gibson is an amazing actor and director.
I spent 31 years in South Carolina. A friend who worked in Charleston saw some of this filmed. The island that Benjamin Martin(partly based on Francis Marion, who was known as the Swamp Fox) used for a hideout was a popular wedding site for years after this was filmed.
Disney made a TV series called " Swamp Fox Back In the early 60s
That's a thing with having kids raised hunting and fishing. They typically arena the ones that utilize weapons to harm, but defend.
The girl that played Susan/Skye McCole Bartusiak, the daughter who wouldn’t speak at first, died here in Houston, Tx in 2014. According to the M.E.’s office she died of an accidental overdose, she was 21 years old. 😢
She appeared in Season 2 of the TV series "24" (around 2002) as a child of a physically abusive father. She is rescued by her Nanny, but her father falsely accuses the Nanny of kidnapping.
😭 Bruh no way 😭
Tom Wilkinson (RIP) and Jason Isaacs -- amazing actors who can play anything. The former played Franklin in the Adams miniseries, Mrs. Surrat's original defense attorney in The Conspirator, and dozens of other roles.
I've gotten to where I finally can pick out Isaacs -- he played Mr. Darling/Captain Hook in the live-action version of Peter Pan, and played the Cajun officer who sent Bad Pitt & tank crew to defend that crossroads in Fury. Last I've heard, Isaacs is playing Cary Grant in a bio pic.
They've both been in so many films that everyone recognizes their faces but no one knows their names!
15:00 This is a very simplified ELI5 summary. You're watching how western wars were fought until after the American Civil war. They still fought like they did with swords, horses and archery but now with firearms.
It wasn't until after the trench wars in WW1 that wars were fought differently. This is due to the tech of military weapons outpaceing war tactics.
This story line is an extremely accurate account, with names changed. Benjamin Martin, portrayed by Mel Gibson, was the life and battles of the leadership of the Militia led by Francis Marion (also referred to and known as "The Swamp Fox"). His legacy still thrives to this day as South Carolina has many businesses, streets, highways, towns, schools and even colleges named after him.
And my Great Grandfather was named Francis Marion Strickland, whose father was born in the Pendelton District of South Carolina in 1768.
This is why Americans love their country so much.. it took sacrifice and dedication to survive and create this Country.
do you really think the USA are the only ones that had to make sacrifices and were dedicated to their fledgeling country ?
well that would be typical for americans, who play the "world series" with only their country participating....
it´s either arrogant or ignorant....
It's the birthing story of pretty much every country on the planet.
We, the Dutch, fought a 80 year long War against the then super power of the world Spain.
Obviously we won👍🇳🇱💯
hey my comment has been deleted...
Depends which Americans you’re talking about :P
@@youwayo Real Americans... we know who that is.
Early in the war the Continental Army suffered loss after loss. They were dealing with the most powerful army and navy in the world. Horatio Gates who was assigned the task of battling Gen. Cornwallis was full of himself as he thought he should have been leader of the army and not Washington, his ego inflated further after with the aid of Washington, won at their battle of Saratoga. However following a disastrous defeat at Camden, he overestimated the strength of his militia, and failed to retreat properly, Gates was replaced by Gen. Nathanael Greene, Gates was facing a court martial.
Washington was a GREAT leader but not so good a military tactician.
@@mikealvarez2322Fortunately he was willing to listen to good tacticians, as he found them.
The British Army was not the best army in the world at the time. That would go to the French or Prussians. Best Navy definitely.
@@jessiemeisenheimer8675 The fact is that to fight the war, the British military had to rely on German troops (Hesse, Hanover, Brunswick) who were available since the Royal Army itself was relatively small.
@@jessiemeisenheimer8675 - Actually, the British military (army and navy) was indeed the most powerful in the world during that era. However, the issue with the British was that their forces were spread around the world, thus diluting the strength of that powerful military. And yes, the French were also extremely powerful at that time with the rise of Napoleon. But remember, that same powerful French military, only a few short years later, was defeated by Haitian slaves in Haiti that successfully revolted and overthrew the French overseers (which included French military forces stationed there). Thus far, that has been the only successful slave revolt in the modern era (the modern era being the era of the Transatlantic slave trade).
“Our children will learn of it with their own eyes and the innocent will die with the rest of us” what a powerful line
When Gabriel lies to his father about what Susan said, always gets me. There's a time for hard truths and a battle camp in a losing war might not be the best moment to stick to some truths. Shows how much Gabriel has matured and how with his new love he thinks more in a family way and not just a young man fighting in a war
A man should always tell the truth. But the truth don't necessarily always need tellin.
Every time I watch the scene where Susan finally speaks to her dad, I get tears.
I had an ancestor who by 17 had been at Fort Ticonderoga, Bunker Hill and Quebec. He had a brother who was 2 years younger who was with him.
The charge-halt-charge tactic, although counterintuitive to modern thought, was sound for the time. Martin saw the British were about to fire a volley, so by having his men halt the charge, he maintained a level of distance to make the shots slightly more difficult to the British. It also allowed timing such that his men would reach the British line while they had their rifle down for reloading, and thus less likely to be in a proper bayonet defense posture.
Bundling bags were an old tradition. If a young man came calling on a young lady and had to stay over, he would be sown into that bag until morning to ensure he did not get up and "have his way" with the young woman.
Great film and great review. Thank you.
You mentioned not being familiar with Heath Ledger's work, so you might want to check out "A Knight's Tale" from 2001. A great film and personal favorite. Selfishly, everytime I see it, I wish we had more of his work to enjoy.
Your accent was wrong on patriots
The final battle scene depicts the Battle of Cowpens in Jan. 1781. My 7th & 8th generation ancestors, William Lane Candler & his son, Henry, fought in that battle under Gen. Daniel Morgan. The Tavington character is based on real-life British officer Banastre Tarleton, nicknamed "the butcher" by the Americans. Morgan decimated Tarleton's forces at Cowpens using the feigned retreat tactic portrayed in the film.
And this movie is a perfect example of why your reaction channel is my favorite Centane, you're both inquisitive and insightful and I love watching every reaction of yours.
This is not based on any specific story, but it does embody three historical truths. First, it is true that the fighting in the southern theater of the American Revolution was especially vicious, much more than in the northern theater. Second, Francis Marion, known as “The Swamp Fox,” was a highly effective guerilla leader who hid in the swamps of South Carolina (where the movie is set). He is obviously the model for Benjamin Martin, in a general way. Third, Martin’s statement just before the final battle, about having the militia fire just two shots and then withdraw was a real tactic. It was devised by Brigadier General Daniel Morgan, who led the Continental army to a huge victory at the Battle of Cowpens in South Carolina.
I recommend an American history movie with a similar vibe and spectacular cinematography: "The Last of the Mohicans" (1992). It is based on a famous, early American novel, and is set during the French and Indian War.
People always seem so baffled about the way battles were fought, understandably, but the line formations and volleys didn't usually last very long, just for the beginning of battles, and if you think about it this is the way battles have always been fought except instead of arrows, spears, and shields there's rifles and cannons having been invented and innovated relatively recently..
Also, the bundling bag tradition has multiple purposes, but it's basically to test compatibility by sleeping to together but ensuring no sex by bundling the man and since he's immobile in the bed she has to care for him..
When you had to concentrate fire with a short range weapon that took a long time to reload you needed coordinated group tactics. Bayonets often shed more blood than bullets.
The tactics were very much driven by the innaccuracy of the rifles of the time. You needed to mass alot of rifles to prevent the enemy from just running straight at your position. To only counter was for the enemy to mass a bunch of rifles and bring them toward you. You see them stop occasionally because the closer you are, the more damage the enemy volley will do. Better to let them get their volley off and then charge them with bayonets.
If just a few men on either side lost their nerve and ran, it would cause panic and your line would collapse. That's why the British kept winning.... their Soldiers were far better trained and conditioned than the Continentals. The tide shifted when the Continentals developed new tactics and generally just wore down the British Army.
The scene where Gibson and his two youngest boys take down the British unit. Shows how the British Army had no idea how fight a Guerrilla War. The colonists knew from multiple battles with and against the Indian nations in the areas of each colony. It was the first time European armies had seen such tactics and really didn't know what to do about it.
Exactly.
I have a pretty fun fact Morocco was the first country to recognize us as a country and it’s loosely based of a general name Francis Marion
This is 1 of my all time favorite movies
Yo your channel is starting to look waaay more professional . I love it!
This movie both crushes and uplifts my soul as a patriotic American. And also.....small detail. Am I the only person who noticed that when Benjamin Martin cast his final bullet with the last toy soldier of his son, the one imperfection was a crater in the shape of the Liberty Bell?
I've noticed some similarities between this movie and the Gladiator.
• Both protagonists' sons are murdered.
• Both protagonists have a face-to-face with their son's killer, where they promise vengeance.
• Both protagonists kill their son's killer by stabbing them in the throat with a dagger-like weapon.
Gladiator was released about 3 months after the Patriot.
One of my most favorite movies that I can watch over and over...great reaction.
"The poor horse, man!" I knew that was coming like five minutes before it happened, hah. But it's like my grandmother always said..."Sometimes, you have to kill a horse."
Grandma was weird.
Grandma has been through and seen some stuff.
4:40 😂😂😂😂
The son will die
The father will live
When you have a family you dont leave it with the excuse of war, you flee. Period.
For such a moving film, I must admit I almost started laughing a little when she said, "His head fell off". All I could think of was Dumb and Dumber, lol.
That is exactly where my mind went, too!
Me too! 😅😂😂 I literally said the line out loud! 😂😂😂
Did you notice that at the end when they were up front in the wagon, she was holding a newborn?! Their brief stay and first kiss at the beach sanctuary turned into a bit more, obviously!
This is such a good movie! I remember watching it in theaters when it came out June of 2000! Mel Gibson did a phenomenal job! You will love this movie Centane!
Kamilla, if this time period and the American Revolution is of interest to you, I highly recommend the HBO Series John Adams. Its HBO so you know it meets a pretty high standard. It's only around 7-8 episodes I believe, but it's a very well done and informative series during this time period.. I am a new sub to you channel and over the weekend I have already watched many of your reactions. You have a sweet disposition and seem to value quality productions, keep up the good work and I look forward you many reactions to come, thank you!
Good recommendation
Excellent recommendation. I loved that series.
I would also recommend Turn Washington’s Spies and the new show Franklin.
Wheather it's Col. Tavington or Lucius Malfoy, Jason Isaacs plays the best weasels/villains. You need to see Mel Gibson's "We Were Soldiers" which is true battle early in the Vietnam war.
For a different flavor of Jason Isaacs yet with the same arrogance - Armageddon is a good one.
‘The President’s Advisor is wrong. I’m Right.’
The man with the plan.
NOTE: I will periodically submit a comment before proceeding to the next one.
More on THE PATRIOT inaccuracies of which I will only mention the major ones.
2. Tavington's character is supposed to represent Banastre Tarleton, British Cavalry officer, and a member of Parliament. I doubt a British officer would shoot a defenseless child in the back. Honor and reputation was a big part of British elite culture. Tarleton would have been considered a Parrish back home. The biggest objection I have to this movie is the Church burning scene. There is no documented account of a church in North America packed with the town's people then set on fire. The Patriots were very good at spreading propaganda to gun up support. Just look at what the pro-patriot press did with a mob scene outside the customs house in Boston where the mob threw rocks at the Red coats and the British fired in self-defense. Our press called it The Boston Massacre instead of a riot.
3. Towards the end of the movie, there are 2 battles. In one Benjamin Martin lays out the winning strategy by telling the militia to only fire twice then retreat. This is supposed to be the Battle of Cowpens. George Washington sent Maj. General Nathaniel Green to take command of the South forces. Green was a brilliant military genius and it was he who laid out the plans, not only for Cowpens but for the Southern Campaign that eventually led to Cornwallis retreating first to Wilmington, NC, then to Yorktown, VA.
4. Cornwallis was not at the Battle of Cowpens, only Banastre Tarleton was there. He was in command of the British troops and he got royally beat. Cornwallis was at the Battle of Guilford Courthouse in North Carolina (just a few miles down the road from where I live. I also taught NC History). Cornwallis won that battle but suffered such severe casualties that he had to withdraw first to Wilmington then to Yorktown. Tarleton was not at Guilford Courthouse.
5. There were atrocities committed during the Revolution but the worse ones were between Americans. Americans were divided on the issue of Independence as accurately depicted in the movie. 1/3 favored independence, 1/3 were loyal to the crown, and 1/3 didn't give a crap. Loyalists were often beaten, tarred and feathered (hot tar sometimes resulted in death), hanged, shot, and/or had their houses burned. This happened on both sides. It's been often said that the Revolution in the Southern Colonies was America's first civil war.
6. The Patriots would have probably lost the Revolution had it not been for France. We received a great deal of foreign aid, advisors from France plus military advisors and money from other European countries.
7. Slaves were offered their freedom if they fought for either the Americans or the British. Slaves actually preferred the British because they didn't trust their masters to actually set them free. This lack of trust was well founded as most slaves were just returned to their masters.
My biggest objections to THE PATRIOT were shooting the boy and murdering an entire town. The town especially was way over the top.
“What the hell are you gonna do with freedom?”
“Whatever the hell I feel like doing! That’s why they call it ‘freedom.’”
the real Swamp Fox was a great man. He once took a British fort without firing a shot. He built a tower and placed a cannon atop it. This gave the gun greater range than the guns of the fort. teh British understood he'd be able to shell them with impunity due to the height advantage, and thus surrendered rather than suffer needless losses.
The real Swamp Fox was a great tactician but an absolutely horrible man. Originally they were going to do a straight portrayal of Francis Marion, until pre-production research revealed that he was an arrogant, violent, sadistic man who worked and whipped his slaves to death. Far from being an American hero, he was despised by his superiors but kept on solely because of his effectiveness.
@@isaackellogg3493 I can't speak on his personality as I don't know about those aspects, but yes, my choice of words could have been better in calling him a great tactician.
" Far from being an American hero, he was despised by his superiors but kept on solely because of his effectiveness."
Wrong, he is an American hero for the results he got. Personality has no bearing on that.
Also, nearly all of the greats in history ruffled the higher-up's feathers. Innovative people do that as a direct result of being innovative. And, the higher-ups were wrong, and he was right. His methods worked.
The shot of the three horrified sons watching their father butcher someone - even Gabriel looks like a child seeing that.
I still find this to be an entertaining movie ever since I saw it when I was a kid. I think all the criticisms of it take it a little too seriously... It's not supposed to be a look at the real politics of the American Revolution, or a social commentary, or any type of scholarly examination of the period.. It's just an action-adventure movie with the backdrop of the American Revolution -- fake characters, fake events (larger events are real of course, like the British capturing Charles Town)... It's like Gladiator isn't supposed to be a seriously accurate depiction of Ancient Rome... It's just a fun movie, with fun costumes and fighting and such. Idk but I feel like it is usually pretty obvious what the filmmakers' intentions are with these things... like if you have a movie like Charlie Wilson's War, then yeah it's probably trying to actually tell you about a piece of history.. but if you have an adventure like Lonesome Dove or True Grit -- probably not trying to seriously explain what the American West was like.. it's just a fun setting to make an adventurous tale in.
The Frenchman is definitely my favorite. "If I die, I will die well dressed."
And i"ve said it before, i'll say it again. I used Aquanet in combat
Martin is a mix of a couple of people in History. The final battle is the Battle of Cowpens, the tactic used in which was considered by some to be the turning point of the war.
Got to checkout Heath Ledger in A Knight’s Tale. It’s a very fun ride and very self aware.
The way war was actually fought, 1v1 and face to face. We have came a long way from those types of battles and I'm thankful for it. But it takes true bravery to fight in those days, very few that these days.
One of my favorite war/movies In general and was surprised you didn’t tear up as much as expected! 🙈
Good reaction, Kamilla. Although this movie is a work of fiction, it is not far removed from the reality of how many of the British soldiers conducted themselves against the then-American colonists. This is why we have a US Constitution, a contract that binds the government into recognizing the natural-born rights of We the People. Natural born 'Rights' that would indeed exist even without the existence of the US Constitution. Freedom of speech, Right to bear arms, Rights against illegal searches and seizures, Rights against the government entering our homes and forcing us to house their soldiers etc etc etc. Those natural-born rights of We the People articulated within the first 10 Amendments of the US Constitution were part-and-parcel inspired by the brutal horrors that Americans suffered at the hands of the British in that era.
Its often hard for people to understand the warfare of this time. But simply put, these early guns were not super accurate, and didnt have as long a range (despite what you see in movies like this) so the best way to ensure you hit a target was to put large concentration of fire in that general direction. This meant lining troops up and fireing volleys. More often then not, victory came down to whoever could hold their formations together the longest. To break the enemy, calvary and artillery were used to tactically break or reposition enemy lines. This often lead to "moving battles" that took place over sometimes miles of land. Honestly, at a time before computers and instant communication. . . Its an impressive feat to pull off.
Correction. The British guns weren't very accurate. The British used muskets with unrifled barrels. However the Americans mostly used Kentucky rifles which did have rifles barrels. Which is why they didn't have to line up and could use ambush tactics.
@@markcarpenter6020 The americans mostly used muskets too. They had some of those rifles, but not many. Made good use of those they had tho.
@@hernerweisenberg7052 most of the guerilla forces used them because they were using their own hunting rifles not a standard military issue.
@@markcarpenter6020 Perhaps, but even about 100 years later in the american civil war, most troops were armed with smoothbore muskets.
@@hernerweisenberg7052 at the start of the war the north was using old weapons. By the end of the war the north was using the Winchester repeater and the colt navy for sidearms. In the south people were either using personal weapons or hand me downs obtained mainly from British and French forces.
Benjamin learned to fight like that in the French and Indian War (7 Years War) and adopted the fighting techniques of his Native Americans enemies who fought alongside the French. The battle of Fort Wilderness was a brutal example of hand to hand combat.
I would also recommend Turn Washington’s Spies, The Crossing, John Adams, the new show Franklin and the Madness of King George.
I watched a channel about ancient weapons. He concluded that the tomahawk was the most dangerous of all.
Kami, it's very cute when you slip into Norwegian. Thanks for sharing your experiences with us
I'm so glad you finally watched this movie! Great reaction as always. I've never watched this movie for historical accuracy. I think it does perfectly capture the idea of what the American spirit and dream should be. I bloody love the soundtrack. Also, if you're interested in seeing more of Mel Gibson you should watch "We Were Soldiers" you will cry a lot. I'm a full grown man and it makes cry. But totally worth it one of my favorite war movies of all time.
“So, what was in the mail?” I wonder if there was junk mail in 1776.. 🤔
We're trying to reach you about your wagon's extended warranty...
@@timgilbert3051😄😄 wow, your comment's brilliant. I'm ROFL
The boy who played the 2nd oldest son, Nathan, was also in The Sixth Sense. He was the mean classmate who bullied the main boy, Cole.
Colonial sharp shooters targeted British officers as a matter of course. Officers wore a silver or gold plated gorget that hung down from his neck via a chain and rested over his heart. You actually see Washington wearing one in one of his paintings. By targeting officers the command structure would break down. It was said that British officers headed for the colonies often filled out their last will and testament.
You would think that they would have the foresight not to make themselves so conspicuous in battle. Tom Hanks's character in "Saving Private Ryan" also had a very conspicuous Captain's rank on his helmet (though I'm told in real life WWII Officers didn't do that). Such an appearance clearly puts a target on every officer's head. I notice both modern Canadian and American soldiers have their ranks in the front center of their uniforms instead of on their collars, or their shoulders. Their ranks are also blended in dark green instead of yellow to make it harder to see anyone's rank unless your up close and in front of them. IOW much less conspicuous.
@@x_trio_3_po333In WW2 officers had the choice as to whether or not to display their rank. Personally I would have refrained from showing my rank if I were an officer.
@@x_trio_3_po333Remember that this is an era where there are no radios. Severe limitations regarding command and control meant that officers needed to stand out for their men to see them. Another example would be Roman centurions who often wore brightly coloured cloaks and ornate helmet crests to help their own soldiers identify them better.
General's names, cities, and tactics are close to events. Muskets were smooth bored, so hitting your target was almost a game of chance. At 100 meters a successful shot happened only half of the time. Hence, you pack all your people together, and perhaps they would hit something. The frontier rifles, while of smaller caliber, were accurate to about 300 meters. "Aim small, miss small." Only about 25% of war deaths came on the battlefield. You were more likely to die as a POW through neglect. Being wounded was bad because of infection, but disease was the big killer. The real Swamp Fox was a commander, not an on field leader. This movie's evil bastard was based on an engaging fellow named Tarleton. Due to his killing of prisoners, Tarlton's Quarter, was used as reprisals. There is no record of him burning an occupied church. He retired in comfort after the war. For a more fanciful Swamp Fox, watch Disney's episodes from the 50s. Keep up the good work, Kam.
Lt. Colonel Banestre Tarleton's descendants returned the captured American battle flags he had taken.
I don't know if someone has commented on that detail, but while this movie starred Mel Gibson, it is not directed by him, but by Roland Emmerich.
Outside of this detail, it is one of my favorite movies and my favorite Roland Emmerich's movie. I'm fan of History but I also knew this movie took some liberties with the real History.
I love this movie with how well the actors played their characters, the costumes, John Williams's soundtrack and the story (especially as I now see this movie as both a war fable and some kind of hero's journey tale. I advice everyone to apply the steps of Campbell's story circle, I think you'll see what I mean).
And I have no issues with the liberties taken because this movie never outright announced at the start "this is what happened" or the cursed "this is the real story of..." (like "Braveheart"). No, it is a story that is happening in the context of the American revolutionary war that however depicted a part of the events that are not necessarily known of the big public.
This movie is underrated in my humble opinion. Not perfect, but a good story.
Just watched this movie again and I noticed something I never noticed. Movie was made in 2000, and in the very beginning when Mel Gibson is making the chair he weighs it 9lbs/11oz (9/11) and says "perfect." Then the chair breaks when he sits in it 🤔
It's actually quite historically accurate, generally. All Mel's later works are epic, and set in iconic times. If you haven't done We Were Soldiers, it's quite good, as well as Conspiracy Theory.
Historians have called it one of the most historically inaccurate historical movies ever made. So no. It is not quite historically accurate, generally. Quite the reverse in fact.
@@benkelly2024Yeah these replies are bad but expected. Many want these fantasies to be real. All of his movies are historical fiction. Like Gibson’s character keeping “free men” who simply worked for him on his plantation… I mean come on.
@@HawkAlumn there were an estimated 30,000 freed slaves during that time. So it's entirely possible he could have had free men working for him.
@@leatherman665 For one it was in South Carolina. Highly unlikely. Only a tiny fraction of blacks in the state’s history were documented as free.
Second Mel’s character was based on a literal slave-owner who raped his “property.”
This is the 2nd reaction video I have watched of yours. You have a good heart. I like your style. Subbed. !!
See "The Crossing" Excellent. Washington crosses the river and takes Trenton.
Historian's from Britain will say I am a liar
That " ax " is called a tomahawk. It's an ax built for combat and deadly
First Heath Ledger film?? You need to watch/react to "A Knight's Tale" right away. Outstanding film, with great costumes and music too.
I’m from North Carolina and it’s extremely beautiful 🎼✝️
Im French , We are proud to have helped you, even if it cost us the French Revolution and the death of the king and then the arrival of Napoleon's empire.
you lived free after that, we returned to France was catastrophic consequences
The Revolution
The end of the Monarchy
The 1st Republic
The end of the Republic
The empire of Napoleon
The wars against the Britains, the Prussians, the Italians, the Austrians
Every time I see this movie, I remember what my late wife said. It was Braveheart but in America. She was so right. Still liked the movie, but she was right.
They indeed woke up the Braveheart 💀💀💀
Movies over 2.5hrs in my day like Lawrence of Arabia, a great film too, had Intermissions for the audience so they might use the restrooms and get more goodies at the concession counter. I miss those days and the big old beautiful theaters.
Pro tips... RIP to the guy who played the general. Too many great parts to mention, tho he did a hillarious role in a movie with Vince Vaughn! The evil Colonel did a bit part in Armageddon, and roles in Blackhawk Down and Fury!
Colonial girls were experts at sewing, even mimicking their mothers stitches.
Kamila, for Mel Gibson's early standout movies: Mad Max, The Road Warrior, Gallipoli. The last one is a little bit of a heartbreaking war movie (if you made it through The Patriot you'll be ok) but SO good and put him on the road to stardom.
I love how invested you were in a number of scenes. Very cute. Very good movie.
this is one of my favorites. love your reactions
thanks, watched your braveheart and have been wanting this one
If this period interests you even the slightest, I would encourage you to watch the HBO series John Adams, which pretty acutely depicts John Adams journey as a legislature and attorney during the Revolutionary War. It also gives a fairly accurate account of many of the other founding fathers, particularly George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and let us not forget Abigail Adams contributions to John’s decisions. They also have an episode depicting his time asking the Dutch for a loan. Very interesting and despite a few possible overdramatized moments, it was very historically accurate. You would enjoy! ❤
Little boys as old as 10 to 12 years old were able to enlist in the military during the revolutionary war as drummers, which all they did was walk into combat and play the drum
I'm so glad you saw this movie! It's one of my favorites!
Centane: "What kind of actual training did you all have?"
Me: From the same commanders that thought wearing red coats, which paints them as an easy target, was also a good idea.
This is why, We will never stop or Kneel to No one. Ever.😂
The character of Tavington in this movie is based on the historical war criminal Col. Tarleron of His Majesty's Dragoons who committed far more numerous and heinous atrocities than can be depicted in a movie. Tarleton was the greatest recruiter for the Continental Army in the entire war. Alas, he escaped the Battle of Cowpens by running like the coward that he was. Under their bravado, all bullies are cowards.
Oh if this is the first movie you've seen where Heath Ledger is playing a role that isn't the joker.. you gotta watch.. a Knights Tale!
I'll write it down!! Thank you so much💓
well both main leads, heath (born and raise in perth, western australia) and mel are aussies..... mel grew up in australia since the age of 12 years old (as he was born in america NY, and his grandmother is australian), as mel's natural real way of speaking is australian accent and with american twang using aussie choice of words, and his career was help by aus entertainment companies to get him his initial international standing..... mel lives in US hollywood being his base of work, but at same time he and his first wife back then prefer raising their young family in australia, because aus is very family oriented country (ideal for his back then traditionalist catholic; this is also common trait to most aussies working in hollywood), oppose to career-rat race-status quo environment, mel was married to an aus nurse for 30 years and they have 7 children, he was also given the order of australia (highest honour given to an australian) in 1997, because mel opened many doors, opportunities and he actually help established australians to become dominant leads in hollywood entertainment industry, as he was like an ambassador promoting aus .....
They halted because muskets where extremely inaccurate past a certain distance, getting closer when you know that the enemy is ready to fire just increases your chances to get hit...
Kamilla, another entertaining Heath Ledger movie, if it hasn't already been recommended, is "A Knight's Tale".........It is a comedic, romance/ adventure movie, that I am positive you will enjoy!!!
35:36 the script called for Tavington to walk in and give his speech on foot, but Jason Isaacs insisted that barging into a church on horseback was much more intimidating. The director Roland Emmerich agreed.
my favorite movie with Mel gibson is this one, and my favorite with mel gibson as a director is the passion of the christ
This is a great movie! I’m glad to see you enjoyed it. I love all your reactions! you are an amazing lady!
Hi 😉Great to see you again 😃I’m getting ready to watch this review and Back to the Future for a double feature so hopefully you’ll love both of them ✨There very good movies So Enjoy and have a Nice Day ❣️
I'm so glad you reacted on this one ♥️...Sweet girl 😊
The main inaccuracy in this film is the supposed accuracy of the shootings that take place. Warfare was fought at such close quarters precisely because muskets were extremely inaccurate. They were only accurate up to 100 yards and only lethal up to 175 yards. Tactics dictated that 25 to 50 yards was the optimal range for volleys to be fired.