Ace actor you somewhat recognized as the main bad guy is Jason Issacs. He was in Armageddon, and starred in a TV series called Brotherhood. He also played Lucius Malfoy in the Harry Potter movies.Also the little girl who wouldn't talk passed away in real life from a drug overdose when she was just 21 years old.
Loved your reaction. I hope you'll consider AUSTRALIA with Hugh Jackman & Nicole Kidman. If you like Denzel Washington, he directs and stars in THE GREAT DEBATORS. It's based on the true story of a professor at a Black College during segregation & his Debate team of student's experiences.
My 9 year old daughter has autism and is nonverbal so the relationship with Susan really hits me hard when she says “I’ll say anything” ooof the water works
I watched this in the theater with some friends. My eyes were seriously leaking. Look around and nobody else was affected... thought I was going to get kicked out of the group. 😂
Thank you for sharing your reaction to "The Patriot," Mary. This was at least largely filmed in South Carolina, where I lived at the time. Benjamin Martin was partly based on Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox, whose actions were based in the same area, and whose grave is there. The movie hideout of his men was in a small island in Cypress Gardens park, and was a popular wedding site for years until the ruins set built for the film finally collapsed. I once helped transport a large alligator from there to an animal rescue site.
If it really was the actual site of the historical hideout (which I feel is doubtful), it's a shame that they didn't use sustainable materials and make it a permanent part of the park.
@@ariochiv To the best of my knowledge, it was simply chosen for purposes of the movie. That park has been used for other films as well, like "The Swamp Thing," "The Tempest(1998)," "An Occasional Hell," and "The Notebook." It's just a short distance from the General Dynamics plant where I worked on the construction of three classes of submarines between 1990 and 1994. That site was later used for "Die Hard 3" and "Ace Ventura 2."
@@duanetelesha A museum employee at Old Santee Canal State Park told me about 20 years ago that in Canada it was taught that the U.S. revolution would have failed if not for Marion tying up British troops, preventing many from countering Washington in the north.
Thought it was corny. Unfortunately for the brave slave(s) who fought in this war....they wouldn't be able to vote for the next 200 years. All men were created equal right?
Look, I love this movie, but it's very bombastic, and the throughline of the backwards yokel coming around to respecting muh strong black freedman is so hamhanded I can't believe it actually seems moving to people.
America has been called the largest, and longest running social experiment ever in the history of the world. The largest country in terms of the amount of different beliefs, religions, ideologies contained within its singular boarder, coexisting *relatively* peacefully.
@@ronmaximilian6953 True, but there were incidents of massacre and threats of same. And there are plenty of examples of the British Army burning civilian homes and hanging rebel sympathizers in reprisals, especially in the Carolinas. Of course, the US government did the same thing during the Civil War.
@@chaddnewman2699 much of the worst fighting in the Carolinas was not carried out by the British Army per se, but by what amounted to a civil war between rebel and loyalist militias.
I have read that during the Revolutionary War, a third of the people were Monarchist, a third of the people wanted independence from the British empire, and a third of the people just wanted to go about their business and be left alone. There were places where the Revolutionary war was bitterly divisive, as was the American Civil War.
Consider this: . The oldest settlements of the colonies were some 150 years old by the time of the Revolutionary War, 5-7 generations. At the same time, The Reformation and the European wars of religion were in full swing, with The Thirty Years War started in 1618. Flavors of Protestants like the Calvinists, that were not liked by more powerful factions were allowed to settle (or self-exile) in the Americas. With Catholics in Canada and Mexico, staying with the Crown was safe.
I had family on both sides of the revolutionary war. Part of my family ended up in Canada for a while because of this war. They where some of the original settlers of Rhode Island.
People often wonder why we Americans are the way that we are. Our nation was born from war and rebellion. God bless the men and women that fought to acquire and preserve freedom.
Yup... I think this was mostly based on Francis Marion (aka: the "Swamp Fox"), but a lot of the character arc was based on the exploits of other revolutionary war heroes like Thomas Sumter and Nathanael Greene, and even some historical aspects from Andrew Pickens and Daniel Morgan.
4:06 it wasn't really about the taxes. Like he said "Taxation without representation". The US colonies considered themselves to be English. They were ancestrally English(primarily), and their culture was an offshoot of English culture. They were also subjects of the British crown. What the colonist were angry about was that their rights granted to them by the British consitution were being violated, and they lacked representation in parliament in order to address those complaints. So they were angry that they were forced to pay taxes to a government which they had no representatives.
As an American student, my seventh grade US History class was set to watch The Patriot (with the brutal tomahawk bit skipped over, but we still knew what went down). My dad happened to own the movie and decided we would watch it as a family first to experience it together and talk about it. And boy, being the crier that I am _and_ being a daddy's girl, I was SO grateful for that, lol. Not only was there so much loss and intense emotion in general, but when the youngest daughter cried out, "Papa!" and ran after him, I was completely gone. Even watching in class the very next day I still had to discreetly wipe away tears! Pretty sure Gabriel's death was also super difficult to get through (as it still is). I thanked my dad after that probably more than once for inadvertently saving me from blubbering in front of all my peers 😅 It is of course very cinematic in a somewhat typical 90s fashion, but especially when so much reality is portrayed, I really appreciate those moments to sort of soften the blows. I only watch the movie every few years or so but I probably wouldn't watch it hardly ever if it didn't have some of those satisfying elements that make you feel like cheering 😉 Thank you for choosing to watch this, it was fun seeing it through the eyes of a non-American. It also reminds me of how little I know of the history of other countries and sparks my interest again in learning more!
really - how much reality? small pieces interlaced with fiction to make a better story. how many church burnings were carried out by the british? zero. It is a good film and story but please do not treat it as reality
If you wanted to watch a realistic "historical" movie and had to choose between a Mel Gibson film or Star Wars........ Thank you, Mel. You can see yourself out now. Don't call us; we'll call you.
Pardon my choice of words -- I basically meant realism; "reality" in that war is heart-wrenching and that people sacrificed their lives in the name of freedom. I should have corrected my sentence or added that explanation for context -- my apologies. In any case, had I been one of the people that actually believes that "based on a true story" holds any meaning in Hollywood, there are kinder ways to correct people. There's no need to be snarky.
Jason Isaacs character is based on the english hero Banastre Tarleton. Bloody Ban the Butcher. After his Warcrimes in the colonies he went on to become the Mayor of Liverpool, a Member of Parliament, Governor, a Knight, and a Baronet. He was a huge advocate of the Slavetrade and worked tirelessly against abolition of Africans and for expanding indenture to the Irish and Indians for the next 50 years. He never fired a whole town and Church in South Carolina. Rather that was earlier in Basking Ridge New Jersey.
@@cpj93070 Nah, The English hold way bigger monsters in much higher regard. We're more concerned with the trauma of Smallpox and Slavery. Fundamentalist Christianity. But more self-reflection and honesty would be great.
Nice reaction! The reason why soldiers stood face-to-face in lines in that era was because muskets were actually not very accurate. So in order to be effective, your soldiers stood in lines so that they could throw a "wall of lead" at the opposing army. It was the best way to try and hit something with muskets.
Colonel Tavington is based on Banastre Tarleton, who in real life survived the war and returned to England. He became a member of parliament and tried to prevent the abolition of the slave trade.
Absolutely correct!! Banastre Tarleton was also nowhere near as cruel as this movie makes Tavington out to be. Tarleton certainly wasnt a great dude. His men slaughtered a Virginian Militia that was trying to surrender. But he certainly did not burn civilians alive in a church.
A lot of people comment on the absurdity of fighting in tightly packed lines and exchanging volleys of musket fire, but it actually made sense at the time. Military muskets of the period were designed to be quick to reload rather than pinpoint accurate, so they couldn't reliably hit even a whole formation of men at any appreciable range. The bigger threat was getting crushed by a bayonet charge or ridden down by cavalry. The best defense against both of those was to stand shoulder to shoulder in a tight formation and present the enemy a dense wall of bayonets that was difficult to push through. It wasn't until the later part of the 1800's that firearms technology improved enough to make line warfare impractical, and militaries started to transition to trench warfare tactics instead.
This movie is excellent. I always cry when Susan calls after Benjamin. It’s even sadder now because that actress has since passed away. RIP to her and Heath Ledger. 🙏🏻💛
@@snazzydares8787it's a fictional character in real events, the major things were accurate and both Martin and Tavington were based on real people, they made Tavington a little worse than the real "Butcher" but the basics are there.
@@cp368productions2 how is changing characters accurate and banister tarlton ( the real life tavington) even he he was made a little worse would have never burnt a church full of civilians
The way of war then wasn’t exactly stupid. Due to the slow rate of fire, the most effective use of infantrymen was volley fire, everyone firing together at once. The massed formations were the way to do that. Also, when an attacking regiment closed with the enemy, it came down to melee fighting with bayonets and swords. When that happened, a tight, massed formation would overwhelm loosely spread out groups.
Well said, I would add that the inaccuracy of the smooth bore rifle a lot to do with it too. You were lucky to hit what you were aiming at past 30 yards. So the most efficient way to inflict casualties was to mass your troops and close to within a short distance before firing. You could aim at a specific person, but you were just hoping to hit anyone.
The biggest reason for standing shoulder to shoulder in lines is because charging cavalry horses will stop short and refuse to charge into an unbroken line. But as soon as one guy is missing from the line, then the horses will all crash thru instead, and that’s when cavalry really starts to wreck everything. That’s why you see the infantry immediately replace anyone who drops from the front line. They could lie down in a line and shoot volleys, but then the horses could just run up to them and stomp their skulls while they reloaded.
There is also the issue of communication. All the soldiers in a company had to be close enough to hear the shouted commands of their officers. Drums, flags, horns, or whatnot, could only give very basic signals such as march, charge, or retreat. Orders such as "wheel 1/4 turn left, dress the line, spread ranks, first rank fire" could only be given by shouts from the officer, and everyone had to be within hearing range.
In 2022, 50,000 Jewish refugees came to The U.S. just from France to escape persecution. So, whether we hear about it or not, that kind of stuff is still going on. Some people still have to escape even Western Europe regardless of the negative world narrative about The U.S.
Hey Mary! Just wanted to drop a note. First, thank you for checking out this movie. While not completely historically accurate, it is an amazing film. Again, thank you. From a "Son of the Revolution" This means my family can trace out heritage to an officer in the continental army. Second, in your view of America and how large it is. You could almost consider the United States to be 50 different countries because of how different they all are.
The fellow depicted, Francis Marion, was nicknamed the Swamp Fox by the British officer, Tarleton, (spl) who was tasked with hunting him down and destroying his force. He waged asymmetrical war due to the lack of men and equipment on his side but he managed to ruin the British war plans and keep them distracted long enough for Washington to win in the north. I think Gabriel was actually Marions nephew not his son.
He had brothers that were killed during the war too I believe, but killed family members were not the reason he started fighting. He was in the continental army before he became a militia commander
I really like this movie, you did an outstanding job reacting to it Mary. Hope you are still doing well. There are true aspects to the movie which makes it so interesting and entertaining.
The Contientals were Colonial regular military. Then there were the militias. The militia units generally had a poor reputation and contributed to several early defeats. This was because they often fired only one volley, maybe two of they were behind cover, then ran away, leaving big gaps in the line. This was used on one occasion however against the British. The militia was put up front, fired its volley and scattered, as expected. The British then advanced overconfidently into a trap of Continentals and cannon. It didn't go well for the British. This movie focuses on the southern theater of the war. It is less well known in part because fewer troops were used overall. However, there were guerrillas one both sides, some good some nearly bandits, real bandits taking advantage, and was overall rather less "gentlemanly" than up north.
I absolutely agree with your statements. The Southern theater was much different. The parts of the war fought in NY, PA, MA etc were very similar to a European war at the time. "gentlemanly" as you put it.
It was actually quite common at that time for widows or widowers to marry an in=law or vice versa. It was practicality sometimes, but in this movie, of course, it was for love also.
@19:44 They are super loyal to anyone who treats and feedS them well! Previous owner must have not been involved in the feeding and grooming of the dogs. Then they might have been loyal to *him*.... haha
I remember watching this with my mother, we both thought this would have a similar kind of ending to Braveheart (especially during Bejamin's fight with the guy who killed his sons) but fortunately it didn't.
One of the reasons the building of his home at the end looked so strange is because it was being built on the very spot his previous house stood before it was burned down. The only things left standing from the original home were the chimneys/fireplaces which were still in good condition so they built the home between them for future use.
From an absolute standpoint, we lost most battles to the British. There were a few factors in our favor. The first was disciplined leaders like Washington who was able to train farmers into disciplined troops, reducing our losses. We used guerrilla warfare tactics and did not fight European style unless we had to. Finally, France, still angry with England over The Seven Years War aided us with a naval blockade at the Battle of Yorktown. We surrounded Cornwallis on three sides and the French prevented escape by the sea forcing him to surrender. Ironic, since England's taxation on the colonies was a direct result of spending so much money in the Americas to win the Seven Years War in the first place.
Gen. Washington was highly indebted to Gen. Baron Von Steuben a Prussian who was in charge of training American troops to be able to fight against British Troops and their Hessian mercenaries!
A Prussian military officer by the name of Friedrich von Steuben turned the American troops into a disciplined force. All major European powers had specialist light infantry that used skirmisher tactics (using cover, launching ambushes, specifically targeting officers, etc.). The militia did target officers specifically as they were mostly armed with rifles but the majority of the battles won by the Americans were won by the standing continental army in large set piece battles where they deployed in line formations. As early as the 1790s veterans of the continental army were disgruntled at the fact that the civilian population believed that it was just the militia of "ordinary citizens" (despite the fact the majority of the militia in the early stages of the war were veterans of the French Indian War) that won the conflict.
In the aftermath of the battle near his house, Gibson's character gave aid to the wounded form both sides, without partiality. Yes, bundling bags were common. That way, a young courting couple could chat all night and get to know each other better, hopefully without "accidents." But in any case, when the life expectancy was about 35, some people thought getting a head start wasn't such a bad idea.
There's a book by Thomas paine, a political activist for America during the Revolutionary War, he has a quote that is Famous, during the darkest days of the Revolution when America was about to lose , he made a speech that ended with " America must win this war because WE HAVE IT IN OUR POWER TO BEGIN THIS WORLD OVER AGAIN". And as you see, America is people from all corners of the Earth , we are like a 7 layer dip, what makes America great is the diversity of people and culture in one place
My two favorite cinematic shots for different reasons are: Hacksaw ridge, when Desmond says I can't hear you and turns to the explosions and walks in. Patriot, when it shows the sons in a line after witnessing their fathers rampage, they all look so small.
Wars were fought in formation that way because Muskets didn't have rifling, which made them pretty inaccurate. The only hope that you had to do damage to an enemy was to mass up your troops in rows and fire volleys, otherwise you'd just have random people shooting random shots and wildly missing all the time. Rifles did exist, many Americans used them during the American Revolution but they were hard to make and gunpowder left a lot of residue that was hard to clean from the rifling of the barrel. So armies stuck with muskets until cleaner gunpowder was invented.
As an American, I can admit that we go "a little overboard" when it comes to nationalistic patriotism... (Most Americans don't comprehend that Europe has had a much different experience with nationalistic patriotism than we have)... With this movie, you can see how we arrived at some of that. A mans son is killed, and everything he owns set fire and he runs into the burning house to retrieve what? Arms and ammunition to make war upon the British. This resonates with us... individual response, individual ownership of arms. This movie definitely DRASTICALLY oversimplfies things, and definitely takes liberties with history, but, it's a good window into the "American Mythology" that we have collectively absorbed (right and wrong) over the last 200 years. This movie is also MASTERFUL at playing ones emotions... Very much like Braveheart. Both of those movies are among my favorite "you have angered a patient man, to your peril" type movies.
Thank you for sharing this with us. You asked how such a vast area as the United States could remain together as one country. Each region has different customs, ethnic makeup, and even different ways we think about things. Yet we, as Americans, do not owe loyalty to our government, to our president, or to any group. We owe our loyalty to our Constitution. Our Constitution defines our rights, our government, and the embodiment of our national identity. It places power in the hands of the people. Our Constitution is what we have fought and died for and is what unites us as a country. We the people, of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
31:48 That reminds me of something that happened at the Battle of Ia Drang Valley. An American officer was shot in the armpit and the bullet passed all the way from one side of his chest to the other. The wound was so severe that he couldn't get back up, so he turned command over to his second in command. Then the second in command was immediately hit, and fearing he might be mortally wounded, the second in command turned to the officer and told him "Tell my wife I love her!" The officer responded "I'm hurt worse than you are, you stupid son of a b**ch!"
That style of warfare existed for 300 years for a reason. The generals weren't stupid and it wasn't inefficient, it was the best way to fight. Line formation allowed for easier command and control. Before radios were invented, commanders had to issue orders via instruments and flags and so men needed to be grouped together to be able to hear and see their orders. Line formation also maximized firepower as muskets were inaccurate beyond about 100 metres, so having the men grouped together like that was the best method of inflicting casualties. The men would also be grouped together in square formations to defend against cavalry attacks, as unless trained from birth and their riders are suicidal horses won't charge a prepared infantry square All major European powers had specialist light infantry that used skirmisher tactics (using cover, launching ambushes, specifically targeting officers, etc.). The soldiers wore brightly coloured uniforms because the smoke generated by thousands of muskets made identifying friendly and enemy units extremely difficult. A uniform that immediately shouted "I am on your team, don't shoot!" was extremely important. The British wore red and white, the Americans wear blue and white, etc. At the battle of Wagram during the Napoleonic wars between France and Austria Saxon soldiers fighting for the French get fired on by friendly units because they wore white uniforms like the Austrians.
I'd seen this a couple of times before I encountered the directors cut. Adds in some little bits that flesh the story out and make many of the motivations clearer
8:33 Hand to hand fighting is unbelievably stressful and frighteningly faster and more chaotic than it looks in movies. During Japan's Satsuma rebellion, rebellious samurai took advantage of densely forested terrain with very little open space to get close enough to ambush government patrols who were armed with rifles but had little training or experience in hand to hand fighting to ambush them up close, and the government troops couldn't handle the terrifying stress of fighting for their lives up close and personal versus men who had spent their entire lives training in close combat. This was enough of a problem that the government recruited former samurai who had joined the police force and formed special sword squads that could go int that claustrophobic environment and fight the rebels with equal competence.
1:49 Tejanos made a similar argument that being ruled and taxed by a government in Mexico that was far removed from and indifferent to the unique local needs and concerns of its remote territories was no different from being ruled and taxed by the farther removed but similarly unrepresentative government in Spain from which Mexico had won its independence.
I'm happy you've taken an interest in my beloved home Mary. So, you're wondering why America is so diverse and yet united? The answer is largely to be found right here, in the nature of its founding. It was forged on a frontier filled with settlers of every common ethnicity and nation of the day. In an environment where free thinking and enterprise was not only possible but commonplace. The New World was seen as a new kind of place and that's exactly why the American experiment worked so well. The people weren't bound together by their former kings or an aristocracy or even by ethnicity or a common state religion; because a great deal of them came to escape religious persecution. No, instead, each citizen was seen as a ruler in his own right. And all men were seen as co-equal contributors to the ruling of the country and equal by their very human nature from the time of their creation. Which was another VERY new idea for the time period and ultimately contributed to the downfall of slavery and religious persecution worldwide. It would take 100 more years before a truly national, federal identity would be forged around the time of the Civil War. But the revolution and the independence laid all the groundwork that was necessary for that to happen. It was only a matter of time from then on. You should try finding old episodes of the children's show Liberty's Kids on RUclips. It lays out the revolutionary era and all the major players and it's pretty fun.
Funny that so many of Roland Emmerich's films are seen as "American" when he's from Germany (although I think he has dual citizenship now), but some of the best American films are made by foreign talent; Casablanca is from a German director. Top Gun was directed by a Brit. Once Upon a Time in America was directed by an Italian. Gravity was made by a Mexican. The Big Country was directed by a German. Chinatown was directed by a Frenchman. Robocop by a Dutchman. Recently, Bad Boys for Life was directed by two Belgians of Moroccan descent. Windtalkers was directed by a Chinese filmmaker. But at the risk of offending the rest of the world, in America, we often feel like we ARE the world (because we're such a huge melting pot to begin with). All the more troubling when a large segment of the population wants to throw out all the immigrants, lol. When you said it's difficult to imagine a large "singular" nation like America (or perhaps China or Russia), in contrast with the varying cultures of Europe, it may help to remember that such places are filled with regional and geographic sub-cultures that are always struggling for their own cultural identity, and America is considered a grand experiment, still in progress. Texans and other states have occasionally voted to secceed from the union. Life in the southeastern United States, for example, can be as "foreign" to New Yorkers or Californians as life on the Hawaiian Islands might be to a Texan or a desert dweller from Nevada. Popular movements may start in one region, sweep across the nation in solidarity, or face tremendous pushback from everyone else. What we tend to share are corporate and/or relgious markers like churches and McDonald's - check out "The Founder" with Michael Keaton if you want to see how Mickey D's came to prominence, quite fascinating actually - and strip malls and movie theaters and the like. But the local cultural flavors can be wildly diverse across the 50 "United" states, so at some point in your life, I'd highly recommend coming to America, renting a car for a week (or two if you can), and simply driving across the country from coast to coast. It took Lewis and Clarke two years to traverse what would become the United States, but I've gone from Charleston, South Carolina to Los Angeles, California in just three days and nights at my speediest. I've also had the luxury of taking my time once or twice, and you don't even have to spend that much money on tourist traps or amusement parks or whatever to get a very eye-opening experience. We have deserts, forests, rolling hills, wide open plains (our national forests are GORGEOUS, and free to tour), beaches with cold water, beaches with hot water, and a number of island chains all around (Puerto Rico wants to be our 51st state, and we've only been around for a bit over 200 years, so stranger things have happened). We've got luxury resorts if you can afford it, cheap motels and other cheap, entertaining diversions if you can't; you name it. It's SO big its hard to imagine that the entire United Kingdom could fit inside of Texas, lol. Yet at one time, the British Isles controlled much of the western world. So local cultures still matter, I think that's what I'm saying, we're just united by larger ideas of self-governance, and of course, corporate interests. Anyway, try The Devil's Disciple, written by George Bernard Shaw, with Kirk Douglas, Burt Lancaster, and Sir Lawrence Olivier. It's a CLASSIC film (and story) about the American Revolution, without all the Emmerich emotionalism, for better and worse. At a breezy 83 minutes, it's also the cinematic equivalent to a quick "airport read", lol. Check out the trailer if nothing else: ruclips.net/video/MQC34HPyccw/видео.html&ab_channel=HDRetroTrailers And thanks for all the great reactions/reviews!!!
Warfare was fought like that due to the weapons of that period of time. The common soldiers used flintlock muzzle loader rifles. It has to due with their range, accuracy, and time to fire an reload. First is range. The rifles of the tome period could shoot about 400 yards (about 365m) but they wasnt accurate though. So soldiers would often stand face to face with their enemies at maximum 100 yards (about 90m). For more deadlier accuracy they would often be facing each other between 20-50 yards (about 18-45m). Now we get into accuracy and firing/reload times. Due to those they would form what is called "Line of Battle". Line of battle is basically where a group of soldiers would form 2-4+ rows of soldiers lined up together. It was used for multiple different reasons. 1: using volley firing where everyone fires all at the same time using the volume of te amout of rifle fire to to reduce your energies on front of you if you fired first. 2: due to the amout of time it took to fire and reload the muzzle a loader rifle they would also fire by the line to keep a contant rate of fire on the enemy. Depening on how many rows you have in your line of battle the first row would fire and the 2nd row would fire while the first row is reloading, wnd so on an so forth. If you have more than 2 row of soldiers in your line of battle by time the last row in your line of battle does their volley is done foring the front row should be close to or completely reloaded and ready to fire again. An average person could fire and reload 1-2 shots per minute with muzzle loader rifles. A well trained soldier could fire about 3 shots per minute. Due to this way of fighting with line of battles against the Britishnwe adapted Guerrilla tactics and the citizen militia was the main ones to use it.
She’s over here saying “why are people spitting everywhere!?” and I’m over here asking why she’s laughing like that.. sounds like she’s gasping for air 🤦♂️🤣
The thing about the Revolutionary War is that King George III of Britain forgot that the American colonies were not vassal states that one could bleed of resources, and that controlling them would be very difficult being half a world away. High taxation without any sort of say in what was taxed and how it was used (mostly not for the colonists benefit) was what triggered the whole thing, the Boston Tea Party being one of those events (tea in those days was compressed into bricks for shipping, so throwing crates upon crates of that into the harbor was a HUGE financial loss and a symbolic defiance of the Empire). Most people wanted to live their lives in peace though, but England could not have any of their colonies defying the King, and so troops were sent instead of diplomats, and well, we all know how it eventually turned out. That, plus Benjamin Franklin enlisting the aid of the French, who were always ready to fuck with England in those days, really made the outcome inevitable, really.
And then Britain went on to create the biggest empire in history after this and France as a country was in ruin from there revolution, so who really got the last laugh?
One of my favorite anecdotes about the Revolutionary War is that during the opening months, a statue of King George was torn down, melted down, and then turned into musket balls to fire at the British.
Great reax as always, Mary. They were helping both British and American soldiers at their home in the beginning of the movie (note both blue and red coats) - Tavington (loosely based on Bannistare “the butcher” Tarelton) ordered the house to be burned because they were aiding the Continentals, and then ordered the “rebels” shot. Other good war films: We Were Soldiers; Lone Survivior, Courage Under Fire (a sort of mystery set in war). A legal one you haven’t done yet and stars Harrison Ford: Presumed Innocent. Also legal thrillers: The Firm, The Pelican Brief, The Client. Sincerely, 2 attorneys in US who are big Movies with Mary fans.
I enjoy this film for what it is. As you said, it is very "Hollywood", but it also touches on a lot of the basic tenets of patriotism I was taught as a child.
Mary, you nailed it that this movie is pretty cheesy in parts, but it's hard for us Americans not to love it. The basics were true in that the early part of the war didn't go well for us, but our troops rallied and ultimately won with the help of our French allies. The warfare style that you noticed was in fact much as depicted. That same line up and shoot at each other style carried over into our Civil War, too. I can't remember if you've watched the movie Glory yet, but it's a moving story of our Civil War through the eyes of a real American colonel who led one of the first colored regiments. It is based on the many letters he wrote home to his parents.
Glory is a great film. I wish someone would make a film about the black loyalists in the war of independence. I have been reading about them, thousands of slaves joined up, given freedom and land in Canada after the war.
People are weirder than ever before. "An actor shouldn't act, hire somebody that is." a common talking point I've see for newer movies. Thankfully most just being nerds about it which I don't mind. A movie pushing interest in history is a good thing. Some though. Supposedly historical inaccuracy of certain portrayals got one or two making fiction of actual history. Their revenge an atrocity against truth, their 'balance' a hypocrisy. That I must say something so common as two wrongs don't make a right. Expected, especially online.
Last I checked this is kind of based off of multiple historical people combined into a few characters. Like Francis Marion "The Swamp Fox" for instance.
When people had the habit of chewing on tobacco leaves, lots of saliva filled their mouths, and they had to spit. When I looked at colonial buildings in Philadelphia, they had spitting boxes filled with kitty litter on the floor. Later, brass spitoons were used; these were brass jugs with a bell on the top that looked like the front of a trombone. Spitoons were a part of American life until the 1918 influenza epidemic, when they were recognized as a disease vector, and they disappeared from public places.
The Patriot is a historical fiction and the lead is modeled on the real hero known as the Swamp Fox. A man named Francis Marion who lead hit and run raids in the south. Like the movie he kept the Britts occupied, preventing the superior forces from defeating the Americans in detail. There was a bigger war going on in europe at the same time and later in 1812 as well. In europe the names Napoleon and Wellington were the key figures in 1812.
Fun fact: Joseph Plumb Martin was only 15 when he joined the Connecticut state militia in the summer of 1776 & later joined the Continental Army of George Washington, serving 6 years. During the American Civil War, Manny Root was 11 when he enlisted as a drummer boy for the Union Army.
My family is in Kentucky because my ancestors fought directly under George Washington, and their payment was land in Kentucky. My aunt still has the documents. This was loosely based on real history. George, Washington only had three dates before he married his wife he often referred to the war as the cause, and before one battle he thought he was gonna die, and he wore a specific uniform. If you have prime, or if you have a way to find the documentary the first American, I highly recommend. There are paintings of that flag, and there are paintings showing soldiers with the head wraps that you saw in the movie.
I am a former U.S. Army officer. The reason the soldiers had to line up and march close to the enemy to fire is that they were equipped with smooth-bore muskets, which were not very accurate nor had significant range. Thus, to have any effect, it was necessary to concentrate fire on the enemy at close range. Americans, living on the frontier, had rifles for hunting. Rifles have greater range and accuracy, so hit and run guerilla tactics were effective. The movie is not a true story, but it is based (loosely) on real people and events. Benjamin Martin is loosely based on Francis Marion, the “Swamp Fox,” with whom one of my ancestors fought! Colonel Tavington is loosely based on Banastre Tarleton, who survived the war and became a member of the British Parliament. For more of his evil, watch the movie, Amazing Grace! It is NOT unrealistic for a racist to change in combat. I personally know of an Alabama soldier whose father was a member of the KKK changing in the Vietnam War. Bonds among soldiers are strong, and this particular soldier ended up marrying the sister of a black comrade in arms.
René Auberjonois, who played Reverend Oliver, also played Father Mulcahy in the 1970 film M*A*S*H, but his best known role is "Constable" Odo on "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" for all seven seasons.
War was conducted very differently back then. Guerrilla tactics were almost nonexistent and considered extremely dishonorable even among the victorious side. Such is noted when Tavington explains that he cannot return to England for how he wants to fight the war.
Guerrilla tactics was used before these, at the beginning of the war. They pushed the British all the way back to Boston, from Concord, through the woods the first days of the war.
This movie was very, very, very loosely based on history. The initial reluctance of a number of colonists in the southern colonies to enter the war is correct. Being much more agricultural, the southern colonies had closer economic ties to Britain (crops for manufactured goods) - many planters along the coast were reluctant to go to war. So after stalling in the north, the British moved the war south because they thought there would be more loyalist support in the south. That was until the Battle of the Waxhaws where a number of revolutionaries were executed on the field after they surrendered by British commander Banastre Tarleton. This led a lot of the "still undecided" to come down on the side of the revolution with the phrase "Tarlton's quarter" being used by revolutionary militia when no quarter was given to the British in later battles. The battles in South Carolina of Camden, the Waxhaws, and Cowpens are reflected in the movie. The retreat over the hill in the last battle of the movie to draw in the British and ambush them is roughly what General Morgan did at Cowpens which was a significant turning point in the war. Colonel William Tavington was loosely based on Banastre Tarleton. Captain Benjamin Martin was loosely based on Francis Marion, "The Swamp Fox". One thing left out is that a lot of the fighting in the south was between patriot and loyalist militias. For example, King's Mountain where the only British soldier, Ferguson, was the commander of the loyalist militia. At the end of the revolutionary war most loyalists (both in the north and south) either left for Britain, Canada, Spanish Florida, or the British Caribbean. And, yes, the movie exaggerated characters. And a substantial number of colonists were loyal to Britain during the war. But it was still an entertaining movie.
@@americandad8903 From what I recall the battle of Cowpens was the patriot victory that changed Cornwallis' strategy. After Tarleton was defeated at Cowpens and Morgan and Greene met up, Cornwallis decided to vigorously pursue Greene (Morgan had retired, ill health). Cornwallis "burned his baggage" for light travel. Then Greene led him on a wild goose chase all through North Carolina and Virginia. I imagine the colonists, knowing the country better, could forage better and probably had a lot of support from the locals in the NC and VA Piedmont "backcountry". So Greene just stayed slightly ahead of Cornwallis until Cornwallis, exhausted, scrambled to the coast at Yorktown hoping to get relief from the British navy. But... drumroll... the French navy showed up first and blocked the harbor. Then GW showed on the land side of Yorktown. The rest is, well... "Happy Fourth of July!" :-)
When I was younger, there was a nice British family who moved in next to us. I invited the daughter over to watch a movie because my parents were out of town. For some reason, I put this movie on without thinking. What is even more awkward is the fact that my aunt came over to make sure I wasn't throwing parties and she walked in on me knuckles deep on my new British queen.
Thanks Mary! I have been to Yorktown Virginia for July 4th. To visit the fort and surrounding area. One heck of a celebration with fireworks, a parade, people dressed in period fitting attire. Every American should go once, even Europeans do. Met a British family when i was there. Be prepared though in July that day on the 4th when i went it was 102 degrees with 100% humidity.
I always thought Tavington was a bit over the top as a bad guy. He is based an a British Colonel named Banastare Tarleton, who was one of the opponents of Francis Marion, whom Mel Gibsons character is based on. Tarleton became infamous for an incident in which 200 surrendering soldiers were killed at the Battle of Waxhaw Creek. Tarleton was commanding a force of American Loyalists (those who stayed loyal to the British Government), when a group of 500 American rebels tried to surrender. While accepting the surrender Tarletons horse was shot out from under him. Thinking that thier commander had been killed in an incredibly dishonorable way, his troops open fired on the surrendering forces and killed over 200 of them. So his reputation is kind of undeserved.
"...not on the frontier, but, amoungst us." He is referencing the Colonies' prior war experience, the French and Indian War, in the 1750s,(LAST OF THE MOHICANS), which was fought on the northwestern frontier, away from most civilian experience in South Carolina.
7:43 *Mary:* _"I'm confused as to who they were helping."_ 🤕 They were helping the wounded from both sides. 12:31 _"Write her."_ _Oh, _*_write_*_ her."_ My guess is we were to assume he heard _"ride her."_ 🤭 *EDIT:* I'm about to watch your *_Firefly_* reactions, but cannot find your reaction to *_Serenity._* Was it taken down? Thanks for the reaction!
The villain Colonel Tavington is based on a real British officer, Bannistre Tarleton, who was known as "The Green Dragoon" and "Butcher Ban". The incident of his soldiers killing killing surrendered Virginian soldiers really happened at the Battle of Wahaws in South Carolina. The incident is known as "Buford's Massacre" after the name of the commander of the soldiers who were killed, Colonel Abraham Buford. For the rest of the war, a call of "Give them Tarleton's quarter" from Colonial forces was a call to offer no quarter or to shoot surrendered British soldiers. One of Abraham Buford's sons, John Buford, was a General of Union Cavalry in the American Civil War (all of his sins and nephews served in the ACW). He played a critical role at the beginning of the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863. On July 1 his cavalry brigade, serving as advance screen for the Army of the Potomac, engaged a division of Confederate infantry, delaying the advance of Confederate forces into Gettysburg, which allowed a Union Corps d'Armee to occupy superior defensive positions, which they held throughout the next 3 days of battle as they were reinforced by additional Corps'. Brigadier General John Buford is played by actor Sam Elliot in the excellent 1993 movie "Gettysburg", which is based on the book "the Killer Angels" by historian Michael Schara.
I actually attended Francis Marion University "The Patriots" - this movie was actually based on actual events. Francis Marion "The Swamp Fox" was the individual this movies was based on.
British burning a church never happened. Never mind people burning within. Can you imagine what propaganda on both sides could do with such an event? Yet it is pivotal event in this movie. History is bombastic enough, shame Hollywood feels the need to mess with it.
“I’m confused as to who they were helping.” They were helping the wounded on both sides, as Martin was doing everything he could to stay out of the war at that point in the movie. The Dragoons, led by Lucius Malfoy, came and changed all that.
❤❤❤ Mary, it's been said that the war in South Carolina was a demonstration of America's first Civil War. There were at least 5000 Redcoats recruited from the population. Mel's character was loosely based on the Swamp Fox. Francis Marion did have a band of merry men, and they fought mostly a guerilla style of warfare. His nemesis was Banastre Tarleton known for his brutality. He died a rich old man in 1833. "BOOOO!" I always thought Jason Isaacs would have been a great James Bond. Alas, it didn't happen. Walt Disney had a series of shows about the Swamp Fox staring Leslie Nielsen. At least some of the shows are on RUclips. Thanks for watching. Be well.
When he said "Why shouldn't I pay my taxes to a tyrant a few thousand miles away instead of the thousand tyrants who are already here"? Someone should of said to him "Britain is already over infested with tyrants" Chum.
The reason why armies fought the way they did was because of the musket itself. Being the first real "reliable" firearm, it was limited by its range and accuracy. In order to maximize its effectiveness, armies would send "volleys" of bullets by standing in orderly lines and firing in a single direction, just like ships at sea. Why they were so close together was due to the poor range of the musket, partly due to the lack of boring of the weapons that would give the bullet a spin, like an American football, like modern weapons. To negate this, armies would have to march close to the other army in order to close the distance.
The Patriot is loosely based on some real life historical characters that took part in the southern theater during the American Revolutionary War. Must say you've not change during your pregnancy at all Mary, reason I say is that another couple who also have a RUclips review channel named the Beesleys that are expecting just around your time frame, she's showing allot more than yourself, like I stated earlier you haven't changed at all on the screen. The Beesleys live on Jersey Island UK not overly far from Belgium.
I finally understand what _"Aim small, miss small"_ means. If you aim for the man and miss, then you likely miss the man. But if you aim for something small, like a button, then if you miss the button, you are still likely to hit the man.
Actually, most of the British soldiers went to Canada. The Revolutionary War technically ended in 1783, but there were still Battles between the United States and the British, War of 1812, until 1815.
Jason Isaac's character is largely based on Bannistre Tarleton, who was infamous for killing surrendering Patriot soldiers. His command got routed at Cowpens, but unlike Isaac's character, Tarleton survived and eventually returned to England. His legacy is the term "Tarleton's quarter", which basically means to take no prisoners.
Thing is he was later considered a very compassionate commander. There was something about the Revolution that brought out the absolute worst in all involved.
If anyone is interested, there is a RUclips channel called ReelHistory in which a historian looks at military movies, including this one, and shows where they are historically accurate and where they are not. His reaction to this movie is interesting, and worth a view, at least for me. This movie generates curiosity about the Revolutionary War, and if that leads folks to read about the time period and learn from historians, instead of movie scriptwriters, then the movie has done a good job. Thank you Mary for watching this one. We all look forward to your point of view.
One of my favorite movies and a pretty good depiction of the brutality of that war. It was not adults sent overseas but fought on our doorsteps with our children and families. The beauty of being an American was that regardless of our differences, when it mattered, we would all come together but I don't think that would be the case these days. Different times...
Guess you don't remember after 9-11. Enlistment into the military about tripled, to go and fight. If a war would come here all would fight. That is why we fight for the 2nd amendment. We will never disarm. Just like the Minutemen of the pass.
@@TheNighthhawk You are living in the past state of how things worked. Most of the people under 25 don't even want to get a job let alone go to war. Things are not the same as they were 20 years ago. The only domestic wars people partake in now is on gender and political affiliation. If it came down to it, 90% of the population wouldn't pick up a weapon and defend themselves and would be pissing their pants in the basement of their moms house. Like I said, different times.
3:04 After the Boston Massacre in 1770, England sent a lot of troops into British America and really tried to clamp down on wildfire of a rebellion that was occurring. At this point the colonies were still trying to make peace with England. On April 19, 1775 you had the "shot heard around the world" when the war broke out at Lexington and Concord in Massachusetts. Farmers and citizens picked up their weapons and attacked the British all through the countryside, forcing them back to Boston and then laying siege to the city for nearly a year until March 17, 1776 when the British evacuated the city. At this point independence was basically the only real course and the Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4th, 1776. Later that Summer in August 1776, the British landed a major force in New York and eventually captured New York City and held it for 7 years.
YAY CONGRATS AMERICA lol :D
Pew-Pew and B-B-Q!
Thank you!!!
Bundling bags are still used (I'm told) by the Amish in America.
Ace actor you somewhat recognized as the main bad guy is Jason Issacs. He was in Armageddon, and starred in a TV series called Brotherhood. He also played Lucius Malfoy in the Harry Potter movies.Also the little girl who wouldn't talk passed away in real life from a drug overdose when she was just 21 years old.
Loved your reaction. I hope you'll consider AUSTRALIA with Hugh Jackman & Nicole Kidman. If you like Denzel Washington, he directs and stars in THE GREAT DEBATORS. It's based on the true story of a professor at a Black College during segregation & his Debate team of student's experiences.
My 9 year old daughter has autism and is nonverbal so the relationship with Susan really hits me hard when she says “I’ll say anything” ooof the water works
That scene hits me hard and I don't even have kids. I can only imagine how you feel.
The part where his daughter runs to him gets me every time. Even though I know it's coming.
I watched this in the theater with some friends. My eyes were seriously leaking. Look around and nobody else was affected... thought I was going to get kicked out of the group. 😂
It's a shame she died so young. The actress I mean of course.
EVERY SINGLE TIME 😢
@@mattkandel2449 Nobody else was affected?! I suggest you back away from them slowly, making no sudden movements...
@bigdream_dreambig -we were all about 13. Teenagers are strange.
Thank you for sharing your reaction to "The Patriot," Mary. This was at least largely filmed in South Carolina, where I lived at the time. Benjamin Martin was partly based on Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox, whose actions were based in the same area, and whose grave is there. The movie hideout of his men was in a small island in Cypress Gardens park, and was a popular wedding site for years until the ruins set built for the film finally collapsed. I once helped transport a large alligator from there to an animal rescue site.
If it really was the actual site of the historical hideout (which I feel is doubtful), it's a shame that they didn't use sustainable materials and make it a permanent part of the park.
I'm glad you mentioned Francs Marion, I was going to add another comment about Ben Martin was based on the Swamp Fox. Thanks
@@ariochiv To the best of my knowledge, it was simply chosen for purposes of the movie. That park has been used for other films as well, like "The Swamp Thing," "The Tempest(1998)," "An Occasional Hell," and "The Notebook." It's just a short distance from the General Dynamics plant where I worked on the construction of three classes of submarines between 1990 and 1994. That site was later used for "Die Hard 3" and "Ace Ventura 2."
@@duanetelesha A museum employee at Old Santee Canal State Park told me about 20 years ago that in Canada it was taught that the U.S. revolution would have failed if not for Marion tying up British troops, preventing many from countering Washington in the north.
@@jeffthompson9622 That's what I figured.
'I'm honoured to have you with us..... Honored"
Gets me every time.
Thought it was corny. Unfortunately for the brave slave(s) who fought in this war....they wouldn't be able to vote for the next 200 years. All men were created equal right?
Look, I love this movie, but it's very bombastic, and the throughline of the backwards yokel coming around to respecting muh strong black freedman is so hamhanded I can't believe it actually seems moving to people.
America has been called the largest, and longest running social experiment ever in the history of the world. The largest country in terms of the amount of different beliefs, religions, ideologies contained within its singular boarder, coexisting *relatively* peacefully.
The Actor you recognized is Jason Issacs who played Lucius Malfoy in Harry Potter.
The character he plays is based on a real, historical figure named Banastre Tarleton. Not a nice guy, by all accounts.
@@chaddnewman2699absolutely not a nice guy. But not as evil as presented here. The British didn't burn churches let alone with people in them
@@ronmaximilian6953 True, but there were incidents of massacre and threats of same. And there are plenty of examples of the British Army burning civilian homes and hanging rebel sympathizers in reprisals, especially in the Carolinas. Of course, the US government did the same thing during the Civil War.
@@chaddnewman2699 much of the worst fighting in the Carolinas was not carried out by the British Army per se, but by what amounted to a civil war between rebel and loyalist militias.
@@ronmaximilian6953 Yep, commanded largely by British officers like….Banastre Tarleton.
I have read that during the Revolutionary War, a third of the people were Monarchist, a third of the people wanted independence from the British empire, and a third of the people just wanted to go about their business and be left alone. There were places where the Revolutionary war was bitterly divisive, as was the American Civil War.
Consider this: . The oldest settlements of the colonies were some 150 years old by the time of the Revolutionary War, 5-7 generations. At the same time, The Reformation and the European wars of religion were in full swing, with The Thirty Years War started in 1618. Flavors of Protestants like the Calvinists, that were not liked by more powerful factions were allowed to settle (or self-exile) in the Americas. With Catholics in Canada and Mexico, staying with the Crown was safe.
@@michaelgonzalez6295 Very interesting. Thanks.
i’m from the north but i still have to call it “the war of northern aggression” 😂😂😂 so hilarious
I had family on both sides of the revolutionary war. Part of my family ended up in Canada for a while because of this war. They where some of the original settlers of Rhode Island.
People often wonder why we Americans are the way that we are. Our nation was born from war and rebellion. God bless the men and women that fought to acquire and preserve freedom.
In case anyone is was wondering Mel Gibson’s Ghost character was based off of Francis Marian’s swamp fox
Yup... I think this was mostly based on Francis Marion (aka: the "Swamp Fox"), but a lot of the character arc was based on the exploits of other revolutionary war heroes like Thomas Sumter and Nathanael Greene, and even some historical aspects from Andrew Pickens and Daniel Morgan.
@@Mr.Ekshin It is a bit of a mishmash, but it's all entertaining.
4:06 it wasn't really about the taxes. Like he said "Taxation without representation". The US colonies considered themselves to be English. They were ancestrally English(primarily), and their culture was an offshoot of English culture. They were also subjects of the British crown.
What the colonist were angry about was that their rights granted to them by the British consitution were being violated, and they lacked representation in parliament in order to address those complaints. So they were angry that they were forced to pay taxes to a government which they had no representatives.
As an American student, my seventh grade US History class was set to watch The Patriot (with the brutal tomahawk bit skipped over, but we still knew what went down). My dad happened to own the movie and decided we would watch it as a family first to experience it together and talk about it. And boy, being the crier that I am _and_ being a daddy's girl, I was SO grateful for that, lol. Not only was there so much loss and intense emotion in general, but when the youngest daughter cried out, "Papa!" and ran after him, I was completely gone. Even watching in class the very next day I still had to discreetly wipe away tears! Pretty sure Gabriel's death was also super difficult to get through (as it still is). I thanked my dad after that probably more than once for inadvertently saving me from blubbering in front of all my peers 😅
It is of course very cinematic in a somewhat typical 90s fashion, but especially when so much reality is portrayed, I really appreciate those moments to sort of soften the blows. I only watch the movie every few years or so but I probably wouldn't watch it hardly ever if it didn't have some of those satisfying elements that make you feel like cheering 😉
Thank you for choosing to watch this, it was fun seeing it through the eyes of a non-American. It also reminds me of how little I know of the history of other countries and sparks my interest again in learning more!
really - how much reality? small pieces interlaced with fiction to make a better story. how many church burnings were carried out by the british? zero. It is a good film and story but please do not treat it as reality
If you wanted to watch a realistic "historical" movie and had to choose between a Mel Gibson film or Star Wars........
Thank you, Mel. You can see yourself out now. Don't call us; we'll call you.
Pardon my choice of words -- I basically meant realism; "reality" in that war is heart-wrenching and that people sacrificed their lives in the name of freedom. I should have corrected my sentence or added that explanation for context -- my apologies.
In any case, had I been one of the people that actually believes that "based on a true story" holds any meaning in Hollywood, there are kinder ways to correct people. There's no need to be snarky.
@mikearmstrong8483 then what are you doing here? Please be quiet and let the adults talk!!🙄😐
Jason Isaacs character is based on the english hero Banastre Tarleton. Bloody Ban the Butcher. After his Warcrimes in the colonies he went on to become the Mayor of Liverpool, a Member of Parliament, Governor, a Knight, and a Baronet. He was a huge advocate of the Slavetrade and worked tirelessly against abolition of Africans and for expanding indenture to the Irish and Indians for the next 50 years.
He never fired a whole town and Church in South Carolina. Rather that was earlier in Basking Ridge New Jersey.
Are you Americans mad that he was never punished for his crimes to Americans, even being labelled a hero in Britain?
@@cpj93070 Nah, The English hold way bigger monsters in much higher regard. We're more concerned with the trauma of Smallpox and Slavery. Fundamentalist Christianity.
But more self-reflection and honesty would be great.
Nice reaction! The reason why soldiers stood face-to-face in lines in that era was because muskets were actually not very accurate. So in order to be effective, your soldiers stood in lines so that they could throw a "wall of lead" at the opposing army. It was the best way to try and hit something with muskets.
The final pistol shot was for Thomas, the gut stab was for Gabriel, and the stab in the throat was for Benjamin.
Colonel Tavington is based on Banastre Tarleton, who in real life survived the war and returned to England.
He became a member of parliament and tried to prevent the abolition of the slave trade.
So by today's reckoning we'd call him a sc*mbag
Absolutely correct!! Banastre Tarleton was also nowhere near as cruel as this movie makes Tavington out to be. Tarleton certainly wasnt a great dude. His men slaughtered a Virginian Militia that was trying to surrender. But he certainly did not burn civilians alive in a church.
@@crashdown903p Tavington is fictional so I guess the writers' could go all in on making him irredeemable
@@crashdown903p Yes, he may have been a thoroughly nasty piece of work, but he didn't do that and neither did anyone else.
I laughed out loud when you said "I'm feeling a sense of aggression!" Just fantastic..
This is in my Top 3 of all time. That little girl talking to her dad for the 1st time, gets me every single time. Great movie and reaction!
The part where Lucius Malfoy kills The Joker really got me. Some Wizards just wanna watch the world burn.
A lot of people comment on the absurdity of fighting in tightly packed lines and exchanging volleys of musket fire, but it actually made sense at the time. Military muskets of the period were designed to be quick to reload rather than pinpoint accurate, so they couldn't reliably hit even a whole formation of men at any appreciable range. The bigger threat was getting crushed by a bayonet charge or ridden down by cavalry. The best defense against both of those was to stand shoulder to shoulder in a tight formation and present the enemy a dense wall of bayonets that was difficult to push through. It wasn't until the later part of the 1800's that firearms technology improved enough to make line warfare impractical, and militaries started to transition to trench warfare tactics instead.
This movie is excellent. I always cry when Susan calls after Benjamin. It’s even sadder now because that actress has since passed away. RIP to her and Heath Ledger. 🙏🏻💛
It is not good it I very very very historically inaccurate
@@snazzydares8787it's a fictional character in real events, the major things were accurate and both Martin and Tavington were based on real people, they made Tavington a little worse than the real "Butcher" but the basics are there.
@@cp368productions2 how is changing characters accurate and banister tarlton ( the real life tavington) even he he was made a little worse would have never burnt a church full of civilians
7:46 They were helping both side's wounded. The Red Coats are British and the blue coats are Americans.
The way of war then wasn’t exactly stupid. Due to the slow rate of fire, the most effective use of infantrymen was volley fire, everyone firing together at once. The massed formations were the way to do that. Also, when an attacking regiment closed with the enemy, it came down to melee fighting with bayonets and swords. When that happened, a tight, massed formation would overwhelm loosely spread out groups.
Well said, I would add that the inaccuracy of the smooth bore rifle a lot to do with it too. You were lucky to hit what you were aiming at past 30 yards. So the most efficient way to inflict casualties was to mass your troops and close to within a short distance before firing. You could aim at a specific person, but you were just hoping to hit anyone.
The biggest reason for standing shoulder to shoulder in lines is because charging cavalry horses will stop short and refuse to charge into an unbroken line. But as soon as one guy is missing from the line, then the horses will all crash thru instead, and that’s when cavalry really starts to wreck everything. That’s why you see the infantry immediately replace anyone who drops from the front line. They could lie down in a line and shoot volleys, but then the horses could just run up to them and stomp their skulls while they reloaded.
@@Robert-un7br Muskets are reasonably accurate to about 100 metres. Where'd you get the 30 yards number from?
There is also the issue of communication. All the soldiers in a company had to be close enough to hear the shouted commands of their officers. Drums, flags, horns, or whatnot, could only give very basic signals such as march, charge, or retreat. Orders such as "wheel 1/4 turn left, dress the line, spread ranks, first rank fire" could only be given by shouts from the officer, and everyone had to be within hearing range.
I began to explain this but grew frustrated trying to cover the why. Y'all have done a better job. 😊
Always remember, never get your history for movies. And based on a true story means fiction,
We have our faults but 31:12 it’s actually kinda nice and refreshing to hear someone outside the US give us a compliment.
And acknowledge what King Leopold II did in the Congo! .... That's a tough read!
In 2022, 50,000 Jewish refugees came to The U.S. just from France to escape persecution. So, whether we hear about it or not, that kind of stuff is still going on. Some people still have to escape even Western Europe regardless of the negative world narrative about The U.S.
Hey Mary! Just wanted to drop a note.
First, thank you for checking out this movie. While not completely historically accurate, it is an amazing film. Again, thank you. From a "Son of the Revolution"
This means my family can trace out heritage to an officer in the continental army.
Second, in your view of America and how large it is. You could almost consider the United States to be 50 different countries because of how different they all are.
The fellow depicted, Francis Marion, was nicknamed the Swamp Fox by the British officer, Tarleton, (spl) who was tasked with hunting him down and destroying his force. He waged asymmetrical war due to the lack of men and equipment on his side but he managed to ruin the British war plans and keep them distracted long enough for Washington to win in the north. I think Gabriel was actually Marions nephew not his son.
He had brothers that were killed during the war too I believe, but killed family members were not the reason he started fighting. He was in the continental army before he became a militia commander
I really like this movie, you did an outstanding job reacting to it Mary. Hope you are still doing well. There are true aspects to the movie which makes it so interesting and entertaining.
Wanted to see your reaction to my favorite scene when Benjamin shouts out God save King George in that tavern. That was funny!😄
Lol! I forgot about that, too funny 😆
The Contientals were Colonial regular military. Then there were the militias. The militia units generally had a poor reputation and contributed to several early defeats. This was because they often fired only one volley, maybe two of they were behind cover, then ran away, leaving big gaps in the line. This was used on one occasion however against the British. The militia was put up front, fired its volley and scattered, as expected. The British then advanced overconfidently into a trap of Continentals and cannon. It didn't go well for the British.
This movie focuses on the southern theater of the war. It is less well known in part because fewer troops were used overall. However, there were guerrillas one both sides, some good some nearly bandits, real bandits taking advantage, and was overall rather less "gentlemanly" than up north.
I absolutely agree with your statements. The Southern theater was much different. The parts of the war fought in NY, PA, MA etc were very similar to a European war at the time. "gentlemanly" as you put it.
It was actually quite common at that time for widows or widowers to marry an in=law or vice versa. It was practicality sometimes, but in this movie, of course, it was for love also.
@19:44 They are super loyal to anyone who treats and feedS them well! Previous owner must have not been involved in the feeding and grooming of the dogs. Then they might have been loyal to *him*.... haha
I remember watching this with my mother, we both thought this would have a similar kind of ending to Braveheart (especially during Bejamin's fight with the guy who killed his sons) but fortunately it didn't.
One of the reasons the building of his home at the end looked so strange is because it was being built on the very spot his previous house stood before it was burned down. The only things left standing from the original home were the chimneys/fireplaces which were still in good condition so they built the home between them for future use.
From an absolute standpoint, we lost most battles to the British. There were a few factors in our favor. The first was disciplined leaders like Washington who was able to train farmers into disciplined troops, reducing our losses. We used guerrilla warfare tactics and did not fight European style unless we had to. Finally, France, still angry with England over The Seven Years War aided us with a naval blockade at the Battle of Yorktown. We surrounded Cornwallis on three sides and the French prevented escape by the sea forcing him to surrender. Ironic, since England's taxation on the colonies was a direct result of spending so much money in the Americas to win the Seven Years War in the first place.
Gen. Washington was highly indebted to Gen. Baron Von Steuben a Prussian who was in charge of training American troops to be able to fight against British Troops and their Hessian mercenaries!
Pennsylvania Rifles too.
A Prussian military officer by the name of Friedrich von Steuben turned the American troops into a disciplined force. All major European powers had specialist light infantry that used skirmisher tactics (using cover, launching ambushes, specifically targeting officers, etc.). The militia did target officers specifically as they were mostly armed with rifles but the majority of the battles won by the Americans were won by the standing continental army in large set piece battles where they deployed in line formations. As early as the 1790s veterans of the continental army were disgruntled at the fact that the civilian population believed that it was just the militia of "ordinary citizens" (despite the fact the majority of the militia in the early stages of the war were veterans of the French Indian War) that won the conflict.
Made me laugh out loud, when you said "ooh I feel a sense of agression"
In the aftermath of the battle near his house, Gibson's character gave aid to the wounded form both sides, without partiality.
Yes, bundling bags were common. That way, a young courting couple could chat all night and get to know each other better, hopefully without "accidents." But in any case, when the life expectancy was about 35, some people thought getting a head start wasn't such a bad idea.
There's a book by Thomas paine, a political activist for America during the Revolutionary War, he has a quote that is Famous, during the darkest days of the Revolution when America was about to lose , he made a speech that ended with " America must win this war because WE HAVE IT IN OUR POWER TO BEGIN THIS WORLD OVER AGAIN". And as you see, America is people from all corners of the Earth , we are like a 7 layer dip, what makes America great is the diversity of people and culture in one place
My two favorite cinematic shots for different reasons are:
Hacksaw ridge, when Desmond says I can't hear you and turns to the explosions and walks in.
Patriot, when it shows the sons in a line after witnessing their fathers rampage, they all look so small.
Wars were fought in formation that way because Muskets didn't have rifling, which made them pretty inaccurate. The only hope that you had to do damage to an enemy was to mass up your troops in rows and fire volleys, otherwise you'd just have random people shooting random shots and wildly missing all the time.
Rifles did exist, many Americans used them during the American Revolution but they were hard to make and gunpowder left a lot of residue that was hard to clean from the rifling of the barrel. So armies stuck with muskets until cleaner gunpowder was invented.
As an American, I can admit that we go "a little overboard" when it comes to nationalistic patriotism... (Most Americans don't comprehend that Europe has had a much different experience with nationalistic patriotism than we have)... With this movie, you can see how we arrived at some of that. A mans son is killed, and everything he owns set fire and he runs into the burning house to retrieve what? Arms and ammunition to make war upon the British. This resonates with us... individual response, individual ownership of arms.
This movie definitely DRASTICALLY oversimplfies things, and definitely takes liberties with history, but, it's a good window into the "American Mythology" that we have collectively absorbed (right and wrong) over the last 200 years.
This movie is also MASTERFUL at playing ones emotions... Very much like Braveheart. Both of those movies are among my favorite "you have angered a patient man, to your peril" type movies.
Belgium in 2023 : yeah we're awesome and friendly. Belgium in the 1800s in Congo : yeah even the british are like WTF YOU GUYS ARE SICKOS
Thank you for sharing this with us. You asked how such a vast area as the United States could remain together as one country. Each region has different customs, ethnic makeup, and even different ways we think about things. Yet we, as Americans, do not owe loyalty to our government, to our president, or to any group. We owe our loyalty to our Constitution. Our Constitution defines our rights, our government, and the embodiment of our national identity. It places power in the hands of the people. Our Constitution is what we have fought and died for and is what unites us as a country. We the people, of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
31:48 That reminds me of something that happened at the Battle of Ia Drang Valley. An American officer was shot in the armpit and the bullet passed all the way from one side of his chest to the other. The wound was so severe that he couldn't get back up, so he turned command over to his second in command. Then the second in command was immediately hit, and fearing he might be mortally wounded, the second in command turned to the officer and told him "Tell my wife I love her!" The officer responded "I'm hurt worse than you are, you stupid son of a b**ch!"
That style of warfare existed for 300 years for a reason. The generals weren't stupid and it wasn't inefficient, it was the best way to fight. Line formation allowed for easier command and control. Before radios were invented, commanders had to issue orders via instruments and flags and so men needed to be grouped together to be able to hear and see their orders. Line formation also maximized firepower as muskets were inaccurate beyond about 100 metres, so having the men grouped together like that was the best method of inflicting casualties. The men would also be grouped together in square formations to defend against cavalry attacks, as unless trained from birth and their riders are suicidal horses won't charge a prepared infantry square
All major European powers had specialist light infantry that used skirmisher tactics (using cover, launching ambushes, specifically targeting officers, etc.).
The soldiers wore brightly coloured uniforms because the smoke generated by thousands of muskets made identifying friendly and enemy units extremely difficult. A uniform that immediately shouted "I am on your team, don't shoot!" was extremely important. The British wore red and white, the Americans wear blue and white, etc. At the battle of Wagram during the Napoleonic wars between France and Austria Saxon soldiers fighting for the French get fired on by friendly units because they wore white uniforms like the Austrians.
I'd seen this a couple of times before I encountered the directors cut. Adds in some little bits that flesh the story out and make many of the motivations clearer
8:33 Hand to hand fighting is unbelievably stressful and frighteningly faster and more chaotic than it looks in movies. During Japan's Satsuma rebellion, rebellious samurai took advantage of densely forested terrain with very little open space to get close enough to ambush government patrols who were armed with rifles but had little training or experience in hand to hand fighting to ambush them up close, and the government troops couldn't handle the terrifying stress of fighting for their lives up close and personal versus men who had spent their entire lives training in close combat. This was enough of a problem that the government recruited former samurai who had joined the police force and formed special sword squads that could go int that claustrophobic environment and fight the rebels with equal competence.
1:49 Tejanos made a similar argument that being ruled and taxed by a government in Mexico that was far removed from and indifferent to the unique local needs and concerns of its remote territories was no different from being ruled and taxed by the farther removed but similarly unrepresentative government in Spain from which Mexico had won its independence.
The part where the reverend throws the loaded gun back to Gabriel as he's falling gets me every time.
I'm happy you've taken an interest in my beloved home Mary. So, you're wondering why America is so diverse and yet united? The answer is largely to be found right here, in the nature of its founding.
It was forged on a frontier filled with settlers of every common ethnicity and nation of the day. In an environment where free thinking and enterprise was not only possible but commonplace. The New World was seen as a new kind of place and that's exactly why the American experiment worked so well. The people weren't bound together by their former kings or an aristocracy or even by ethnicity or a common state religion; because a great deal of them came to escape religious persecution.
No, instead, each citizen was seen as a ruler in his own right. And all men were seen as co-equal contributors to the ruling of the country and equal by their very human nature from the time of their creation. Which was another VERY new idea for the time period and ultimately contributed to the downfall of slavery and religious persecution worldwide.
It would take 100 more years before a truly national, federal identity would be forged around the time of the Civil War. But the revolution and the independence laid all the groundwork that was necessary for that to happen. It was only a matter of time from then on.
You should try finding old episodes of the children's show Liberty's Kids on RUclips. It lays out the revolutionary era and all the major players and it's pretty fun.
Funny that so many of Roland Emmerich's films are seen as "American" when he's from Germany (although I think he has dual citizenship now), but some of the best American films are made by foreign talent; Casablanca is from a German director. Top Gun was directed by a Brit. Once Upon a Time in America was directed by an Italian. Gravity was made by a Mexican. The Big Country was directed by a German. Chinatown was directed by a Frenchman. Robocop by a Dutchman. Recently, Bad Boys for Life was directed by two Belgians of Moroccan descent. Windtalkers was directed by a Chinese filmmaker. But at the risk of offending the rest of the world, in America, we often feel like we ARE the world (because we're such a huge melting pot to begin with). All the more troubling when a large segment of the population wants to throw out all the immigrants, lol.
When you said it's difficult to imagine a large "singular" nation like America (or perhaps China or Russia), in contrast with the varying cultures of Europe, it may help to remember that such places are filled with regional and geographic sub-cultures that are always struggling for their own cultural identity, and America is considered a grand experiment, still in progress. Texans and other states have occasionally voted to secceed from the union. Life in the southeastern United States, for example, can be as "foreign" to New Yorkers or Californians as life on the Hawaiian Islands might be to a Texan or a desert dweller from Nevada. Popular movements may start in one region, sweep across the nation in solidarity, or face tremendous pushback from everyone else.
What we tend to share are corporate and/or relgious markers like churches and McDonald's - check out "The Founder" with Michael Keaton if you want to see how Mickey D's came to prominence, quite fascinating actually - and strip malls and movie theaters and the like. But the local cultural flavors can be wildly diverse across the 50 "United" states, so at some point in your life, I'd highly recommend coming to America, renting a car for a week (or two if you can), and simply driving across the country from coast to coast. It took Lewis and Clarke two years to traverse what would become the United States, but I've gone from Charleston, South Carolina to Los Angeles, California in just three days and nights at my speediest. I've also had the luxury of taking my time once or twice, and you don't even have to spend that much money on tourist traps or amusement parks or whatever to get a very eye-opening experience. We have deserts, forests, rolling hills, wide open plains (our national forests are GORGEOUS, and free to tour), beaches with cold water, beaches with hot water, and a number of island chains all around (Puerto Rico wants to be our 51st state, and we've only been around for a bit over 200 years, so stranger things have happened). We've got luxury resorts if you can afford it, cheap motels and other cheap, entertaining diversions if you can't; you name it. It's SO big its hard to imagine that the entire United Kingdom could fit inside of Texas, lol. Yet at one time, the British Isles controlled much of the western world. So local cultures still matter, I think that's what I'm saying, we're just united by larger ideas of self-governance, and of course, corporate interests.
Anyway, try The Devil's Disciple, written by George Bernard Shaw, with Kirk Douglas, Burt Lancaster, and Sir Lawrence Olivier. It's a CLASSIC film (and story) about the American Revolution, without all the Emmerich emotionalism, for better and worse. At a breezy 83 minutes, it's also the cinematic equivalent to a quick "airport read", lol.
Check out the trailer if nothing else:
ruclips.net/video/MQC34HPyccw/видео.html&ab_channel=HDRetroTrailers
And thanks for all the great reactions/reviews!!!
Warfare was fought like that due to the weapons of that period of time. The common soldiers used flintlock muzzle loader rifles. It has to due with their range, accuracy, and time to fire an reload. First is range. The rifles of the tome period could shoot about 400 yards (about 365m) but they wasnt accurate though. So soldiers would often stand face to face with their enemies at maximum 100 yards (about 90m). For more deadlier accuracy they would often be facing each other between 20-50 yards (about 18-45m).
Now we get into accuracy and firing/reload times. Due to those they would form what is called "Line of Battle". Line of battle is basically where a group of soldiers would form 2-4+ rows of soldiers lined up together. It was used for multiple different reasons.
1: using volley firing where everyone fires all at the same time using the volume of te amout of rifle fire to to reduce your energies on front of you if you fired first.
2: due to the amout of time it took to fire and reload the muzzle a loader rifle they would also fire by the line to keep a contant rate of fire on the enemy. Depening on how many rows you have in your line of battle the first row would fire and the 2nd row would fire while the first row is reloading, wnd so on an so forth. If you have more than 2 row of soldiers in your line of battle by time the last row in your line of battle does their volley is done foring the front row should be close to or completely reloaded and ready to fire again.
An average person could fire and reload 1-2 shots per minute with muzzle loader rifles. A well trained soldier could fire about 3 shots per minute.
Due to this way of fighting with line of battles against the Britishnwe adapted Guerrilla tactics and the citizen militia was the main ones to use it.
She’s over here saying “why are people spitting everywhere!?” and I’m over here asking why she’s laughing like that.. sounds like she’s gasping for air 🤦♂️🤣
The thing about the Revolutionary War is that King George III of Britain forgot that the American colonies were not vassal states that one could bleed of resources, and that controlling them would be very difficult being half a world away. High taxation without any sort of say in what was taxed and how it was used (mostly not for the colonists benefit) was what triggered the whole thing, the Boston Tea Party being one of those events (tea in those days was compressed into bricks for shipping, so throwing crates upon crates of that into the harbor was a HUGE financial loss and a symbolic defiance of the Empire).
Most people wanted to live their lives in peace though, but England could not have any of their colonies defying the King, and so troops were sent instead of diplomats, and well, we all know how it eventually turned out. That, plus Benjamin Franklin enlisting the aid of the French, who were always ready to fuck with England in those days, really made the outcome inevitable, really.
And then Britain went on to create the biggest empire in history after this and France as a country was in ruin from there revolution, so who really got the last laugh?
@drussk8808 😂😂Keep dreaming that 81% of the UK is white British you complete clown.
One of my favorite anecdotes about the Revolutionary War is that during the opening months, a statue of King George was torn down, melted down, and then turned into musket balls to fire at the British.
Britain wasnt 3000 miles away, Canada (a british colony) shares an extensive land border.
Great reax as always, Mary. They were helping both British and American soldiers at their home in the beginning of the movie (note both blue and red coats) - Tavington (loosely based on Bannistare “the butcher” Tarelton) ordered the house to be burned because they were aiding the Continentals, and then ordered the “rebels” shot. Other good war films: We Were Soldiers; Lone Survivior, Courage Under Fire (a sort of mystery set in war). A legal one you haven’t done yet and stars Harrison Ford: Presumed Innocent. Also legal thrillers: The Firm, The Pelican Brief, The Client. Sincerely, 2 attorneys in US who are big Movies with Mary fans.
I enjoy this film for what it is. As you said, it is very "Hollywood", but it also touches on
a lot of the basic tenets of patriotism I was taught as a child.
Mary, you nailed it that this movie is pretty cheesy in parts, but it's hard for us Americans not to love it. The basics were true in that the early part of the war didn't go well for us, but our troops rallied and ultimately won with the help of our French allies. The warfare style that you noticed was in fact much as depicted. That same line up and shoot at each other style carried over into our Civil War, too. I can't remember if you've watched the movie Glory yet, but it's a moving story of our Civil War through the eyes of a real American colonel who led one of the first colored regiments. It is based on the many letters he wrote home to his parents.
Glory is a great film. I wish someone would make a film about the black loyalists in the war of independence. I have been reading about them, thousands of slaves joined up, given freedom and land in Canada after the war.
Bottom line is, you would not have won if it wasn't for the French.
lol So many people complaining in the comments, it's a movie not a documentary.
People are weirder than ever before. "An actor shouldn't act, hire somebody that is." a common talking point I've see for newer movies. Thankfully most just being nerds about it which I don't mind. A movie pushing interest in history is a good thing. Some though. Supposedly historical inaccuracy of certain portrayals got one or two making fiction of actual history. Their revenge an atrocity against truth, their 'balance' a hypocrisy. That I must say something so common as two wrongs don't make a right. Expected, especially online.
Last I checked this is kind of based off of multiple historical people combined into a few characters.
Like Francis Marion "The Swamp Fox" for instance.
Napoleonic tactics were pretty much invented in Belgium. 😂
When people had the habit of chewing on tobacco leaves, lots of saliva filled their mouths, and they had to spit. When I looked at colonial buildings in Philadelphia, they had spitting boxes filled with kitty litter on the floor. Later, brass spitoons were used; these were brass jugs with a bell on the top that looked like the front of a trombone. Spitoons were a part of American life until the 1918 influenza epidemic, when they were recognized as a disease vector, and they disappeared from public places.
Was wondering how many times we'd hear "nee" in this. Knew it would be a lot.
The Patriot is a historical fiction and the lead is modeled on the real hero known as the Swamp Fox. A man named Francis Marion who lead hit and run raids in the south. Like the movie he kept the Britts occupied, preventing the superior forces from defeating the Americans in detail. There was a bigger war going on in europe at the same time and later in 1812 as well. In europe the names Napoleon and Wellington were the key figures in 1812.
Fun fact: Joseph Plumb Martin was only 15 when he joined the Connecticut state militia in the summer of 1776 & later joined the Continental Army of George Washington, serving 6 years. During the American Civil War, Manny Root was 11 when he enlisted as a drummer boy for the Union Army.
My family is in Kentucky because my ancestors fought directly under George Washington, and their payment was land in Kentucky. My aunt still has the documents. This was loosely based on real history. George, Washington only had three dates before he married his wife he often referred to the war as the cause, and before one battle he thought he was gonna die, and he wore a specific uniform. If you have prime, or if you have a way to find the documentary the first American, I highly recommend. There are paintings of that flag, and there are paintings showing soldiers with the head wraps that you saw in the movie.
One of John Williams best scores - really is the pinnacle of "American" sounding soundtrack ;)
One of my all time favorite movies!
I am a former U.S. Army officer. The reason the soldiers had to line up and march close to the enemy to fire is that they were equipped with smooth-bore muskets, which were not very accurate nor had significant range. Thus, to have any effect, it was necessary to concentrate fire on the enemy at close range. Americans, living on the frontier, had rifles for hunting. Rifles have greater range and accuracy, so hit and run guerilla tactics were effective.
The movie is not a true story, but it is based (loosely) on real people and events. Benjamin Martin is loosely based on Francis Marion, the “Swamp Fox,” with whom one of my ancestors fought! Colonel Tavington is loosely based on Banastre Tarleton, who survived the war and became a member of the British Parliament. For more of his evil, watch the movie, Amazing Grace!
It is NOT unrealistic for a racist to change in combat. I personally know of an Alabama soldier whose father was a member of the KKK changing in the Vietnam War. Bonds among soldiers are strong, and this particular soldier ended up marrying the sister of a black comrade in arms.
René Auberjonois, who played Reverend Oliver, also played Father Mulcahy in the 1970 film M*A*S*H, but his best known role is "Constable" Odo on "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" for all seven seasons.
honestly each state within america has it;s own cultures not to mentions entire regions, which are almost entirely different
War was conducted very differently back then. Guerrilla tactics were almost nonexistent and considered extremely dishonorable even among the victorious side. Such is noted when Tavington explains that he cannot return to England for how he wants to fight the war.
Guerrilla tactics was used before these, at the beginning of the war. They pushed the British all the way back to Boston, from Concord, through the woods the first days of the war.
This movie was very, very, very loosely based on history. The initial reluctance of a number of colonists in the southern colonies to enter the war is correct. Being much more agricultural, the southern colonies had closer economic ties to Britain (crops for manufactured goods) - many planters along the coast were reluctant to go to war. So after stalling in the north, the British moved the war south because they thought there would be more loyalist support in the south. That was until the Battle of the Waxhaws where a number of revolutionaries were executed on the field after they surrendered by British commander Banastre Tarleton. This led a lot of the "still undecided" to come down on the side of the revolution with the phrase "Tarlton's quarter" being used by revolutionary militia when no quarter was given to the British in later battles.
The battles in South Carolina of Camden, the Waxhaws, and Cowpens are reflected in the movie. The retreat over the hill in the last battle of the movie to draw in the British and ambush them is roughly what General Morgan did at Cowpens which was a significant turning point in the war. Colonel William Tavington was loosely based on Banastre Tarleton. Captain Benjamin Martin was loosely based on Francis Marion, "The Swamp Fox".
One thing left out is that a lot of the fighting in the south was between patriot and loyalist militias. For example, King's Mountain where the only British soldier, Ferguson, was the commander of the loyalist militia. At the end of the revolutionary war most loyalists (both in the north and south) either left for Britain, Canada, Spanish Florida, or the British Caribbean.
And, yes, the movie exaggerated characters. And a substantial number of colonists were loyal to Britain during the war. But it was still an entertaining movie.
I have been to the battlefield of Cowpins’ . It was a definite strategical and tactical advantage to the colonists!
@@americandad8903
From what I recall the battle of Cowpens was the patriot victory that changed Cornwallis' strategy. After Tarleton was defeated at Cowpens and Morgan and Greene met up, Cornwallis decided to vigorously pursue Greene (Morgan had retired, ill health). Cornwallis "burned his baggage" for light travel. Then Greene led him on a wild goose chase all through North Carolina and Virginia. I imagine the colonists, knowing the country better, could forage better and probably had a lot of support from the locals in the NC and VA Piedmont "backcountry". So Greene just stayed slightly ahead of Cornwallis until Cornwallis, exhausted, scrambled to the coast at Yorktown hoping to get relief from the British navy. But... drumroll... the French navy showed up first and blocked the harbor. Then GW showed on the land side of Yorktown. The rest is, well... "Happy Fourth of July!" :-)
When I was younger, there was a nice British family who moved in next to us. I invited the daughter over to watch a movie because my parents were out of town. For some reason, I put this movie on without thinking. What is even more awkward is the fact that my aunt came over to make sure I wasn't throwing parties and she walked in on me knuckles deep on my new British queen.
Very underrated film. Love this reaction.
Thanks Mary! I have been to Yorktown Virginia for July 4th. To visit the fort and surrounding area. One heck of a celebration with fireworks, a parade, people dressed in period fitting attire. Every American should go once, even Europeans do. Met a British family when i was there. Be prepared though in July that day on the 4th when i went it was 102 degrees with 100% humidity.
I always thought Tavington was a bit over the top as a bad guy. He is based an a British Colonel named Banastare Tarleton, who was one of the opponents of Francis Marion, whom Mel Gibsons character is based on.
Tarleton became infamous for an incident in which 200 surrendering soldiers were killed at the Battle of Waxhaw Creek. Tarleton was commanding a force of American Loyalists (those who stayed loyal to the British Government), when a group of 500 American rebels tried to surrender. While accepting the surrender Tarletons horse was shot out from under him. Thinking that thier commander had been killed in an incredibly dishonorable way, his troops open fired on the surrendering forces and killed over 200 of them. So his reputation is kind of undeserved.
This is based on the “Swamp Fox.” My many-times great grandfather fought with him.
"...not on the frontier, but, amoungst us." He is referencing the Colonies' prior war experience, the French and Indian War, in the 1750s,(LAST OF THE MOHICANS), which was fought on the northwestern frontier, away from most civilian experience in South Carolina.
I’m British and always loved this movie!
7:43 *Mary:* _"I'm confused as to who they were helping."_ 🤕 They were helping the wounded from both sides.
12:31 _"Write her."_
_Oh, _*_write_*_ her."_
My guess is we were to assume he heard _"ride her."_ 🤭
*EDIT:* I'm about to watch your *_Firefly_* reactions, but cannot find your reaction to *_Serenity._* Was it taken down?
Thanks for the reaction!
hey its Jayne from Firefly! heh
A Favourite Scene .... "Oh, Fireworks!"
The villain Colonel Tavington is based on a real British officer, Bannistre Tarleton, who was known as "The Green Dragoon" and "Butcher Ban". The incident of his soldiers killing killing surrendered Virginian soldiers really happened at the Battle of Wahaws in South Carolina. The incident is known as "Buford's Massacre" after the name of the commander of the soldiers who were killed, Colonel Abraham Buford. For the rest of the war, a call of "Give them Tarleton's quarter" from Colonial forces was a call to offer no quarter or to shoot surrendered British soldiers.
One of Abraham Buford's sons, John Buford, was a General of Union Cavalry in the American Civil War (all of his sins and nephews served in the ACW). He played a critical role at the beginning of the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863. On July 1 his cavalry brigade, serving as advance screen for the Army of the Potomac, engaged a division of Confederate infantry, delaying the advance of Confederate forces into Gettysburg, which allowed a Union Corps d'Armee to occupy superior defensive positions, which they held throughout the next 3 days of battle as they were reinforced by additional Corps'. Brigadier General John Buford is played by actor Sam Elliot in the excellent 1993 movie "Gettysburg", which is based on the book "the Killer Angels" by historian Michael Schara.
I actually attended Francis Marion University "The Patriots" - this movie was actually based on actual events. Francis Marion "The Swamp Fox" was the individual this movies was based on.
British burning a church never happened. Never mind people burning within. Can you imagine what propaganda on both sides could do with such an event? Yet it is pivotal event in this movie. History is bombastic enough, shame Hollywood feels the need to mess with it.
“I’m confused as to who they were helping.”
They were helping the wounded on both sides, as Martin was doing everything he could to stay out of the war at that point in the movie. The Dragoons, led by Lucius Malfoy, came and changed all that.
This is such a good, but sad movie. I hate that I enjoy watching it, but it's just done so well.
The Deaths of some of the main Character shows how tragic and costly the Revolution was!
❤❤❤ Mary, it's been said that the war in South Carolina was a demonstration of America's first Civil War. There were at least 5000 Redcoats recruited from the population. Mel's character was loosely based on the Swamp Fox. Francis Marion did have a band of merry men, and they fought mostly a guerilla style of warfare. His nemesis was Banastre Tarleton known for his brutality. He died a rich old man in 1833. "BOOOO!" I always thought Jason Isaacs would have been a great James Bond. Alas, it didn't happen. Walt Disney had a series of shows about the Swamp Fox staring Leslie Nielsen. At least some of the shows are on RUclips. Thanks for watching. Be well.
When he said "Why shouldn't I pay my taxes to a tyrant a few thousand miles away instead of the thousand tyrants who are already here"? Someone should of said to him "Britain is already over infested with tyrants" Chum.
The reason why armies fought the way they did was because of the musket itself. Being the first real "reliable" firearm, it was limited by its range and accuracy. In order to maximize its effectiveness, armies would send "volleys" of bullets by standing in orderly lines and firing in a single direction, just like ships at sea. Why they were so close together was due to the poor range of the musket, partly due to the lack of boring of the weapons that would give the bullet a spin, like an American football, like modern weapons. To negate this, armies would have to march close to the other army in order to close the distance.
The Patriot is loosely based on some real life historical characters that took part in the southern theater during the American Revolutionary War. Must say you've not change during your pregnancy at all Mary, reason I say is that another couple who also have a RUclips review channel named the Beesleys that are expecting just around your time frame, she's showing allot more than yourself, like I stated earlier you haven't changed at all on the screen. The Beesleys live on Jersey Island UK not overly far from Belgium.
I finally understand what _"Aim small, miss small"_ means. If you aim for the man and miss, then you likely miss the man. But if you aim for something small, like a button, then if you miss the button, you are still likely to hit the man.
Actually, most of the British soldiers went to Canada. The Revolutionary War technically ended in 1783, but there were still Battles between the United States and the British, War of 1812, until 1815.
Great Reaction Mary !!!! Thank You
Jason Isaac's character is largely based on Bannistre Tarleton, who was infamous for killing surrendering Patriot soldiers. His command got routed at Cowpens, but unlike Isaac's character, Tarleton survived and eventually returned to England. His legacy is the term "Tarleton's quarter", which basically means to take no prisoners.
Thing is he was later considered a very compassionate commander. There was something about the Revolution that brought out the absolute worst in all involved.
If anyone is interested, there is a RUclips channel called ReelHistory in which a historian looks at military movies, including this one, and shows where they are historically accurate and where they are not. His reaction to this movie is interesting, and worth a view, at least for me. This movie generates curiosity about the Revolutionary War, and if that leads folks to read about the time period and learn from historians, instead of movie scriptwriters, then the movie has done a good job. Thank you Mary for watching this one. We all look forward to your point of view.
One of my favorite movies and a pretty good depiction of the brutality of that war. It was not adults sent overseas but fought on our doorsteps with our children and families. The beauty of being an American was that regardless of our differences, when it mattered, we would all come together but I don't think that would be the case these days. Different times...
Guess you don't remember after 9-11. Enlistment into the military about tripled, to go and fight. If a war would come here all would fight. That is why we fight for the 2nd amendment. We will never disarm. Just like the Minutemen of the pass.
@@TheNighthhawk You are living in the past state of how things worked. Most of the people under 25 don't even want to get a job let alone go to war. Things are not the same as they were 20 years ago. The only domestic wars people partake in now is on gender and political affiliation. If it came down to it, 90% of the population wouldn't pick up a weapon and defend themselves and would be pissing their pants in the basement of their moms house. Like I said, different times.
3:04
After the Boston Massacre in 1770, England sent a lot of troops into British America and really tried to clamp down on wildfire of a rebellion that was occurring. At this point the colonies were still trying to make peace with England. On April 19, 1775 you had the "shot heard around the world" when the war broke out at Lexington and Concord in Massachusetts. Farmers and citizens picked up their weapons and attacked the British all through the countryside, forcing them back to Boston and then laying siege to the city for nearly a year until March 17, 1776 when the British evacuated the city. At this point independence was basically the only real course and the Declaration of Independence was adopted on July 4th, 1776. Later that Summer in August 1776, the British landed a major force in New York and eventually captured New York City and held it for 7 years.
“In peace, sons burry their fathers.
In war, fathers burry their sons.”