Revised American history doesn't quite sink movie

Rating: Null/10 (3 July 2000)

Here is the ultra-simplified American history for the MTV generation. "The Patriot" is a movie that essentially takes the entire American Revolution with all its complex motivations and political nuances, and boils it all down into a revenge plot. It's almost amusing to see how the movie tries to struggle free of this notion, as it offers up some simplified images of glory and honor, while all the while the lead character's motivation is essentially the same: to kill his nemesis.
That's not to say "The Patriot" is all bad. Once you get past all the (literal) flag-waving and glorified American perspectives on the Revolutionary War, its actually pretty involving. I found myself drawn into its story almost against my will. It's a credit to Roland Emmerich, the director, and the screenplay, that the movie succeeded at making me care about Gibson's quest for justice even as I couldn't help rolling my eyes as he grabs an American flag and charges up a hillside to rout the fleeing rebel troops to turn around and press forward.
The process by which Gibson gets there is a long and dark journey. His character, Benjamin Martin, is a farmer and dedicated family man with a South Carolina plantation where he simply wants to harvest his crops and live in peace. He is a highly respected hero of the French-English War years ago but has decided that war should never be used, even as a last resort, and is willing to sacrifice principle to this cause, as he lectures on in a speech he makes before a voting council that must decide on whether or not to join the revolution. The movie opens in 1776 as the Declaration of Independence is about to be announced. Martin's oldest son, Gabriel, signs on with the Continental army against his father's wishes, and goes off to war, where he fights for two years and becomes battle-hardened but loses none of his idealism.
The same cannot be said of the rebels themselves, whose morale begins to falter as they suffer one defeat after another. The decisive battles in the war were not won on the traditional battlefield, and the untrained and ill-equipped militia forces are cannon-fodder for the stalwart British. Eventually, Martin is compelled to join the fight when one of his young sons is killed by a vicious British officer named Tavington, who chooses to use fear and repression to crush the revolt, and employs brutal tactics to accomplish this goal. Martin gathers a ragtag bunch from the surrounding towns and forms a militia of his own, that hides out in the swamp and uses hit-and-run tactics to catch the British off-guard. Ultimately his goal is to search and destroy Tavington.
The British are portrayed as either weak-minded or cruel, with the intent of making us feel a certain satisfaction when we see them being killed by muskets and hacked by tomohawks. The guerilla tactics used by Martin to halt the flow of supplies are far more effective than the marching of the Continental troops into overwhelming fire from the enemy. What's odd is the way the movie seems to be suggesting that Martin was the first one to come up with the idea, when by 1778 I imagine this idea had occurred to and even been used by George Washinton. But the famous figures of the Revolution, including Washington, are never seen, and indeed are but shadowy figures in the movie while Martin leads his men into battle and more or less wins the war singlehandedly. I admit I found it hard to believe at the film's climax when the battle slows to a crawl to allow Martin and Tavington to go at it, mano-e-mano.
This is all a sort of laughable revisionist history to embrace, but I was able to overlook it and just enjoy watching Gibson at work. He has a way of seeming plausible in the face of such silliness, and even though his character exhibits similar traits to that of his portrayal of William Wallace from "Braveheart" (to which this movie will inevitably be compared) I still identified with his losses and his principles. He brings a certain dignity to the role. I also enjoyed seeing Chris Cooper as the weary commander of the Continental regiment he is aiding, and Heath Ledger as his impulsive son who joins them.
One complaint I would register is the way that the African-Americans in this movie are relegated to the position of mute observers. If the movie had not shown blacks at all I might have preferred that to watching them be dismissed out of hand, but due to the prevalence of slavery in the Carolinas in that day that would hardly have been realistic. There is one slave who joins Martin's band but his thoughts and motives aren't really explored. While it is true that slaves who joined up were generally given their freedom at the end of the war, I felt as if this character was being used as a token, and it made me somewhat uncomfortable to watch as the movie tipped the race card. Having watched "Glory" which revealed how black soldiers helped turn the tide of victory to the Union and treated its black characters with more dignity, this sort of pandering seemed superficial.
All this aside, "The Patriot" works on the level of pure entertainment, and I enjoyed it as such. I also would not recommend it be shown in history class.