pretty good action, terrible plot

Rating: Null/10 (1 July 2000)

This movie is like many other American movies: terrible plot and dialog, saved by pretty good acting. Yes, the movie presents one-dimensional characters in the heroic Americans and the dastardly British. And yes the plot is utterly predictable and over-the-top melodramatic. And yes it is not very historically accurate. But as several people before have said, the movie is not meant to be a serious look at the revolutionary war; it is supposed to be a summer blockbuster geared towards the 4th july upsurge of patriotism. On that count it succeeds; the action scenes are pretty good, though not quite the quality of braveheart. The acting is quite good, particularly on the part of mel gibson. And some characters are actually well done, for example that of General Cornwallis as the true British aristocrat.
Hence I would almost be willing to overlook the movie's many faults and enjoy it for the mindless action movie it is. However, one thing I found completely disgusting is the total revisionism with respect to the treatment of black people in the movie. It's as if because the movie has portrayed Mel and his militia men as such good hearted honorable men, it couldn't destroy that image by acknowledging their racism. It's so blatant and so obviously untrue to life one cannot help but cringe.
To summarize, this is nowhere near as good as Braveheart, which actually had interesting subplots and _good_ monologues, but if you're willing to take it for what it is, and can get past the corny lines, blatant emotional manipulation, and revisionist interpretation of history and culture, it's not bad.