The Patriot truly was an epic film, but the effects of Hollywood were much more heavily felt than in the movie's 1995 counterpart, Braveheart.

Rating: 8/10 (8 August 2000)

The Patriot is a beautifully made film. It has a very engaging story and it is very well acted and directed, but it was also heavily influenced by Hollywood. Normally, the effects of Hollywood are not inherently damaging to movies in general (although they rarely add to a film's cinematic value), but in the case of a period film like The Patriot, it is best to avoid the influences of Hollywood.
The first problem that is presented is the fact that a "Hollywood Movie" is NEVER compatible with real life. The real world is just not the same as the world that is presented in the movies, and the Patriot attempted to tell a bit of real history, the same way that Braveheart did. Even though the film was historically accurate to a certain extent, many of the battles were either blended together or completely fabricated, and the events that took place in those battles are, in many cases, clearly manipulated. I believe one of the ending scenes, involving Benjamin Martin (Gibson) and Charles Cornwallis (Tom Wilkinson), provides a good example.
And Mel Gibson played EXACTLY the same role that he played in Braveheart!! He was the average guy who suffered an unimaginable loss to the sheer brutality of the 'enemy,' and decides to take it upon himself to take the enemy out. He is such a spectacular warrior that he is able to kill dozens of men single-handedly, and the enemy is so shocked that they think he is a "ghost." Wasn't that exact line in Braveheart somewhere? I have to admit that it was a lot of fun to watch those battle scenes, but the lack of originality is something that I absolutely have to complain about.

Besides that, the film also attempted to address certain issues in history, but these attempts were clearly very weak. They wanted to address the slavery issue, so they had a slave in the movie who is fighting in order to earn his freedom, but winds up fighting alongside the other white soldiers even though the necessary time to earn his freedom has passed. This is a very noble thing to do, and it was very inspiring to watch, but then you realize that this was the only black man in the entire film. That is a very small effort to put towards addressing such an enormous issue, especially in American history.
Furthermore, the very end of the film (possible spoilers ahead), while uplifting and much easier to watch than the ending to Braveheart, was obviously meant to manipulate the audience's emotions. I don't like to have my emotions manipulated like that, even if it IS nice to see a "happily ever after" ending. Everything was finally coming together for everyone in the movie, including the solitary slave, who apparently found the perfect white man to spend his freedom working for.
It's ironic that when everything works out perfectly in a movie, it ends up being more disappointing than a film that has a tragic ending, like Braveheart did. I think that this is a pattern that can be seen most in war films, because the target audience for war films likes to see what really happened. They don't want a nice flowery ending, they don't want anything sugar coated to make it easier to watch, they want the history books acted out on film. This led to the success of films like Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, All Quiet on the Western Front, Full Metal Jacket, etc. When the facts are altered in any way, it immediately lessens the impact of the film.
Despite all of my complaints, I do acknowledge that The Patriot was an amazing film, and it was extremely well made, with even a bit of good comic relief included (comic relief is almost required in war films, in my opinion). It is something that should be watched by anyone who even remotely enjoys war films or even just period films. All that I have pointed out in this review are some of the things to be advised about before watching it.