History Buffs: The Patriot
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 09. 2015
- Sorry for sounding so angry in this review. I just.....really hate this movie lol
SUPPORT HISTORY BUFFS ON PATREON
/ historybuffs
HISTORY BUFFS MERCH!
history-buffs-shop.fourthwall....
● Follow us on Facebook: / historybuffslondon
● Follow us on Twitter: / historybuffs_
Mel Gibson literally kills the main villain with an American flag...this is the most American film ever
Not the villain but his poor horse.
He kills him a bayonet
@@jjkhawaiian dont matter horse was british he shouldve seen it comin
@@josephmalham725 lol
Yes and it’s utter shit. Coincidence?
Next you're going to tell me that we did not defeat the aliens in Independence Day...
Thanks, made me laugh
Good one.;-)
Will Smith punching the alien was as fake as the moon landing
So then "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" was not an extended episode of "How It's Made"?
+TheTraakon star wars is more realistic than the Patriot
“WTF IS A KILOMETER!!!”
-George Washington body-slamming King George
Anachronistic but funny nonetheless.
*'WTF 'beeth' a kilometer?' It was the mid 1700s, after all...
Britain uses miles as a measurement. Oh and its spelt 'kilometre'.
-UK body-slamming the US education system 😂😂😂😂
@@cambs0181
Breaking News: English have inferiority complex and can’t spell…
@cambs0181 it's only spelled that way in countries where a 10 based counting system is required so it matches the number of fingers and toes....
Tarleton's depiction is so ridiculously evil that I'm half expecting him to pull out a wand and start yelling "Avada Kedavra!", all while kicking house elf's named Dobby.
Imagine he gets a pencil and does the pencil trick from The Dark Knight
@@apparition_83 Or travels to the Star Trek Discovery Prime Universe instead of the Star Trek Discovery Terran Universe.
@@mariakelly90210 I haven’t watched Star Trek so I don’t get it 😂
@@apparition_83 Jason Isaacs played a villain in Star Trek Discovery.
@@ShadowSonic2 ohhhhh
My US History teacher showed us this movie, and he paused the movie every time he spotted an inaccuracy.
That must have been a long day.
must 'have' been a long day*
You may now press play again.
I stand corrected.
Benny Biggums, there are far better movies to show for the revolutionary war than the patriot like The crossing. I don't understand why people think this movie is supposed to be 100% accurate. Most of Mel Gibson's movies really aren't accurate and just show drama and action. Your Teacher doesn't know how to pick em lol.
you have block scheduling right? how long did you watch this? seven mo ths lol
This movie makes a lot more sense if you think it's set in the Assassin's Creed universe, Benjamin is a former Assassin, and Tavington is a Templar looking for an Apple in Ohio.
Though even ACIII is more historically accurate to the Revolution than The Patriot.
@@harrissyed1417 one native American being involved in virtually every major event of the revolution is historically accurate?
@@uja11 I mean it in the sense of how most of the historical elements and events are portrayed in this game.
Well to be fair Connor's involvement wouldn't exactly be made public knowledge, the American Brotherhood would make sure of that.
@@Pagan20-08 His interactions with George Washington and Samuel Adams would mean that there would be eyewitness testimony about Connor Kenway's involvement in the Revolution and both Founding Fathers would write a ton of letters to or about him but they wouldn't mention the Assassins or Templars out of respect for his personal safety and especially how much it would cause humanity to freak out if they found out there was a secret conflict that manipulated everyone and that they were created by a godlike race to be their slaves. He would be public knowledge to most Americans sans the whole Assassin Brotherhood stuff for the reasons that I explained. He would be an American folk hero and most people would be debating how much of his deeds are real much like Molly Pitcher.
I like how the rebels all have a perfect modern American accent already 💀
Read Albion’s seed. It helped me understand the accents
I mean… I loved this movie as a kid. But movies like this have shown me how strong propaganda can be.
the americans had a distinct accent even back then. They didnt sound like the british. Im not saying they sounded like modern americans either
@@kenopsia6748 so then, what's the point of the comment? Lol I'm sure we all know that already, my point was that it's funny that they already sound like modern Americans. 💀
ikr? The brits didnt even talk like modern brits either
I'm surprised that you didn't mention the fact that many of the men in this film can fire muskets from horseback with deadly accuracy.
Yeah, those guns can't even fire accurately while standing still, why would it be accurate with more aiming difficulties to worry about?
@@seneschalorcberg1338 the issue comes from the military loads, they took quantity over quality in terms of accuracy, instead of like 1 maybe 2 rounds a minute with a proper sized ball, they'd rather 3-4 rounds with a ball that fits easier thus reducing accuracy but when you had hundreds firing a cloud of lead, it didn't matter
@@vanillaicecream2385 Yes, in an open combat where soldiers dared to form lines and fire at each other like ship cannons, the weapon fits this purpose.
But quickshooting a fleeing man on horseback wouldn't.
@@seneschalorcberg1338 i was just explaining why you were incorrect about muskets being inaccurate, if you had a ball that fit the bore size you would be surprised on how well it aims
@@vanillaicecream2385 You're right. I am suprised.
When you get down to it, the most historically accurate part of the Patriot is that there was, in fact, an American revolution against the British.
Ritchian lol
Pretty much.
Kek
Rainbow six seige IQ no, your ancestors, not you yourselves won a protracted and bloody conflict and then every generation of 'Muricans SINCE that one refused to shut up ABOUT winning it for the next 200 years despite no-one outside your borders giving a shit, you don't hear us constantly telling the French we beat THEIR arses or the Russians saying it to the Germans or, for that matter the Chinese or Vietnamese saying it to YOU. Stereotypes exist for a reason and this is a major part of why the rest of the modern world views America as the arrogant loud-mouth that thinks nothing can touch it and doesn't really care what anyone else thinks of it
1IbramGaunt yes you do, I've heard it plenty.
“Historians from Britain will say I am a liar”
And they'll be right 🤣🤣
Historians from the entire world will call him a lair too
Historians from the U.S. will say your a liar.
And, they are correct sir.
All will say you are a liar, and they will not only be right, they will also be roasting you, as I am right there with them.
A guy talking with a British accent not liking The Patriot, I'm so shocked 😅
Well what do you expect when your country is being smeared .
He’s actually really unbiased but yes it is funny
Right? Maybe he should do one on WW2 when thousand of Americans died to keep them from speaking German?
In his defence the film is a load of fictional garbage.
Because it’s utter ahistorical garbage and like Braveheart just perpetuates Anglophobia
When I was in China they had a series of patriotic movies on TV which portrayed Mao as a kind and great man who united the Chinese people, and Americans were portrayed as evil aggressors and imperialists during the communist takeover and later during the Korean War. Basically, almost every country's popular media does this sort of thing. Even Japan now is making war movies that portray their role in World War Two as some sort of nostalgic Lost Cause, instead of showing just how brutal they really were.
Yeah japan is basically lost cause x10
China i think it gets a bit more complicated towards the depiction of mao, the great leap forward directly and indirectly killed ALOT of people, safety standards, lack of knowledge, working till exaustion etc
But yeah its a common trope of propaganda
Where'd you live?
@@Boristheborat not in any of those countries
Hope Pakistan also makes own version of the Patriot
This is literally nothing like that.
“I can’t shake this feeling that The Patriot has a very anti-British sentiment.”
* spits out coffee laughing*
No shit
I know right!? I mean americans portrayed as bad guys thats ok with everyone and anyone but british being bad guys woah guys thats fecken bs
Lol that’s the point! Just like they’re responsible for the potato famine
Riko Saikawa I thought the disease that infected the potatoes were responsible lol
Sniff _ the plight of the blight
Funny how you ignore facts like Francis Marion being a slave owner though hahahah.
Ah yes, Braveheart 2: American Bogaloo
Yes! lmao. A reference to Breakin'.
Touché
hahahah , Bravo Sir. Literal LOL
😂😂💀
tears of laughter. 10/10. Just picturing danny devito running with a tomahawk and tri corne hat towards the redcoats through the cannonfire smoke.
This movie was insanely accurate (I was there)
AMERICA!
@@Mythrays1 Almost like comments section tourettes!
Thank you for your service 🫡 from a veteran of the second battle of Hoover Dam
@@AshesWorkshop which side 😂😭
Me too.
Mel Gibson's involvement is the first and only red flag you need to know whether a movie is faithful to actual history.
Are you suggesting that Aliens did not come to Earth and makes crop circles?
Well Gibsons film we were soldiers is surprisingly accurate
It’s like Mel Gibson was friend zoned by an English girl in high school and has been trying to get back at England ever since
Just like u ha Simp
kysike666 haha simp normie
Great theory hahaha
Audairevonetta haha simp I’m intellectually better lol
He probably was indeed friend zoned
I don't get why the makers of this film were afraid to make the main protagonist a slave owner, an audience can still identify with him as a human being but also realize that he is a product of his time. Slavery is a terrible part of our history, but regardless it's a part of history that simply can't be erased.
Its a good comment, but today's regressive left would like for you to hold their collective beer.
Unfortunately, the more and more I get on in years the more I fear that 'the audience can't handle the truth' is the phrase of the day, so to speak. Too much diving for the lower common denominators...
A dumb patriotic film directed by the German who brought you 2012 and ID: Resurgence.
I read something back when it came out about the film maker being told he could not depict a slave owner as a hero. They wanted him to make it about a guy from Boston but he wanted to show the war in the south because it isn't usually depicted. Making the hero free his slaves when his wife died was their compromise. In fact according to the interview a lot of the things in the movie that pissed everyone off ended up being the concessions both sides made so the would offend one group or the other. The ended up trying to be PC and pissing off everyone.
J.G Productions who cares you guys owned slaves
My 5th great grandfather was with general Washington on December 25th 1776. his son (my 4th great grandfather) then fought with him in the war of 1812 when he was only 15 years old. so this movie always makes me think about my heritage.
The moment you see Mel Gibson in the credits you know that it's going to be about as historically accurate as star trek.
Literally the american version of braveheart
@@benjaminzera2731 I hope you're joking
@@benjaminzera2731 Its not that. It's just judging by the comments on this video I wouldn't be surprised if someone legitimately felt this way.
@C WI doubt it.
I always misremember them haha
_"They may take our lives... but we'll ne'er pay...OUR TAXES!"_
Yeah, checks out.
Jason Isaacs was one hell of a villain in this movie though. Dude's one of my favorite actors.
It's a roll he seems fit for, you should watch star trek discovery, just get ready for a mind fuck.lol
Agree
Shame he got turned into Ralph Finnes' whipping boy in the Harry Potter series.
He was one of better parts of this movie
@@konghammer6061 should warn people though how horrible that show is before you send them to that mess haha
Wouldn’t the American colonies have had slightly British accents still? And that’s another thing that boggles my mind, how did the accents come about when the colonies that went out there all spoke British
Interestingly! The modern "British" accent is relatively new! After the Revolutionary war is when the upper class citizens in England began to create the non-rhotic accent that we know today! The current American accent would be closer to what both sides spoke back then, but it would still sound wayy different, but both accents evolved from there.
@@kumakatoki6510 no..... No...... No, no, just no! The american accent is nothing like the original english!
There was no "English accent" as each county had drastically different accents, some even close to being their own languages or dialects. A Cockney wouldn't be able to understand a Cumbrian without difficulty and vice versa. What most people think of as "English" is received pronunciation which wouldn't have been common then at all. A lot of Brits abroad would've had regional accents like the Bristol or West Country drawl that has a similar "R" to most North American accents.
Going out on a limb here... Since the New England area is the longest and most established area for white Europeans, my guess is that that accent hasn't changed a whole lot in the last 250yrs...
So, if you want to know what Washington sounded like... Go talk to New Englander.
Just a guess... 🤷
@@MH3GL You would think! though even after the revolution, New England's connection to England still stayed strong! Immigration from England to New England was still strong! That's why some New England accents adopted the dropping of the rhotic R as well. I think there is an island in Virginia that speaks a preserved English of the time.
Even the musical "1776" wasn't afraid to accurately depict some of the founding fathers as slave owners.
It's funny how Assassin's Creed 3 is more accurate than this movie
I Saw this comment while playing assassin's Creed 3
Burleon
... the worst part is that it kinda is 😂, despite being heavily historical fiction.
One thing I’ll give Ubisoft. They’re pretty good with time period accuracy
Wanna watch a good show try TURN:Washington’s Spies.
Yes. Also, a good show is TURN: Washington’s Spies.
And in the Patriot the French do nothing , just show up at the end? 🤔 all their gunpowder, muskets, cannon, etc were from France and they provided clothing and helped pay the soldiers money they owed.
As an American I can confidently say that the uploader being British is irrelevant to any claims made in this video. Everything he says is on point and without bias, unlike the film itself (he even points out that there are many factual British atrocities that could have replaced the BS in this film). This video is about historical accuracy, not nationalism on either side. Those of you in the comments dismissing this video just because he is a Brit are merely deflecting because you can't come up with any valid counter-arguments to his criticisms. The Patriot was a fun watch when I was a kid but to watch it as an adult and still take it at face-value is just absurd.
Thank you so much Devin for saying that. I was hoping that I had made myself clear in the video itself that my only criticism is against the film. Unfortunately there are a lot of idiots who take offense based on my nationality and assume that just because I'm British I am naturally on their side of this conflict when that couldn't be further from the truth. So once again thank you for taking the time to write your comment and understanding the point I was trying to make. :)
Hey Nick! Sorry for the late reply, for some reason I just now got the notification in my email. You're very welcome! Someone has to keep the trolls in check, right? Haha. Take care and keep up the great work!
Whoa back there, Buckaroo! When did _The Patriot_ become a historical film? Historical setting, certainly. Borrowed some historical elements, sure, how could it have been otherwise? But I, for one, never thought I was watching a portrayal that purported to be historically accurate.
.
Rather, it is a good guys versus bad guys story. The bad guys are despicable, the good guys all live by the Boy Scout oath. So some of the exploits of Francis Marion and Banastre Tarleton lent realism to the story; is there any actual subterfuge taking place? Was the movie prefaced with the title, "This is a true story?" Everything the nominated bad guys do is low and mean and when the good guys do the same thing, it's for God, motherhood and apple pie. The bad guys are motivated by avarice, the good guys by the purity of their consciences. This is standard, conflict-centered, dark side/light side, swashbuckled storytelling. Besides, if it was historically accurate it would have been ten hours long and boring as all get-out.
.
Granted, casting a historical glance at the film is worthwhile, but castigating it for historical inaccuracy when none was promised perhaps speaks more about the sensitivities of the reviewer than the entertainment value of the story told. Just remember: No taxation without representation!
Most people, myself included, look at it the same way you do: This isn't real, it's historical fiction, good vs. bad, etc. But there are less intelligent folks out there who might take it at face value which is the whole origin of the debate re: how history is represented in mainstream films and who is responsible, the filmmaker or the viewer? I'm sure we both agree that responsibility falls on the viewer. I was mainly responding to people in the comments who were saying dumb things about Nick's nationality like it had anything to do with his arguments.
Because America that's why. But really this actually true, being British doesn't change anything. The facts are that both sides aren't innocent. The movie is good watch, but it's not even accurate to history.
Them making Mel Gibson's character had "free" slaves was bullshit LOL
Mel Gibson is the Steven Seagal of historical movies
It also downplayed French participation in the war
Of course!
yeah, without the French, USA wouldnt exist. You can even say that the atacks of the Spaniards to English ships help a lot
+MR.Chickennuget 360 You forget the small strategic detail that due to the threat from France and Spain, Britain had large forces tied up at home in case of invasion.
I wouldn't say that one frenchman in the film conveys how much help the USA actually got from France. As you mention yourself, France supplied weapons, uniforms and supplies which all are *vital* for fighting a war^^
+MR.Chickennuget 360 yes but the movie makes it seem that there was only one French officer training militia it doesn't show the supplies they sent or that the string of victories that actually defeated the British was aided by France
+The conquerors To which the American's refuse to honour their debt to France. Which resulted in the Quasi French-American war where France kicked their arses.
Notice how every English person in this movie, including low ranking soldiers, have posh accents?
Don't you know old boy all British have posh accents? ;)
Do we ever hear low ranking soldiers talk? I'm pretty sure Tavington, Cornwallis, Cornwallis' gay looking friend, and that Lieutenant at the beginning are the only British people that say anything more than "For the love of God, we surrender!"
Americans don't know the difference
You know what I'm saying blood! He said I can't wear my new trousers because they ain't uniform, that's like against my basic human rights. Isn't it though?
Isn't it?
Standard.
dernwine For sho. You know what I'm saying like that can't actually do that because thats like actually assault.
The American desire for Indian land (which most history texts refer to as "Western land") was a highly motivating force that gets neglected. I highly recommend _The Indian World of George Washington_ by Colin Calloway; and _Autumn of the Black Snake_ by William Hogeland. The myth of freedom fighting Americans resisting British tyranny is unsustainable.
No it isn't. You're a dumbass who doesn't understand history. So you do the typical braindead thing of doing a 180
Americans were ABSOLUTELY freedom fighters. This isn't even a debate. You're stupid one dimensional understanding of history doesn't change that lol😅
Yeah those are both extremely biased books. Americans were not obsessed with Indian land. They weren't more greedy than other people, they legitimately fought for the values and did it to the end. The issue again is idiots like you think history is simple dichotomies ....it never was 😅
@@mrsmith9597 😂 typical shitty framing of history from someone who clearly doesn't study history and doesn't want to admit they're wrong
@@mrsmith9597 I never said the English didn't conquer native land. What's your point?
Now, imagine you are an English kid, sitting in an american 7th grade history class while this movie plays, and everytime Tavington or the redcoats do something terrible the whole class turns and glares at you...
Tavington clearly led the "Das Reich Regiment' of the British Army in the revolutionary war.
Very.
British Freikorps
But... Wouldn't they be Prussians if that is the case?
love the shoutout to Come and See (1985) when Tavington's men burned down a church packed with people
I was 9 or 10 when this movie came out. My love of history started young so I paid more attention to my elementary school history classes. Studying the Revolution we had a 'German day' where we focused on Steuben, Pulaski (my teacher's words were 'Poland was mostly ruled by Germans at this time.' which is why he was included), and the Hessians. From that lesson I remembered the Hessians had green uniforms, so my child mind made the conclusion Tavington was a Hessian/German mercenary because he had some green on his uniform.
most historically accurate mel gibson film? mad max
Hacksaw Ridge is accurate enough,
we were Soldiers is lookable.
@@patrickkaleja9581 got to admit I did know that and did enjoy both but mel gibson did lose the plot on the other fims
Givin all the ladies heart attacks?
Braveheart is actually pretty historically accurate. Things didn't occur in the manner that is shown in the movie, but they DID happen. Here are examples:
1. William Wallace was socially about the equivalent of the guy shown in the movie.
2. Wallace's rebellion DID start over an English noble killing a woman Wallace allegedly loved.
3. King Edward I did invade Scotland prior and massacred a town, giving himself a very grim reputation in Scotland.
4. King Edward 's son was suspected of being gay. His lover was eventually executed, just NOT in the manner shown in the movie (GREAT scene, BTW).
5. The Battle of Sterling Bridge WAS Wallace's big victory, though the battle wasn't anything like what was shown in the movie.
6. The Battle of Falkirk was almost exactly as depicted except for the stupid part with the Irish, done for laughs.
7. Wallace was betrayed by Scotland's nobles and executed as shown.
8. The Queen DID have an affair with a foreign enemy of the King, just not William Wallace. She did end up overthrowing the King, as is foreshadowed in the movie.
"What women want" is much more accurate.
the most unrealistic scene in my opinion is hitting a cavalry soldier with a smoothbore pistol at like 50 yards plus
As a parent the part with his younger daughter not talking to him is very close to home for me, that scene always tears me up.
Fun unsurprising fact: The same dude who directed this directed Independence Day.
A German who has a real hard-on for America
Independence day was a good film tho this is not
@@baconman5044 Independence Day was awesome
@@baconman5044 yea and it was more historically accurate than this film
I’m beginning to see a pattern here...
I remember I watched this in my high school history class. The point of watching it was to pick out the inaccuracies of the film. My teacher even pointed out that this film was not well received in the UK for how the British were portrayed.
@loudatyourdoor I think u.s.s.r was worse
"I remember I watched this I my highschool history class" scared me before I read the rest of the comment
Funny how the African Americans on Mel Gibson's character's property are not slaves they just like working for him! Such a fake movie they have the British pretty much like Nazi's and the American's are all about freedom even though they have slaves but never show that in the film.
@@terryf3282 yeah it was pure American apple pie propaganda. The sad thing is many people saw it and believed it. It was a very popular movie when I was in high school.
I do also believe Americans hated it just as much. I believe Donald Trump would like it.
Like many others, I found this movie entertaining, if you can suspend disbelief for most of it. I tend to believe Nick is right that had the church fire actually happened, we'd still be hearing about it today and it would have been taught to my generation in school (I'm 65). A few years ago I was living in the Philippines and there is a spot in the walled city of Intramuros where the Japanese reportedly buried 600 Americans and Filipinos alive in a cave. The place is still treated as a shrine and every school child learns about it. So I think it would be much the same here if such an atrocity really happened.
One of the most interesting things I saw in the Patriot were the talks between Cornwallis and Benjamin Martin that apparently took place under flag of truce for the "prisoner exchange where Martin could not be touched because he was there under that flag. I wonder if such was actually a custom of war at the time. I also found it interesting that the British were appalled at the targeting of officers. That seemed to have the ring of truth to it.
We got shown this in middle school in a country school and we weren’t told it was fictional, we were even led to believe it was based on true events
It is a fictional representation of actual people and events with certain details either changed or embellished for the sake of the movie.
Well it was based on true events to be fair. I mean there was a war and it was in North America. I suppose it would be like watching Blazing Saddles as an educational film to teach about American pioneers of the West in the 1800s.
My rage is immeasurable and my day is ruined just from seeing these words
I think this is the biggest reason why Nick gets pissed at this movie: it basically spreads misinformation.
It is based on true events. The American revolution is an event that definitely happened.
I read somewhere that Tarleton's descendants actually sued the filmmakers for their portrayal of him as this absurd monster.
Haha Im gonna research this. I do hope it’s true
Suing a tabloid for libel. How very British of them.
And when they call him the ‘Butcher’ that’s quite an achievement
@@matthewsmith5374 Filmmakers, not tabloids
On what grounds could they sue? Libel laws don't protect the dead. And Tarleton's been dead for almost 200 years.
(Besides which, it isn't Sir Banastre Tarleton in the film, regardless of how much he may have "inspired" the character.)
Mel Gibson argued with director Roland Emmerich that his character should be a slave owner. Emmerich nixed on the grounds that the audience wouldn't accept his character. Gibson argued that the movie would be better if his character was and they could have had an honest discussion about it in the film.
That's interesting hearing about Gibson and the director. However, I disagree with many points made by Nick. I loved this film - which happened to distort events as many other historical films do. Yes, there were free African Americans and enslaved African Americans - many who were mistreated by British and Americans alike. And Nick failed to show moments in the film where British troops expressed or demonstrated sympathy or disfavor with what was perpetrated to the Colonists. I can go on, but I feel this movie (wonderfully cast and filmed) made you see "historic" events warts and all. And it was effective in my view.
@@1ActorrmanBut they made a load of things that the British did. It's making up the warts.
@@1Actorrman shooting British soldiers who were surrendering would be classed as a war crime. But this is brushed off with the line “They’re red coats...they’ve earned it.”
This film was nothing more than anti British propaganda, and it got to the point where I cheered when Tavington killed two of Martin’s sons. After all, they were insurrectionists...they’d earned it.
Lol, these dumbfucks arguing about the events that took place in a movie that is historically not accurate.
Dumbfucks from Dumbfuckinstan.
@Andrew Gray do you think vigilante justice is any way to run society?
I’m Canadian and was shown this in my high school social studies class. Before the movie started, my teacher explained that it was pure fiction and not to take it seriously.
As an American, can you hug us?
@@MegaToonzNetwork *hugs*
What class was this?
@@cambs0181 We call it “social studies”
You know what struck me? The same actor who played Tavington, James Isaac, also played the role of General Zhukov in The Death of Stalin.
Also Lucious Malfoy in Harry Potter.
11:15 The best thing to come from this film is the scene of the British officer laughing and giving us the _Laughs in British_ meme.
That's the only thing to come from this film
And the...
America: hey france we need help in a war
France: sorry I’m broke
America: it’s against the British
France:*Boats go vroom*
And the RuleBritannia.exe!
@@IsaiahRichards692 from Kaiser Vs?
And the "If I die I will die well dressed" meme
“Tell me about... Ohio.”
You don’t wanna come here m8. Lemme tell ya, all we have is big cities with C’s in them and crippling depression.
Scruffy the Unshaven “mistake on the lake”
As another Ohioan I 100% agree
I've been petitioning to turn Ohio into another great lake for years but I haven't gotten very far.
Hey, at least you're not Detroit.
LaRue Does Things Ohio ain’t all bad, go Buckeyes
It is really funny that the Americans complained about representation. At the time, many English commoners were not represented in the House of Commons, while empty hills like Old Sarum had two seats in Parliarment. In short, the Colonists were barely less represented than many Englishmen.
There's still a difference between living close to the seat of power and being far away. Commoners may not have been represented but they could still petition. It was still easier to make yourself heard if you were an average londoner as opposed to a colonist.
My dad was an American revolution reenactor and an extra in this movie, he was a drummer in one of the battle scenes, and despite how much he loved to show me war movies I never did see this one and as such I can’t even remember where exactly he is. I wonder why?
“Something was happening that had never happened before.”
I hear the faint sound of Dutch people screaming.
Lol true, everyone forgets the united provinces.
Beat The Great the American declaration of independence is also largely inspired by het Plakkaat van Verlatinghe (the Dutch DoI)
@@AtlasNL Also the Magna Carta from British Law.
The patriot is basically like braveheart but in america.
Good point.
+NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-Incorporated :D..... I love your username
+kulgan18 Yeh and both by Mel Gibson...and both say fuck you to England...hmmmmmmm MEL
And Braveheart is equally offensive to anyone who cares about history.
Oberstgreup I just like the soundtrack.
This is still the best intro on youtube. Not only do I not skip over this intro, but many times I re-watch it.
Imagine how different things would be if King George had just said "ok, you can have a representative in parliament"
Nobody mentions another striking inaccuracy: the actor playing Lafayette. In real life, Marquis de Lafayette was only 18 or 19 at the time the movie takes place (which is 1776). He was a young man starting his carrier. But here the actor (though he gives a very good performance) seems to be in his late forties or early fifties. In real life, Lafayette again visited the United States at the invitation of the then President Monroe in the Grand Tour of 1824 when he, himself was middle-aged.
On the contrary, Lafayette is a black man from Oakland with curly hair and insane rap skills! 😉
@@TrevJ91 Lol!
His name is Cheky Karyo. I don't think he's meant to represent Marquis de Lafayette. In real life he came leading a army with artillery, something the Americans didn't have, and back by a navy that defeated the British navy. I think this character in the movie is just "a Frenchman "!
@@renaudtheis1197 Thanks for notifying me! I made a huge mistake. He doesn't play Lafayette, but a completely fictional character called Jean Villeneuve. He is not to be confused with Jean-Charles Villeneuve - the French naval officer who served under Napolean and was at Trafalgar. Though I think the former is lightly based on or at least inspired by him. It's just that, the character here is like a substitute for Lafayette, he is at almost every place Lafayette is supposed to be, that I made the assumption.
Again, I withdraw my former comment and apologize for any misunderstanding I may have caused. This is an erratum.
@@dwaipayanroychowdhury7035 Lafayette was higher up in the ranks though there were plenty of French troops and officers late in the war.
The Americans are pictured as the total victor of the war, but the truth is that they never had a chance without the French.
Dont worry, we repaid the debt during ww2 ;)
Flagger you truly did
actually they had french in the movies, but in reality you wouldn't see a french unit in South Carolina during the war. They served in New England and the mid-atlantic. so its kinda a stretch that they threw in that French officer to train the militia.
remenber cheasepeak bay where the french won a naval battle witch was rare to then to do
Funny thing is the Spanish actually helped just as much the French did.
Just saw your reaction. I used some of the battle scenes from the movie in history class to illustrate the style of combat at the time and talk about the weapons used. I agree that this went way over the top regarding the activities of the British. I don't know if you have seen the movie 'Revolution' with Al Pacino. It would be good to get your perspective from this movie and is based upon the American Revolution. I personally think it is well done.
As always well done, I’m never ceased to be amazed at how much research was done to create these fantastic videos. I can’t get enough, keep them coming!
Really I thought the most unrealistic thing in this movie was when a women stood up in a church and basically called every man in the room a coward and there were no consequences
Common tactic governments use to convince young man to join the war, the British did this during ww1 for examples
@@raptonsoul2557
white feather campaign?
I thought the 4 feathers was a retty good movie as well.
The idea that women were looked down upon as second class citizens is a myth. They were not expected to receive education or work outside the home, but nobody thought they were incapable of these things. Men were enfranchised because they could hold a weapon and threaten the king, not because they were men.
Douglas Swancer the unrealistic thing was the accuracy Tavington’s flintlock. That man sniped a dude from like 70 years away while on horseback
@@konnorrockkonnoisseur4970 a time travel bullet?
Beyond the historical inaccuracy, the battle scenes were well done in my opinion.
Love the battles, hate any scene with Mel Gibson though
Honestly, that works against the film, because like Nick said in his Apocalypto review, such attempts at faithfulness give the film a false layer of authenticity, leading moviegoers to believe that the film is an accurate portrayal of history, when in this case, it’s thinly-veiled Anti-British Propaganda.
The battles were cool
Still too many people running around at random instead of rank and file and very little battle casualties were caused by close combat. The one thing I liked was that cannons actually used cannon balls rather than 20th century explosive rounds. You want great battle scenes try Gettysburg.
The final battle scene was pretty good when you put aside Mel Gibson and his flag
I love this movie regardless of its accuracy. It’s a fun watch. Tarleton is such a good villain. The actor did an amazing job!
RIP Heath Ledger
Everyone knew it was a movie, not a documentary, we aren’t idiots .
the First and most successful *BREXIT* ever
Not really. The treaty of paris and 1814 1818 tied America to us forever.
@Ned Chil Believe me. that was not the first time you pissed off Europe.
LOL
You forgot successful too.
@@jameswatsonatheistgamer More than that. This war was fought over central banking. The fact that the Bank of England continued to run its central bank in the US after both the Revolution and the War of 1812 tells you who REALLY won these wars (it wasn't the US). Andrew Jackson temporarily threw off the central bank in 1832, but the US has since been pulled back into central banking and the Federal Reserve is owned and operated primarily by European interests. IOW, most Americans don't know they are still a colony of Great Britain (which is controlled by the Vatican.). You've been played (many times), folks.
"Master has given America a sock. America is free!"
Dobby :(
🤣
‘Murica
Anyone else notice how many History Buff reviews cover movies staring Mel Gibson?
So I just want to say that while this movie is justifiably mocked, I think the part with Martin talking to his son who's glad that he killed those soldiers isn't supposed to read as a "Get those redcoats" sentiment, but that our protagonist is disturbed he's raising a little war criminal in his own image.
The funniest part to me was when the British freed the slaves, and the movie portrayed this as a sad dramatic scene
@@frocat5163 except they got freedom after. The ones that fought for us were still slaves after. Britain also abolished the slave trade by 1807. And we’re debating it’s justification as early as 1776.
@@frocat5163 i could of sworn that the us freed them after the british
@@afriendlycadian9857 they did. That’s why he deleted his comment. Lmao. Who said you can’t win arguments on CZcams?
Actually Tavington took them and made them fight in the British army. He did not set them free.
@@janetstoker893 But that, like almost everything else in this film, is utter bullsh*t.
Tavington is a ridiculously exaggerated travesty of Sir Banastre Tarleton. It's based on a widely held view of Tarleton that is already wildly exaggerated, dubious and controversial.
The offer made to slaves by the British was to _volunteer_ to fight in exchange for freedom, which offer was later matched by the Continental Army.
"The most un-massacre massacre in the history of massacres."
😂
I still think the Bowling Green Massacre tops the Boston Massacre in it's un-massacre-ness :P
Brazil (1) vs Germany (7)? Anyone?
Sacrilege83 Bolivia (6) Argentina (1) also....
Really. I was IN Boston visiting, listening to this story and when I heard "5 people" I was like... "Oh ...so it was a disagreement?"
“They just drone on and on about freedom…”
That cracked me up. 😂
classic brit disliking freedom
@@YHWHsam He's fucking Scottish, christ all of you are dipshits. I'm sad you are counted as fellow Americans like me, being thos idiotic and simple minded
Nick raises an important point at the end of his review.
But it’s not only about the director (or producer). It’s also about the audience, about the millions of Americans who are still being taught - and not only through Hollywood movie - that their nation is an exceptional nation, free from all the issues that every other nation has to deal with.
That’s the subject of a larger story about America, and about how we remember History.
Aloha 🤙🏼👏🏼
No American is taught this. At least not in school. You can't point out even a single history textbook approved for use in an American public school that makes such a claim. Some Americans might pick up such ideas at political rallies or from watching dumb movies like this or on Fox News... but... the majority of American historical films are highly self-reflective and self-critical. And public school curriculum does not whitewash the sins of the nation, despite what *other* political rallies and news channels would have you believe. Americans, taken as a whole, are probably among the most self-aware and open to criticism people in the world, probably excepting the Germans. I've been to close to 100 countries, lived in dozens, and worked as an educator in the US, Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia... so I feel like I've got a pretty good perspective on this. I think the main difference is that when a Macedonian or an Albanian or an Irishman says something about their own country being the greatest in the world... everyone else just laughs and thinks that's cute. When an American says it... they take offense and get defensive... because they know that the American claim actually needs to be taken seriously.
It is people like you Malafunkshun that so misunderstand and misstate the meaning and message presented in this movie. You state that America is not exceptional and that millions of people in the US are currently still being brainwashed into thinking that it is. In this you are very wrong. America was exceptional and in many ways it still is. Exceptional does not mean without any defects or problems at all. Yes this country had problems still but never in the course of history had a leader "George Washington" persevered to defeat the greatest military power of the world at that time "Great Britain" and then disbanded his army and fired himself when he turned over the governance of the country to the elected political representatives of the 13 colonies. Your bias exposes you to what you are.
Interestingly (if I remember correctly), Mel Gibson himself criticized the fact that Benjamin Martin had black servants rather than slaves. He said it felt like a real cop-out.
Of course that didn't stop him from playing the role and collecting his millions for it.
Mel Gibson demands historical accuracy would have a better ring to it.
So, now actors should stop playing roles that they do not agree with? We would be at a loss of many movies if that were the case.
I didn't say they were under any obligation to do that, but they certainly have the option to do so if they want too.
TheStapleGunKid
If they want to have normal careers then no.
“Tell me about Ohio”
Well, Cleveland is in Ohio, and all of Cleveland’s sports teams are crap.
Well the browns did really well this season and made it to the playoffs soooo......
What about the Cavs?
The Browns are pretty good (and look lethal this upcoming season), the Blue Jackets need some retooling, and there's nothing good to say about the Cavs. But if I were to pick a shitty sports city, it'd be Cincinnati. They have one team that hasn't won a playoff game in decades. And the worst part is that they've won their division a few times and still failed to win a playoff game, giving fans the illusion of hope.
@@davidparkes7741 I'm not too much into american sports but they were NBA champs with LeBron not that long ago, right?!
I’m sure they’re way better than any Georgia team 😂😂
As an American and quoting my forefathers “Suck it nerd!”
A quick breakdown of the Patriot: The main character, played by Mel Gibson, is in the middle of a brewing fight for independence, but initially doesn't join the cause. But then he loses a family member in a fight with British soldiers and initially takes revenge on a small group of them with some help.
He then gathers his forces and realises that engaging the English army in a fair fight isn't going to work, so starts a guerilla campaign to harass and disrupt the British. This leads to him gaining a legendary reputation and culminates in a big final battle to decide once and for all if independence will be gained or lost. Along the way, people from other countries come to assist alongside his freedom fighters. He often finds alliances with them uneasy and it leads to conflicts on occasions.
Against them is a ruthlessly evil villain with no redeeming features, assisted by his not-so-able deputies. These villains commit unspeakable acts of violence and cruelty, which far exceeded the actual violence of the time.
Oh wait, that's the plot for Braveheart. Sorry, so easy to get that movie and this one mixed up.
Mel Gibson has been in several anti English films:
Braveheart
The Patriot
Gallipoli
Maaayyybbbeee.
I think Mel Gibson doesn't like the British Empire
@Alex The Awsome Liam Neeson dealt with that already in 'Rob Roy' (1995)
How is Gallipoli anti english ?
@@TheSergentChaotix because the British government knowingly sent thousands of Australians to their death as a war strategy. Mel Gibson is Australian
kid: _kills red coats_
red coats: imprision him
mel gibson: *OmG HoW CoULd You DO DiS*?!?!1!!
TheAqualinda jajaja never though it that way... it also always bugs me how poorly armed and trained people are able to kill professional soldiers like they are grunts...
well, being a trained soldier doesn't make you magically immune to bullets or ambushes.
Lover Boy you know this is historical fiction so how are you expecting people to have common sense? It’s made by people in Hollywood that has never been in any real world situation.
They can’t kill the main character off but why not his two kids along with his other son that was killed lol or simply write a different scene if they can’t work around the world’s most professional soldiers being good at their job.....
they were gonna hang him and they just killed his other son
Tldr British man doesn't like the patriot
I watch this move every couple of years then go straight to this video for a good chuckle
*Man i didn’t know the nazis existed in the revolutionary war*
You don't know history then.
The National Socialists didnt exist, but people like them have always existed.
@@PhilK112 national sosolists were not left they were of the right
Phil K antifa is anti Jew? link please :)
They did not world war2 had them
This movie has nothing to do with Tom Brady or Steve Rogers. Dafuq...
Heh
yea and i hear Bill Belichick wasn't even brought up in this one
To be fair, people that commit war crimes often don't document it.... Tends to incriminate them if they lose
I am German and I don't agree ;)
I'm trying to find the song at the beginning of this video on CZcams and I can't find it, can anybody help me out?
who would have guessed that a movie called "The Patriot" was going to be overtly Patriotic
It's not patriotic. It's chauvinistic
its less Patriotic and more Nationalistic
It should rightfully be called "The Jingo"
As an American, this movie poses me off. As a soldier it infuriates me. I am a patriot, I fight for my country and it's citizens. This film is a mel Gibson jerk off session coached in false patriotism.
@B Ready Since you are under a bridge why cant you just do like water
This movie portrays Red Coats as the SS.
Not at all?
As said by the guy over me, the SS weren't comic book villains like Hollywood and some "historians" like so much to depict. There's reasons why in the end they were capable to build a massive army of half a million men, 60% of them not Germans and ALL volunteers.
Were they not comparable?
yeah well like the video said, they should've covered something the British actually did, rather than make something up.
Nolan there was a British officer in the Carolinas who did similar things
Why does everyone gloss over the fact that one of the "intolerable acts" that led to the American Insurrection was the British decision to allow the French in the newly acquired province of Quebec to retain their language and continue to practice Catholicism.
A friend created "The Patriot Drinking Game" Players had to take a drink whenever certain things appeared onscreen:
-racial equivocations, intended to hide the racial realities of the period: Benjamin Martin's field hands all being free Africans, when in reality, that was EXTREMELY rare, on South Carolina plantations, at the time.
-undergarments as outerwear.
-atrocities committed by British troops, that they never actually committed.
and I added "anything that was spoofed in "Sweet Liberty", (which I like to call "The Making of The Patriot") 14 years EARLIER.
-There were others I can't recall.
Anyway, the game was cancelled less than 20 minutes into the movie, to orevent mass alcohol poisoning. One of the group later described the game, and its cancellation, to Jason Isaacs, who reportedly found it brilliant.
According to Mel Gibson's view of history:
Britain used mass slavery in the American Revolution
Jesus was REALLY into BDSM
William Wallace was a Pagan who invented the kilt, and had a romance with a 7-year old girl
The Conquistadors were into CoD Zombies time travel, and wanted to take over the Mayan people
The Civil Rights movement was unnoticed by most of America due to everyone staying at home and watching cartoons
Wait, didn't the British abolish slavery half a century earlier?
No. They did so in the early 19th century. Still, they viewed it as a very undesirable thing back then, unlike the Americans, that started TWO wars over it in order to keep it.
JollyOldCanuck yes and America abolished slavery 8-12 years after George Washington.
Could someone explain that last one
Never mind i just got it
This video is so British, it colonised my computer.
Haven't heard that one a hundred times before.
@@arakami8547 I doubt you've ever heard that before and it's relevant so STFU
@@canadianwardog7118 go on any video about a british patriotic song, znd youll see hundreds of comments exactly like this one
Thank you.
You can almost feel the bitterness...
Bringing up MLK in a movie review set in the Revolutionary War?
Stretch much to make a point about how 'racism is still a thing - America bad.'
Jeez the movie isn't supposed to be accurate, it's supposed to be popcorn entertainment.
But oh my goodness the Brits are off the hook bad guys...better accuse America of hatred and racism!
I normally love this channel, but this was just cringy - he's yelling at the top of his lungs about the slavery thing, as if that was anything but a passing moment in the movie, at all.
It was never mentioned but for like, one line in the film. Here it's a 10 minute diatribe.
This video was...disappointing, at the least...
But the salt.
Oh my, so Salty.
😄😄😄😄
@@JohnSmith-mk1rj let's be honest, both sides had been war mungers horrific murderers and none are out the hook
Tavington was demonized but Cornwallis was portrayed as quite civilized. It wasn’t all of England that was indicted, just Tavington. Martin was a composite of many characters.
I actually used to have a project where students took a "based on true events" history movies and dissected them as you are doing. It really interested students, helped them to become questioning and critical thinking. This was pre you tube - or they would have been using your site :)
FYI the student who chose this movie ended up tearing it apart...
As a side note, it isn't completely accurate that breaking away from a king to form a new nation was a revolutionary idea. For example, it happened in the Netherlands in the later 1500s, and the document in which the Dutch forswore allegiance to King Philip II of Spain - the 'Plakkaat van Verlatinghe' of 1581 - was a direct inspiration for the Declaration of Independence of the United States. Like the Declaration of Independence, the Plakkaat of Verlatinghe was a list of things the King had done wrong, providing reasons for the Dutch to break away from the Habsburg Empire.
I suppose there is a difference in that the majority of the Dutch spoke a different language and had a different religion than the King of Spain, but restrictions of privilege and representation (especially for the Dutch nobility) were also issues back then.
+The Iron Historian Its not accurate they were breaking from a king at all...the beef was with lord north( the prime minister),and the british parliment....
dave h Well, they did address the King in the Declaration of Independence, and George III definitely had his hand in rejecting the Olive Branch Petition.
+The Iron Historian +dave h
Originally the Dutch only rejected Filips II as a tirant, without the intention to become a republic. They approached Queen Elisabeth to become their new monarch, but she didn't want a war with Spain at the time. Instead she send two representatives, one at the time. But she chose both her favorites, instead of the competent men at her court who understood the Dutch. Both screwed up. The Dutch got fed up, chose the existing Estate General to become their new goverment... So, thanks Elisabeth for being incompetent I suppose.
***** Well yeah, I don't deny that. The Dutch Republic in the end became more of a Monarchy, with the Stadtholder functioning pretty much as a King. Even during the Stadtholderless periods, power was mostly organized plutocratic.
So yeah, there were revolutionary aspects to the American Revolution, but not the Independence-bit, which was stated in the video.
+The Iron Historian Didn't the English rebel against there own King the middle of the 17th century and then decide like six years later that a king is better than the Republic ran by a bunch of guys who banned theater and Christmas?
I would usually just skip to the battles and action scenes because they're the only real takeaway from this movie for me. After that, I would load up Empire Total War and have fun.
xD
Amen
The way they fought wasn't actually...so... yeah...
El Prez the staged choreographed movie war was the true historical part to you?
Books- check um out at your local library
El Prez HELL YEAH
what is the name of the song that plays as the intro for all History Buff episodes?
I worked in a theater when this came out. My dad wanted to see it so I got free tickets. He loved it but I rolled my eyes over how over the top it was.
When was it over the top?
Not surprised a 40 year old man with weeb in his name would feel that way.
@@cameron4145 I was a US Marine too. :3
@@drunkweebmarine9492 doubt it
It's no coincidence that a lot of villains in American films have British accents.
Yeah, just look at Star Wars.
@@connorbranscombe6819 to be fair it's iconic line from Tarkin
Not really it’s usually Russian
@@jamaphy8621 that's because it is the Rebels vs Empire. Look at Enemy at the Gates on how they use English accents
@@westbygod_304 such as?
Tavington believes in total war?
boy do I have the game series for you.
yeah but if he'd played total war he would've been able to exploit the revolutionary AI to ensure he defeated them ;)
Like Grant and Sherman they also believed in total warfare...
Tavington would’ve had at least 3000 hours in Empire: Total War.
When ever i play Empire: total war as the British,i have one regiment of dragoons named "Tavilton's Bastards" 😁
Our redcoats are running from the field of battle, a shameful display.
Nick apologies if I've asked this before but have you ever considered doing an analysis of The Siege of Jadotville?
The story is behind the Swamp Fox, the final battle scene was in Cowpens SC, there is a tiny cabin there.
"Taxation without representation" a commonly misunderstood quote. The "representation" is the key part. Britain was never going to allow colonialist true representation in the house of parliament.
Each colony had their own Parliament represented to the Crown by the governor, so they needed representation( in the HoP for what and by whom), they already had it???? Or did you mean the American colonies had to be treated differently than any other colony? Why, they were British with their own representatives and if what history has told us is true, the American colonies had " the best" of all the British colonies around the world for life expectancy, standard of living, best education (that went belly up--) all the best standards of living that people could want. Even better than Britain itself!!
Colin Marsh Actually they literally had as much representation as citizens in Britain. Which was none. No citizen had any play in the parliament, which was GB argument against Taxation without Representation, which the Colonists still resented, as they were being taxed much heavier than the citizens of GB. They were told that the Colonists were equals but were getting taxed far heavier with the Stamp tax.
@@ljwells6445 but the colonists were taxed less than the people in great Britain.
@@ljwells6445 _"they literally had as much representation as citizens in Britain. Which was none."_ - and still is none. Monarchy sees to that even now. Republicanism has given the American people Donald Trump. That's a better deal than Lizzie and Boris, believe me.
Tony Duncan ...you do know the monarchs of Britain have not held any real power for at least the last 150 years right?
Britain is as democratic as the US, all power resides within the governement and the House of Commons. Monarchy and House of Lords are entirely ceremonial.
In less than 20 years Jason Isaacs went from an expy of Banastre Tarleton to Marshal of the Soviet Union Georgy Konstantinovich Zhukov via a stint as a Sith Inquisitor and a Mirror Universe terrorist.
Hey, I just started watching a bunch of your videos. Do you have a video or a list of movies talking about ones that were actually historically accurate?
You forgot about the "stamp act" bro. The colonists were taxed on stamps and paper