Peaceful farmer Benjamin Martin is driven to lead the Colonial Militia during the American Revolution when a sadistic British officer murders his son.
Ashamed of his savagery during the French and Indian War, Benjamin Martin decided he would sit out the American Revolution, while his oldest son Gabriel enlisted minutes after South Carolina joined the fight. He changes his mind when his house is burned down and one of his children is killed by the savage Green Dragoon commander Colonel Tavington. Quickly realizing that traditional 18th century warfare tactics won't work, Martin organizes militiamen into a guerilla unit to harass Cornwallis' army long enough to allow the French to arrive.
This is a good movie if you love history. If you haven&#39;t seen it yet, please know this before you enter the theater: Yes, war was fought face-to-face until around the War of 1812, when tactics won out over &quot;gentlemen&#39;s combat&quot;. I heard so many people saying &quot;This is so stupid!&quot; while I was trying to enjoy this film. Did they think it was some kind of bizarre, Hollywood interpretation of the foolishness of warfare? Well, it was, but that&#39;s not my point.<br/><br/>It bothers me that people don&#39;t know simple historic facts when going to be entertained at the cinema. I&#39;ve been bugged by it since I actually heard some twenty-something college kid gasp &quot;Omigod, the Russians are, like, right there…&quot; during &quot;Saving Private Ryan&quot;. (Saving Private Ryan, for those who may not have seen it, takes place during World War II, and the featured enemy was Germany, not Russia.) It makes me want to get up and go &quot;Okay, stop the film! Let me give you all a quick history lesson…&quot;<br/><br/>Movies are for entertainment. From my point of view, movies can be enjoyed even more if we take a quick look at some of the history involving the period of the movie before plopping down the $7.50.<br/><br/>About the film, &quot;The Patriot&quot;: there&#39;s an interesting paradox to watching this film. It feels as though Emmerich took the cast and crew back to the 1700&#39;s to shoot the epic. You know it&#39;s a movie, but somehow it seems to have been made while America was occupied by the King&#39;s Army. This will illustrate the attention to detail and the respect with which the makers of this film created it. Watch for the cinematography and costume design nods come Oscar time next March. My rating: *** (out of four).
First I will like to say that I didn&#39;t expect to much of a movie directed by the same guy who made &quot;Godzilla&quot; and the writter of &quot;Saving Private Ryan&quot; but at least I was expeacting a fun, interesting and ejoyble film like &quot;Braveheart&quot; was. But it was awful, predictable, realy long, boring and monotonus. The script have to many mistakes, the direction is boring and all those scenes when Emmerich tries to project the patriotism it ends like a patetic and ridiculous scenes. The only good things was the performace of Mel Gibson and the cinematography.
The best movie I've seen about the Revolutionary War.
For three reasons: (1) The officers would be more experienced in defending the column that was escorting Gabriel to prison. They&#39;d be better able than those lower in rank to fight off an attack by a single man and two boys. Additionally, officer training is more intense and involved than basic training, and they would be more knowledgeable in combat tactics. (2) With the officers dead, the other Redcoats in the column would find it harder to organize themselves into a single and effective fighting unit to repel the attack, as we plainly saw happen. So, without the officers yelling orders to the lower ranking soldiers, it was easier for Martin to mount his attack successfully. (3) Targeting officers specifically was not a standard military tactic at the time. It was not part of the gentlemanly code of warfare and would cause upset and confusion when the Rebels used this tactic. Yes and no. We&#39;re probably suspending some of our disbelief for the sake of the story—the scene is an excellent opportunity to introduce us to Martin as a great guerrilla warrior. Also, he had the advantage of his two sons already being excellent marksmen, having taught them that specific skill. With their elevated position on the nearby ridge, they had a huge advantage. Additionally, Martin had extensive knowledge of the area near his farm and the terrain therein. He chose the spot specifically for its cover by the natural flora (trees, shrubs, etc) and the ridge where he planted his sons to act as his snipers. This is a technique employed by marksmen, especially with less accurate weapons such as the muskets and other muzzle loaded weapons that were used during the American Revolution. What it means is the smaller the target you aim at, the smaller the chance of missing the larger target. For example, if the boys were to aim at an officer, they could miss him. But if they aim at a button on the officer&#39;s coat, they may miss the button, but they&#39;d still hit the officer. As suspected by many people, the &quot;new&quot; Extended Cut features mostly scenes that were first used as deleted scenes for the old DVD release. Now these passages were re-integrated into the movie, adding up nearly 11 minutes to the movie. No. As with most films of the genre, it is fiction based on/inspired by true events.
a5c7b9f00b
Blue Thunder full movie hindi downloadCase File 99 'We're Not Alone' in hindi downloadDownload Episode 1.246 full movie in hindi dubbed in Mp4malayalam movie download HymnSon of Rambow malayalam full movie free downloadThe Dark Road full movie hd downloadTaken movie downloadDon't Turn the Other Cheek full movie in hindi free download mp4Operation Mekong full movie in hindi free downloadThe Story in hindi download free in torrent