Reel History 4: Man's Man Edition: The Patriot

Look into those steely blue eyes. The eyes of... The Patriot

It's a little odd how the most revered, celebrated time in American history is the one represented by The Patriot, a very stupid movie. There are few contemporary blockbusters about the American Revolution, and compared to other wars, few movies in general - I could only find the 1939 movie Drums Along the Mohawk and the 1972 musical 1776 (more on that later), and if we're feeling generous, the miniseries John Adams. The last motion picture to be made (one I couldn't get my hands on) was 2003's Benedict Arnold: A Question of Honor with Kelsey Grammar in the juicy role of George Washington. No movie is as ubiquitous when it comes to the American Revolution as The Patriot, and that's kind of a shame  A smart, contemporary epic could be made about the American Revolution, just not the one Roland Emmerich decided to make.

The Patriot is, above all else, a ridiculous movie, and for those who couldn't glean the whole plot from the poster, here's a little summary: it's 1776, the violence of the American Revolution going on for little over a year now, but it hasn't reached Benjamin Martin (Mel Gibson) at his South Carolina plantation (tended to by a workforce of completely free black people. Our noble hero, a man of his times in South Carolina, would never own slaves). But it does eventually, of course, and when the peacenik Martin has his farm burned and son killed by British soldiers (led by the ruthless Colonel William Tavington) he goes into a beserker rage, killing his enemies with brutal efficiency and a certain je ne sais quoi that can only be found in a Roland Emmerich movie. He and his son (played by Heath Ledger) gather a ragtag militia together, and they go on to help win the war for independence. Hurray!

Well, history isn't that simple, and neither's The Patriot to be honest, but it's really a movie that, when the action starts, has no interest in what actually happened during the war. But because the events and characters are broadly based on real life, it does get a lot right while not having to be exact: the debate between pro and anti-war Americans; the French Major Jean Villeneuave, who teaches Martin's militia how to fight, is clearly based on Marquis de Lafayette, arguably one of the most important figures in the American Revolution and whose help and guidance was indispensable when things were at their bleakest; and the swamp hideout of Martin and his men is directly based on how Frances 'the Swamp Fox' Marion fought his battles. Marion is one of the four men Mel Gibson's character is based on, all of whom were militia leaders steeped in guerrilla warfare.

But when it's wrong, it gets crazy, and boy howdy does it get crazy. The insanity begins with Gibson's wild man invincible warrior shtick and ends with the character of Colonel William Tavington, who is based on General Banastre Tarleton, a man known as 'the Butcher' or 'Bloody Ban'. Those are some nasty nicknames, sure, and he may have earned them after the Battle of Waxhaws in 1780, which took place in our main character's state of South Carolina: Tarleton (apparently) refused to take prisoners and slaughtered many Continental soldiers who were either surrendering or not resisting. Now, whether he did this on purpose or not is up for debate, but the slaughter really isn't, so it gained traction as American propaganda. But what Tarleton did not do was round up a town full of non-soldiering American citizens and burn them alive in a church, as the villain Tavington does. This was an aspect borrowed by the screenwriters from real life Nazi war crimes, and events like this never took place in the American Revolution. In fact, if they did, there is no freakin' way Americans would ever have forgotten it, and as American Heritage editor Richard Snow says, "It could have kept us out of World War I."

But that's what this movie is all about: ennobling the American cause, actual noble history be damned. Turning the British into the equivalent of Nazis makes cause for American independence a battle of good versus unremitting evil, and allows the director to eschew any conversation on the context of the war. Taxation without representation, the British Port Act, or the Quartering Act? Those are just part of a conversation on the rights of self determination in government and the true meaning of liberty. And that's booooring! The British are BURNING OUR HOMES AND LOVED ONES. They are monsters! Let's have Mel Gibson hatchet one of 'em to smithereens!

And that's the problem Hollywood runs into with the Founding Fathers- they are intellectuals, and therefore, they are dull. These men- John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Ben Franklin- were some of the smartest, most interesting men of the age, but they spent too much time learning and talking, and not enough time hacking British soldiers to bits and pieces. This is why they exist as deities in the American mythology, and why we see so few movies about them- they were great men who loomed over the actions of the Continental Army, writing the great American saga while the men they inspired (like the fictional Benjamin Martin) watered the tree of freedom with their own blood. The Patriot does this with George Washington; in one scene, when Heath Ledger first enlists, he sees the larger-than-life Commander-in-Chief float through the camp on his mighty steed, his majesty and godliness compounded by the morning mist. George Washington the man isn't so exciting for an action flick, but George Washington the idea is perfect- what he stands for is what The Patriot intends to stand for, even though just using his image doesn't save the movie from being stupendously silly.

But for many people, that's simply what the Founding Fathers are all about. They were divinely inspired to fight the evil at their doorstep and craft a perfect nation, or as perfect a nation as man can achieve. This sort of ideology took mortal men and turned them into demigods, and casts their cause and the American cause of today as the righteous one. The Patriot says that there are two basic types of American heroes- those who are divinely inspired to a cause, and those who are charged with carrying out that inspiration. And if one isn't divinely inspired or doesn't heed the warnings (ol' Ben Martin was opposed to the war in the beginning) the evil they failed to see and stop will draw them into the cause. This thinking can be used to cast any undertaking into an us v. them, good v. evil conflict, be they actual worthy fights like the American Revolution or World War II, or otherwise (Vietnam, Iraq, etc.).

It also can inspire stupid, blasphemous paintings like this one. Notice the unwed mother and cellphone guy who do not agree with the Constitution. Also notice Jefferson, who didn't believe in the divinity of Christ.

Here's what The Patriot needed:

Roland Emmerich knows what America wants to be; whether or not he knows what it is remains to be seen.

NEXT TIME: 1776, a musical tribute to the Founding Fathers (and a movie that swings the other way when talking about them).