El patriota

Es solo ligeramente algo peor a Braveheart que Troya lo es a Gladiator. Una película de Hollywood, con mucho oficio, pero no del todo «desde el corazón» y con el riesgo de ser aceptada por las masas (con un presupuesto tan grande). El patriota no podía dejar de ser abrazada por las masas porque contiene todos los clichés de las epopeyas bélicas, heroicas y románticas que se puedan imaginar en la historia del cine. Y los mezcla en un rico guión y con un reparto de calidad. Salvo que Emmerich es un artista de la cursilería exagerada. Muchas de las composiciones están reordenadas y recoloreadas de forma irreal (¡incluso el azul solo para los ojos de Gibson!), y sirve al patetismo hasta tal punto que le quita la seriedad que necesita la película como fresco histórico sobre hechos reales. Como «película Disney» para una tarde lluviosa de domingo no está mal. (08.05.2020)

Emmerich's craft Is not only in the dynamite, but at times also in the details, which is on full display here. The production design is pretty sexy, Williams caresses the soul, and the acting duo of Gibson - Isaacs does exactly what each does best. But as expected, it's a patriotic farce, with the German filmmaker yelling "long live the spirit of the American Declaration" in every scene, and the difference between the good guys and the bad guys is as clear as between Mordor and a Hobbiton. It's watchable, but the birth of a legendary hero couldn't be more clichéd. Not to mention that it’s longer than a wait at the dentist. (19.01.2018)

Gibson overstepped the mark here... True, the basis of the film is the same as that of his mega hit Braveheart, but unlike the campaign of the charismatic Scottish warrior William Wallace, the struggle for national independence of a certain Benjamin Martin does not have the right "scale". Scale in fulfilling the templates of a historical film, scale in the piling of clichés. Because The Patriot is uncomfortably predictable, and the emotional charge is generated is a way that is so toiling and obvious that nothing happens during the moment it's supposed to spark. The handsome poses of the statuesque hero Gibson do not help. Roland Emmerich, I think that's one big historical mistake, and I thank him for confirming it again with his sterile and inept direction. The script is one big mess, which mattes and kneads a potentially interesting topic in the most chewy and exuded way. The characters are so embarrassingly standardized that my memories of a Czech building film of the 1950s come back to me. Pathos, pathos, and pathos again. In the middle of it, you just have to appreciate something as mediocre as Gibson's acting. At least it elevates the film to slightly below-average, but its schematics and traditional Emmerichism ("being more Emmerichan than American") represent something I don't want to see again. (10.02.2005)

Nowadays it's a classic and Mel is in great form in it. They really shouldn't have touched this guy's family. His crazy expression is inimitable and the scene with him and his youngest daughter, when they both fall into each other's arms, can bring tears to your eyes. But I am most entertained by the people who are the ones who scold it because it has too much American patriotism.__P.S. A great Jason Isaacs (and the villains in general) and the traditionally perfect John Williams. (12.08.2009)

The beginning is engaging, the portrayal of the characters is good, the production quality is high, and Mel Gibson's facial expressions are traditionally precise. Jason Isaacs plays the villain with skill, and the initial clearance of twenty redcoats is unforgettable. But those are the only highlights of the film and then it only goes downhill. The fight scenes are not as dynamic and the mass scenes do not work well for Roland Emmerich. The cinematography is confusing and unclear, and the raw war atmosphere is clearly lacking. It's hard to fault Patriot for its pathos, but Gibson alone with his array of alternating angry, furious, and sad looks cannot win the war. (16.11.2003)