329:question:329--week_4_questions_comments-2022
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
| 329:question:329--week_4_questions_comments-2022 [2022/09/15 05:00] – [V. The "So, what?" question] 76.78.225.170 | 329:question:329--week_4_questions_comments-2022 [2022/09/15 05:35] (current) – coleman_taylor | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
| Similar to The Last of the Mohicans, The Patriot says a lot about the time period that it was made. The 1990’s and early 2000’s featured some extremely inconsiderate and inaccurate films, as the historical genre suffered greatly from dramatization. While The Patriot was not as racist as Mohicans, it was on the same level of inaccuracy, and it is racist in the sense that it ignores slavery altogether. From what I have seen in this time period, the films are just trying too hard to be dramatic and impactful. To have the hero of the story fight the villain with an American flag as a spear is simply overdoing it. It seems like overdoing it is the overall theme for movies from this era, as they consistently promote a dramatized tale over an accurate recount of an event. -Burke Steifman | Similar to The Last of the Mohicans, The Patriot says a lot about the time period that it was made. The 1990’s and early 2000’s featured some extremely inconsiderate and inaccurate films, as the historical genre suffered greatly from dramatization. While The Patriot was not as racist as Mohicans, it was on the same level of inaccuracy, and it is racist in the sense that it ignores slavery altogether. From what I have seen in this time period, the films are just trying too hard to be dramatic and impactful. To have the hero of the story fight the villain with an American flag as a spear is simply overdoing it. It seems like overdoing it is the overall theme for movies from this era, as they consistently promote a dramatized tale over an accurate recount of an event. -Burke Steifman | ||
| + | I think one of the most surprising things for me was to discover this was released in 2000 and not post-2001. The film overall invokes a sense of patriotism that was on the rise in the late 1990s and 2000s. The showing of the thirteen colonies' | ||
| ====== V. The "So, what?" question ====== | ====== V. The "So, what?" question ====== | ||
| Line 91: | Line 92: | ||
| This movie has a lot of pros and cons, and I think we can use this movie as a reference for what can be done. Obviously a fairly accurate historical movie can be make well. What it needs to well-rounded historical accuracy, point case being the depiction of enslaved people. That is something that was clearly skirted around, and it makes sense for the time period in which the movie was made. Even in the year 2000 a lot of racial issues were not at the forefront in the way they are today. There was also a lot less sensitivity to these tragic events, as oftentimes they were ignored or downplayed. That aspect of the movie is a direct correlation to the political and social attitudes of the early 2000s. -Michaela | This movie has a lot of pros and cons, and I think we can use this movie as a reference for what can be done. Obviously a fairly accurate historical movie can be make well. What it needs to well-rounded historical accuracy, point case being the depiction of enslaved people. That is something that was clearly skirted around, and it makes sense for the time period in which the movie was made. Even in the year 2000 a lot of racial issues were not at the forefront in the way they are today. There was also a lot less sensitivity to these tragic events, as oftentimes they were ignored or downplayed. That aspect of the movie is a direct correlation to the political and social attitudes of the early 2000s. -Michaela | ||
| + | |||
| + | I enjoyed this film even if I felt no joy in some parts (I mean this in a good way, the film was great at telling the story. When I saw everyone gather in a church I said ‘no’ about ten times). This film did to me what I think it set out to do in everyone, made me feel patriotic while watching. Overall, the film is actually a pretty good secondary source about the past. I personally did not know much about the Revolutionary War in the south, and the film worked well to give me an introduction to it. The film also did a good job at showing the differing and changing opinions of colonists towards the British. Ben at first did not want to fight in the war, but the second the British started acting in a way he disagreed with, he changed. According to our class discussion, the changing of opinion is a more accurate portrayal than the typical ‘all colonists vs the British and if a colonist is with a British, they are traitors’ depiction. There are glaring issues with it though. As mentioned in numerous comments, slavery was brushed over in favor of Ben looking more favorably. Even the dialogue at the beginning where the enslaved person said that they were free and just worked the land felt so off. You cannot make a story about America’s past and brush over slavery like it was no big deal. It was/is a big deal and still continues to impact us today. To ignore it is criminal. - Taylor Coleman | ||
329/question/329--week_4_questions_comments-2022.1663218057.txt.gz · Last modified: 2022/09/15 05:00 by 76.78.225.170