Wiki for Dr. McClurkens Courses

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
329:question:329--week_4_questions_comments-2026

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
329:question:329--week_4_questions_comments-2026 [2026/09/23 22:36] – [How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made?] 76.78.172.87329:question:329--week_4_questions_comments-2026 [2026/09/29 13:32] (current) – 199.111.65.35
Line 15: Line 15:
  
 This movie focuses on the Southern campaign of the Revolutionary War and gets a lot of concepts and the general sequence of events right. This movie shows the burning of Charles Town (Charleston), the initial British success in the South, and how the British end up getting beat back and driven north by the nimble Continental forces ultimately ending in the British defeat at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781. This movie highlights pillaging as well as violence against civilians (however it is not to the same extreme as they show it), guerilla warfare and how it conflicts with traditional European warfare, and the presence of enslaved individuals and how both sides tried to use the enslaved to their advantage. The movie also demonstrates the hesitance of many colonialists to take up arms against the British. South Carolina was one of the last states to sign vote in support of the Declaration of Independence and there was much apprehension on the part of enslavers because of the trade and protection that being a part of the British empire afforded them — even if Benjamin Martin doesn’t mention that entire point in his speech in the legislature. – Nora M. This movie focuses on the Southern campaign of the Revolutionary War and gets a lot of concepts and the general sequence of events right. This movie shows the burning of Charles Town (Charleston), the initial British success in the South, and how the British end up getting beat back and driven north by the nimble Continental forces ultimately ending in the British defeat at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781. This movie highlights pillaging as well as violence against civilians (however it is not to the same extreme as they show it), guerilla warfare and how it conflicts with traditional European warfare, and the presence of enslaved individuals and how both sides tried to use the enslaved to their advantage. The movie also demonstrates the hesitance of many colonialists to take up arms against the British. South Carolina was one of the last states to sign vote in support of the Declaration of Independence and there was much apprehension on the part of enslavers because of the trade and protection that being a part of the British empire afforded them — even if Benjamin Martin doesn’t mention that entire point in his speech in the legislature. – Nora M.
 +
 +The Patriot is correct with the variety of ethnicities and their involvement within the American Revolution. The British did offer freedom to slaves who joined their army—and there are multiple Black soldiers seen on their side within the movie. The Battle of Yorktown also did involve the help of the French, so it was good to see the character of Jean Villeneuve as a central character throughout the film. –Aaliyah A.
 +
 +In terms of historical accuracy there are a few things the Patriot got right. For one aspect of war and battle were fairly accurate. Especially with the guerilla war tactics used throughout the film. The film also portrayed who was involved in South Carolina throughout the revolutionary war. How both militia and every day people were involved. The movie also showed that sometimes even children fought and helped with the war. The film also correctly shows how the British treated colonists, especially with the seizing of property and quartering. And the British offering slaves freedom in exchange for enlisting.
 +-Ellie I
 +
 +I think that this film deserves credit for featuring an example of a marooned community of this period, as these groups are historically overlooked, especially in early 2000s cinema. We see this depiction when Ben’s family are taken to a marooned community along the coast for safety as this would be a secure location that was easily overlooked. Maroon communities were settlements of self-liberated people who escaped the brutal conditions of enslavement. In the context of South Carolina, they were vital centers of resistance for the Black community, with their survival relying heavily on an understanding of the physical landscape and an ability to sustain agricultural life in often challenging environments. 
 +While I appreciate the inclusion, the film’s depiction of these communities, and the want to showcase broader experiences of free and enslaved Black Americans during the Revolutionary period, it still lacks historical nuance and a clear perspective on the lives of Black-Americans in the post-Revolutionary period and up to the point of the film’s release. - Izabella M 
 +
  
 ======Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact?====== ======Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact?======
 +
 +One of the most egregious inaccuracies in the film that I feel gets overlooked is the depiction of the British as having ambitions for native american land after the war and even carving up territory for the characters of Gen. Cornwallis and Col. Tavington. Maybe, these supposedly “loyal” British subjects should’ve known about the Proclamation of 1763 which explicitly forbade colonial settlement west of the Appalachians. In fact, this decision served as one of the main catalysts for the American Revolution just as much as “no taxation without representation” as one of the main reasons people, young and poor males especially, would come to America was an opportunity to seek out land that they could call their own and develop through hard work, the origins of the “American dream.” That actually sounds a lot like Benjamin Martin’s character, but somehow it's the British and loyalists who are the ones eyeing up Indian land. - Charles Salcedo
 +
 The Patriot is a very idealistic portrayal of the American Revolution in the south. It was basically an action movie. The biggest inaccuracy I saw in the movie was the portrayal of Black Americans. Benjamin Martin did not own slaves, they were freedmen who worked by their own decision. Nor did his sister in law, I presume, given that their former workers provided them refuge after the British came for Martin’s family. Even though both of them owned plantations in the south. There was a nice appearance of what I assume were the Gullah people, who provided the Martin family and Charlotte with refuge and care. The one slave that earned his freedom by fighting with Martin was apparently slowly accepted by his white colleagues and was just fine with his treatment once they became nice to him. The Patriot was just an objectively bad representation of black Americans in the south and during the revolutionary war. Although the exaggerations done here weren’t unlike other decisions made in the movie. -Katie D. The Patriot is a very idealistic portrayal of the American Revolution in the south. It was basically an action movie. The biggest inaccuracy I saw in the movie was the portrayal of Black Americans. Benjamin Martin did not own slaves, they were freedmen who worked by their own decision. Nor did his sister in law, I presume, given that their former workers provided them refuge after the British came for Martin’s family. Even though both of them owned plantations in the south. There was a nice appearance of what I assume were the Gullah people, who provided the Martin family and Charlotte with refuge and care. The one slave that earned his freedom by fighting with Martin was apparently slowly accepted by his white colleagues and was just fine with his treatment once they became nice to him. The Patriot was just an objectively bad representation of black Americans in the south and during the revolutionary war. Although the exaggerations done here weren’t unlike other decisions made in the movie. -Katie D.
  
Line 24: Line 36:
  
 The main problem I see with this movie is the sense of equality between the races towards the end of the movie. This could not be more inaccurate because the thought of freedom from slavery did not even present itself until the following century. The way that the soldiers on both sides of the war treated the slaves in the beginning of the film was more accurate. Slaves did not even have full freedom even when they were considered freed slaves until Ben in the movie. Why did the slaves work for him for free if they were already free to go and live their own life? They worked the land for Ben most likely in exchange for some share of the products grown. I don't like it that they burned the church down especially with people in it but this did not happen during this time period in history nor during this war. The burning of the church was inspired through a separate source and was completely inaccurate history wise for this movie -- Autumn. M The main problem I see with this movie is the sense of equality between the races towards the end of the movie. This could not be more inaccurate because the thought of freedom from slavery did not even present itself until the following century. The way that the soldiers on both sides of the war treated the slaves in the beginning of the film was more accurate. Slaves did not even have full freedom even when they were considered freed slaves until Ben in the movie. Why did the slaves work for him for free if they were already free to go and live their own life? They worked the land for Ben most likely in exchange for some share of the products grown. I don't like it that they burned the church down especially with people in it but this did not happen during this time period in history nor during this war. The burning of the church was inspired through a separate source and was completely inaccurate history wise for this movie -- Autumn. M
 +
 +The depiction of race was one of the biggest issues that I saw throughout the film. Within the film, it is depicted that the Black Americans were already freed men. At the end of the movie, it is said that they chose to rebuild the house on their own free will. There was no depiction of the struggle with slavery as it heavily focused on the Revolutionary War. The film also took inspiration from a true event, which was the burning of the church however, that event wasn't until World War II. -- Shelby Hawley
 +
 +As stated by others The Patriot is more of an action movie, focusing on the larger more “exciting” aspects of war rather than accuracy. For one, multiple characters in the film are entirely fictional. Especially the main character Benjamin Martin, and the villain William Tavington. How slaves were portrayed was fairly inaccurate. Yes there were free slaves in the area who worked. But the fact they willingly worked for the Martins, the idea is rather asinine. Also the fact that not a single Native American was shown in the movie was also ridiculous considering how much of a large part they played in the war.
 +-Ellie I.
 +
 +As I’ve stated previously, the film could have done much more to show the dangerous nature of marooned communities and the agency of those who built them, along with the heavily problematic depiction of the agendas and motivations of their Black characters as a whole. The film’s ending in particular, with the character of Occam giving his life to fight for the chance of freedom, immediately returning to the plantation and happily welcoming the family’s return, just rubbed me the wrong way. It portrayed the state of the Black population and equal to the White population and gave off a sense of wonder and optimism at what is to come in the future, which is just wrong in so many ways. The film missed a significant opportunity to accurately reflect the lived realities of Black Americans during the Revolutionary era and the fight against oppression that is in many ways still ongoing (especially in the late 90s and early 2000s when this film was released). Ultimately, the portrayal remains more of a cinematic backdrop than a true exploration of the historical significance and struggle of the Black community. -  Izabella M
 +
 +Despite the film’s significant depiction of the free black population of South Carolina, which only numbered in the few thousands, the film leaves many other groups that existed in the colony with little to no representation. Both the enslaved population of South Carolina and openly loyalist population are depicted each only by one character, the enslaved man Occam (played by actor Jay Arlen Jones) who served in Martin’s militia and Captain James Wilkins (played by Adam Baldwin) who was Colonel Tavington’s second-in-command. Meanwhile, not a single Native American character in depicted in the film and the only mentions to Native Americans at all in the film revolves around the backstory of the main character Benjamin Martin, his slaughter of Native Americans in the French and Indian War being the catalyst for why Martin would want to avoid another war this time coming to his doorstep. This reflects the film's desire to avoid the complexities of certain populations that could give a bad impression of the patriot cause, given how reality shows that loyalists and Native Americans were sizable minorities, certainly greater than the population of free blacks, in British North America and the enslaved population in South Carolina was actually the majority within the colony. - Charles Salcedo
  
 ======How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources (as presented in class)?====== ======How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources (as presented in class)?======
Line 31: Line 52:
 Colonial America went through many trials as well as wars to get us where we are today. I think what we learned in class follows along pretty well with the film's interpretations. We started off with the seven years war as well as the French and Indian war in the 1750s through the early 1760s. This is likely when Ben first fought battles and learned how to fight. He recalls many times to his son Gabrial in the film about how he murdered Indians and sent their body parts back to their tribes. This gives you the sense of how brutal that war was and why Ben doesn't want to start or be in another war in the start of the film. We go further along the line and talk about how of course the British won the war but levied a heavy tax on the colonists in America. This led to the stamp act and the Townsend act. Naturally this angered a lot of people and made them want to create their own nation separate from England. This starts the revolutionary war and against Ben's better judgement, his eldest son enlists in the continental army to fight for the cause. At the time there were more enslaved people in America than there were not so they got pulled to fight in the war for both sides. They are told that if they fight then they will gain their freedom. We see this in the film when Ben’s “freed” slaves are taken by the British.-- Autumn. M Colonial America went through many trials as well as wars to get us where we are today. I think what we learned in class follows along pretty well with the film's interpretations. We started off with the seven years war as well as the French and Indian war in the 1750s through the early 1760s. This is likely when Ben first fought battles and learned how to fight. He recalls many times to his son Gabrial in the film about how he murdered Indians and sent their body parts back to their tribes. This gives you the sense of how brutal that war was and why Ben doesn't want to start or be in another war in the start of the film. We go further along the line and talk about how of course the British won the war but levied a heavy tax on the colonists in America. This led to the stamp act and the Townsend act. Naturally this angered a lot of people and made them want to create their own nation separate from England. This starts the revolutionary war and against Ben's better judgement, his eldest son enlists in the continental army to fight for the cause. At the time there were more enslaved people in America than there were not so they got pulled to fight in the war for both sides. They are told that if they fight then they will gain their freedom. We see this in the film when Ben’s “freed” slaves are taken by the British.-- Autumn. M
  
 +The Patriot showcases the American Revolution in a way that is better read as an interpretation than a source on how the events depicted actually took place. The film uses the American Revolution as a backdrop to a plot based on drama and revenge, making entertainment more important than accuracy. The interaction between white colonists and African Americans specifically is purposefully ignorant of the actual climate of the time. Benjamin Martin is presented as a perfect hero and slavery is wholly ignored, instead the black people who work on his family's plantation are introduced as unpaid workers. The way the plot is written, refusing to acknowledge the reality of slavery is a requirement to how the film-makers offer the character forward to the audience.
 +-Leah B.
  
 ======How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made?====== ======How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made?======
 +
 +In the U.S., the 1990s and the early 2000s were very much a time drenched in nationalistic ideals and patriotism. Hollywood was producing constant films that further impassioned this rhetoric, often having clear and simple good vs bad characters and dramatically heroic narratives. In this film there were also themes of protecting one's home and family in the face of frankly cartoonishly evil violence, which was another common theme of movies during this time. Heavy elements of racial sanitization and fear of broaching controversial topics involving our country's flawed history also pervade the film's storyline, as the protagonist is shown to be a southern plantation owner who very uniquely doesn't have slaves working his fields but instead paid freedmen. The film is very clearly refusing to acknowledge the fact that the rich and middle-class white colonists who historically fought for American independence against the violent and despicable British empire were very often violent and despicable in their own right. Such an admittance to this fact would go against the overall themes of clear good vs evil and the encouragement of thoughtless nationalism, so it was omitted. 
  
 The 2000s are rather famously known for their major displays of American Exceptionalism in the lead-up to the Post-9/11 conflict in Afghanistan, aptly dubbed the "War on Terror"; films catered to that foundational cultural pride and related martial agenda. This is ably reflected in Roland Emmerich's The Patriot (2000), as it depicts the very genesis of the United States of America, its formation, and the correlated militaristic forces American citizens coveted in the 2000s period. It practically functions as a love letter to the American people's national pride. -Bailee Eberenz The 2000s are rather famously known for their major displays of American Exceptionalism in the lead-up to the Post-9/11 conflict in Afghanistan, aptly dubbed the "War on Terror"; films catered to that foundational cultural pride and related martial agenda. This is ably reflected in Roland Emmerich's The Patriot (2000), as it depicts the very genesis of the United States of America, its formation, and the correlated militaristic forces American citizens coveted in the 2000s period. It practically functions as a love letter to the American people's national pride. -Bailee Eberenz
Line 47: Line 72:
 The Patriot works as a primary source about the time in which it was made in terms of its nationalistic and very positive portrayal of the American Revolution. In the late 90s and early 2000s (and some of this sentiment still exists), the portrayal of the United States’ founding as a nation is taught and seen as something which was brave and should be celebrated—and this is depicted in the film largely due to how humanized the character of Benjamin Martin. Because he is a veteran, lost his wife, and also loses two kids in the movie, the audience is supposed to feel empathy for him and share his strong patriotism. Like other people have written here, this allows for the audience to see him as a good, all-American guy and to not look too much into the details of the Black characters in the film (especially the “freemen” who work on his plantation).  -Aaliyah A. The Patriot works as a primary source about the time in which it was made in terms of its nationalistic and very positive portrayal of the American Revolution. In the late 90s and early 2000s (and some of this sentiment still exists), the portrayal of the United States’ founding as a nation is taught and seen as something which was brave and should be celebrated—and this is depicted in the film largely due to how humanized the character of Benjamin Martin. Because he is a veteran, lost his wife, and also loses two kids in the movie, the audience is supposed to feel empathy for him and share his strong patriotism. Like other people have written here, this allows for the audience to see him as a good, all-American guy and to not look too much into the details of the Black characters in the film (especially the “freemen” who work on his plantation).  -Aaliyah A.
  
 +The Patriot (2000) serves as a primary source about the late 90s in the US, especially the culture of cynicism regarding the sort of jingoist patriotism that was so prevalent during the later part of the Cold War and would reignite during the War on Terror. The film is plagued by the whitewashing of the issue of slavery, during an era of minimizing the systemic harms down to American slaves and their descendants. But the film does try to highlight that atrocities were committed on both sides of the Revolutionary War, while still making the British Empire out to be the 'evil' side. -- Ryan A.
 ======The "So What" Question -- Why should we care about the movie and its version of history?====== ======The "So What" Question -- Why should we care about the movie and its version of history?======
 The Patriot is one of the few movies I would say historical inaccuracy does not matter that much, if you have knowledge of the American Revolution and can recognize the cartoonish characters. From my understanding, this movie was extremely popular which means it has left a massive impression on a wide audience. But the movie is basically one big action scene, all hinging on one guy’s revenge, with a cartoonishly evil British Officer. While there are definitely problematic representations in the movie, the movie is very obviously not accurate to history, nor is it trying to be. It's an action movie that so happens to be set in the 1790s. -Katie D. The Patriot is one of the few movies I would say historical inaccuracy does not matter that much, if you have knowledge of the American Revolution and can recognize the cartoonish characters. From my understanding, this movie was extremely popular which means it has left a massive impression on a wide audience. But the movie is basically one big action scene, all hinging on one guy’s revenge, with a cartoonishly evil British Officer. While there are definitely problematic representations in the movie, the movie is very obviously not accurate to history, nor is it trying to be. It's an action movie that so happens to be set in the 1790s. -Katie D.
 +
 +The film is important to view and study as both a primary and secondary source. It has legitimate merit in its historical accuracy, albeit still flawed in its retelling since it is still merely a fictional drama meant for entertainment purposes. It illustrates quite well some of the more brutal aspects involved in the fight for American independence, and also the British’s perspective of the colonists. Fighting tactics and military operations were also often well represented. The film is also notably saturated in 1990s/early 2000s American political ideals. There was obviously quite a lot of effort put into the production of this film. And despite its shortcomings and rather disappointing sanitization of racial issues, as someone who doesn’t typically enjoy war films, I still think this is generally a good movie with good storytelling value. - Leo Tooks
  
 I think the fact that this movie heavily shallows out the history of slavery and racism in South Carolina is a really important discussion that makes this movie important to look at today in 2026. We discussed a bit in class on Tuesday about how this was likely done to maintain the "good guy" image of Benjamin Martin and the overall desire to enforce moral clarity, which was important to American society in the 1990s-2000s. However, we can understand today that that nuance and complexity is necessary to understanding the history of the American South. It also adds to our overall discussion we've been having throughout the course about how, what, and why movie makers sacrifice certain historical details in films and whether or not that's significant enough for us to be ok or not ok with. I think this movie makes us think about manhood or the American version of manhood and how that has changed over time, what kinds of qualities or actions do Americans value in men, and how that's portrayed or carried on to modern audiences. -- Grayson D.  I think the fact that this movie heavily shallows out the history of slavery and racism in South Carolina is a really important discussion that makes this movie important to look at today in 2026. We discussed a bit in class on Tuesday about how this was likely done to maintain the "good guy" image of Benjamin Martin and the overall desire to enforce moral clarity, which was important to American society in the 1990s-2000s. However, we can understand today that that nuance and complexity is necessary to understanding the history of the American South. It also adds to our overall discussion we've been having throughout the course about how, what, and why movie makers sacrifice certain historical details in films and whether or not that's significant enough for us to be ok or not ok with. I think this movie makes us think about manhood or the American version of manhood and how that has changed over time, what kinds of qualities or actions do Americans value in men, and how that's portrayed or carried on to modern audiences. -- Grayson D. 
Line 55: Line 83:
 The movie and its version of history matters because movies like these can influence how people understand historical events, especially if they do not know much about the actual history itself. The Patriot gives viewers a dramatic version of the American Revolution that focuses on individual characters, battles, and the ideas of fighting for freedom. Even though parts of the movie are fictional and exaggerated, it can still shape how people remember the Revolution. Looking at the movie as a historical source allows us to see the difference between what actually happened and how the events were changed to create a story that would appeal to a modern audience. — Cait. Edwards.  The movie and its version of history matters because movies like these can influence how people understand historical events, especially if they do not know much about the actual history itself. The Patriot gives viewers a dramatic version of the American Revolution that focuses on individual characters, battles, and the ideas of fighting for freedom. Even though parts of the movie are fictional and exaggerated, it can still shape how people remember the Revolution. Looking at the movie as a historical source allows us to see the difference between what actually happened and how the events were changed to create a story that would appeal to a modern audience. — Cait. Edwards. 
  
-This movie portrays a national psyche so well. The root of who we are as Americans comes from our understanding of the American Revolution and how we portray that supposedly unifying time. We use the history to justify our existence as a nation and our global position, our ideals of “freedom” and “liberty” come from the Revolution. Anytime a movie is about the Revolution, it deeply reflects how people are feeling about our national identity at that time. Here we see the neo-conservatism of the 1990s portrayed through Benjamin Martin's hesitance to trust big government and the continentals, only until his family is threatened does he take up the call — and only on his own terms with the militia. In exaggerating British violence and emphasizing family (either blood related or found family), it justifies the revolt and also justifies the United States at the top of the global order in the 1990s — we are the ones protecting the common people. On a another note, the sanitization of slavery within the film it depicts this rise of “color blindness”, or the idea that there are no racial issues because society doesn't see color (which inherently causes a lot of issues).  – Nora M+This movie portrays a national psyche so well. The root of who we are as Americans comes from our understanding of the American Revolution and how we portray that supposedly unifying time. We use the history to justify our existence as a nation and our global position, our ideals of “freedom” and “liberty” come from the Revolution. Anytime a movie is about the Revolution, it deeply reflects how people are feeling about our national identity at that time. Here we see the neo-conservatism of the 1990s portrayed through Benjamin Martin's hesitance to trust big government and the continentals, only until his family is threatened does he take up the call — and only on his own terms with the militia. In exaggerating British violence and emphasizing family (either blood related or found family), it justifies the revolt and also justifies the United States at the top of the global order in the 1990s — we are the ones protecting the common people. On another note, the sanitization of slavery within the film it depicts this rise of “color blindness”, or the idea that there are no racial issues because society doesn't see color (which inherently causes a lot of issues).  – Nora M
  
 I care about this movie version of history because it could be used as a source for what generally happened during that time period. Other than the talk of freeing slaves fully or them not looking to be the majority of the population, this film teaches you some pretty accurate accounts of American history. The dress, the look, and the overall persona is displayed very well. We should care about the look of loss of innocence on Ben’s children's faces when they shot at the British for the first time. The look on his daughters faces when their home burned to the ground by the British and when their own father left them in a field with their freshly dead brother as well as no protection other than tall grass. We should care about this film due to it being very life-like when you take a close look at the eyes of the children especially when fear and grief are magnetized in such a short period of time. Grown adults today couldn't even fathom the horrors seen by those children who could do absolutely nothing but act to stay alive. -- Autumn. M I care about this movie version of history because it could be used as a source for what generally happened during that time period. Other than the talk of freeing slaves fully or them not looking to be the majority of the population, this film teaches you some pretty accurate accounts of American history. The dress, the look, and the overall persona is displayed very well. We should care about the look of loss of innocence on Ben’s children's faces when they shot at the British for the first time. The look on his daughters faces when their home burned to the ground by the British and when their own father left them in a field with their freshly dead brother as well as no protection other than tall grass. We should care about this film due to it being very life-like when you take a close look at the eyes of the children especially when fear and grief are magnetized in such a short period of time. Grown adults today couldn't even fathom the horrors seen by those children who could do absolutely nothing but act to stay alive. -- Autumn. M
  
 +Despite the film's problems, like whitewashing slavery, adding ahistorical atrocities like burning the church, and telling a black and white story, the Patriot (2000) is still an important piece of media. The first ambush scene with Martin and his middle sons, Nathan and Samuel, is an excellent sequence and one of my favorite action scenes of all time. A lot of care was taken to depict a plausible story, pulling from the accounts of Francis "the Swamp Fox" Marion, Tarleton, Cornwallis, and others, which excellent costumes that would look perfectly appropriate worn by reenactors at places like Colonial Williamsburg. -- Ryan A.
 +
 +Despite the Patriot (2000) having its fair share of issues with historical accuracy it dramatizes the events to apply to the audience of the 2000s. There was a clear depiction of good and bad guy, during this time that is what the audience wanted to see. Those who knew the Revolutionary War and the history could easily spot these inaccuracies, but it is important in the history of film. Being able to tell a great story even if they have to exaggerate or make up, change, or rewrite some characters in order for it to work coherently. -- Shelby Hawley 
329/question/329--week_4_questions_comments-2026.1790202991.txt.gz · Last modified: by 76.78.172.87