The Patriot, 2000

The Patriot, 2000
Director: Roland Emmerich
Cast: Heath Ledger, Mel Gibson, Joely Richardson



Stage: Home theatre, Friday night


The Patriot in short: It is 1776 in colonial South Carolina. Benjamin Martin, a French-Indian war hero who is haunted by his past, now wants nothing more then to live peacefully on his small plantation, and wants no part of a war with the most powerful nation in the world, Great Britain. Meanwhile, his two eldest sons, Gabriel and Thomas, can't wait to enlist in the newly formed "Continental Army." When South Carolina decides to join the rebellion against England, Gabriel immediately signs up to fight...without his father's permission. But when Colonel William Tavington, British dragoon, infamous for his brutal tactics, comes and burns the Martin Plantation to the ground, tragedy strikes. Benjamin quickly finds himself torn between protecting his family, and seeking revenge along with being a part of the birth of new, young, and ambitious nation.


Preps: Haven't seen it before, unfortunately. Mel on a Friday night sounds great. Let's check it out.



Reality: Well, no real expectations. I need to state I am not really a fan of war movies, especially if they are happening on US soil. Because I mostly find them boring and not really attractive to the eyes. And I burst into tears when they tread on animals. I am making an intro because it also reflects in my reviews. Not many movies in this genre have surpassed my limit and have been thrown away. Some of them might be considered very high on my scale, though. For instance Braveheart is one of them, where you can just die of all the feelings that go through your body.

Now as I have mentioned Braveheart, it has the same main actor. Mel Gibson was in some sense (as Bruce Willis for action movies), born for this genre, as the roles in this sense suit him like a glove. Patriotism, fighting for the country, family, love of his children.. it just brings the best out of Mel Gibson and makes him epic, not only heroic.
The scenes are carefully chosen and up to a great extent, lead the observer through the historical facts and figures. The approach at fighting is amazing. I still cannot believe they used such weapons and that virtually a queue of men was just standing there while the opponent would shoot at them. And as they fell down, another (prior second row) stepped in front. In any case, you don't see many so well depicted battles as this one. The energy that Gibson shows is amazing. Especially when interacting with a stiff opponent or when having conversations with his loved ones. Heath Ledger is a good brother in arms, a true statue of youth and rebellion in comparison with Gibson. Whereas Gibson is old school, fighting for survival and until the last man falls.

The music is remarkable, it emphasizes each scene as it should, it is also the answer to my soul's spirit as it shows me without a shadow of a doubt, whether the scene is going to be morbid, killer-spirited, romantic, and it pours in my veins as deep as possible.
As always, I wonder, what is the purpose of the wars and where do they lead in their vanity. What is the role of a war, does it work like a disease - to give an answer to overpopulation? Whose idea is it and why does it get this far. Bunch of men, standing and "fighting for the cause".. when everything could be settled prior to the actual fight. Most of politicians would disagree as a lot of people perceive war to be the only solution or answer to many things. In this case, when you watch Patriot and see why they are fighting, the feeling of sadness even increases. It's never the great generals or politicians that get stuck on field with rifles. They are observers. And real population their puppets (or say chess figures). Truly sad. But real.




My personal rating: 8,5 (one of the finest war-historical heroic movies of all times. It will hurt your soul and make you wonder how lucky we are not being in that space and time. On the other hand, you will want to taste and smell it in reality. Gibson's great role, Heath Ledger also exceeds my expectations)

Signs, 2002

Signs, 2002
Director: M. Night Shyamalan
Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Mel Gibson, Rory Culkin

Stage: Home theatre, TV selection of a Saturday night


Signs in short:In Bucks County, Pennsylvania, a five-hundred-foot crop circle is found on the farm of Graham Hess, the town's reverend. The circles cause a media frenzy and test Hess's faith as he journeys to find out the truth behind the crop circles.

Preps: None in perticular. But I am aware of the content.

Reality: Wooow, another episode of X files. This time in roles with Joaquin and Gibson. The Ceasar from Gladiator and the man who saves the world for xxx times. Joke aside, I truly feel I have stepped into another episode of X files and I am missing Scully and Mulder. Gibson as an ex priest (not really convincing), Phoenix chasing his life and beliefs. The children that believe in god and aliens. The dogs driving crazy all around them with barking and attempts of violence.

Now, the signs have been intriguing the minds of people for decades. And they aren't easy to be explained. Therefore they are usually said to be a work of aliens and there we have a chase after the designers of this perticular sign. In some sense, this movie isn't something new or won't reveal something we haven't seen in some of the other attempts of this genre. But it has an interesting insight into the philosophy of kids and the way they are feeling about the alien presence. The father figures here aren't neither convincing or they are resolving something. So no upgrade whatsoever from the known movies. The figure of the protective father and brother. The figure of an uncle that isn't as smart as the father. The signs that aren't explained after all. And remain to the viewer to be interpreted.

Not really something to die for, I mean the movie. Easily thrown away into the recycle bin. And easy money for both main protagonists. As said, the genre is easily sold to the crowd. But the movie is not for people that demand more. After all, if we didn't get the Stonehenge and similar signs for centuries, why think you can get the ones that are fresh and made in corn fields :)

My personal rate: 2,0 (a bit amusing at the beginning, with the development, loses its pace for sure).

Signs on IMDB

Edge of Darkness, 2010

Edge of Darkness, 2010
Director: Martin Campbell
Cast: Mel Gibson, Ray Winstone, Danny Huston, Bojana Novakovic


Stage: Home theatre

Edge and the darkness in short: As homicide detective Thomas Craven investigates the death of his activist daughter, he uncovers not only her secret life, but a corporate cover-up and government collusion that attracts an agent tasked with cleaning up the evidence.

Preps: It's running currently at our theatres, so I have seen the trailer. Seemed like one of the Bourne trilogy movies, or somehow connected to the genre I love usually; investigation of a homicide, cops running around, corrupted governmental issues, etc. Something seemed worth seeing. And I haven't seen something really good from Gibson in a long time.


Reality: The beginning is fascinating, powerful, gets your adrenalin down your veins. Discovery of a secret life a beloved daughter had, is intriguing, the thin red line of corruptness increases my heartbeat. But in the other half the movie lost me. I was actually bored and thought of leaving it at the first initial feeling, removing the thing from my disk and forget about it.

The story is sad, but not so powerful. The action is like my biorhythm - increasing and falling again, the scenes don't have the power to keep me in front of the TV. Thank god I didn't watch this in the cinema.

However, you will find it good to see that some people (that we aren't aware of) are actually investigating cases we never get to see or hear about. The story around father and daughter (the past deeds) could have been separately shown and go even deeper, in this case I would feel more connected to all of this. And the understanding of the movie story -- hmmm, you need to be alert all time. Because if you aren't, you lose it.


My personal rating: 5,0 (I did have a hunch this was to be a good one, but it lost me in the second half. Not one of the best Gibson casts anyway. And he's become a bit old :)


Darkness on IMDB