Looking for American Revolution movies? Unfortunately, Hollywood has not done enough in covering this critical period of our nation's history. There just aren't that many films based in the American Revolution. But...thankfully...there are a few.
Here are my recommendations for American Revolution movies:
1.John Adams (HBO miniseries), starring Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney
One of the best film productions ever set in early American history, John Adams won numerous well-deserved awards! The miniseries stars Paul Giamatti, who portrays a believable John Adams. Laura Linney steals the show, turning in a breathtakingly awesome performance as Abigail Adams, one of the most remarkable women in American history. And I loved Tom Wilkinson as Benjamin Franklin!
Based on David McCullough's Pulitzer Prize winning John Adams and produced by Tom Hanks, John Adams is a must-see American Revolution movie (or, technically speaking, miniseries).
2. The Patriot, starring Mel Gibson and Heath Ledger
Okay, the plot doesn't exactly follow history closely and it's much too hard on the British. The antagonist, based on Banastre Tarleton (who was indeed ruthless and, at times, barbaric), is too evil. **Spoiler alert: Burning down a church with civilians inside is simply not something any British officer of the American Revolution would've done!
That said, it's nice to watch a big-budget Hollywood production, starring the same guy who portrayed William Wallace in Braveheart! (Though Braveheart is a better movie). If you just want to kick back, eat some popcorn, and enjoy a good movie set in the American Revolution, you should check out The Patriot.
3. George Washington, starring Barry Bostwick and Jaclyn Smith
This 1980s TV miniseries is a little dated. (You can tell it's a 1980s production, when you watch it). But it's worth your time, if you can get a hold of a copy. It unfortunately rarely comes on TV anymore. And you'll probably need to get in VHS. Like I said, it's 1980s.
Other American Revolution Movies...
I have mixed feelings about The Crossing, which stars Jeff Daniels, and Benedict Arnold: A Question of Honor, which features Aidan Quinn. It would take me too long to get into a review of them right now, so I'll save that for another post.
I absolutely do NOT recommend Revolution, starring Al Pacino. Of course, if you're a fan of the dark, cynical version of American history, parroted by the late Howard Zinn, then you'll probably like Revolution. Otherwise, skip it.
For kids (of all ages), I do recommend Liberty's Kids! :-) An excellent animated miniseries that covers the American War for Independence.
Okay, what about you? What are some of YOUR recommendations for American Revolution movies?
Showing posts with label American Revolution movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Revolution movies. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
Monday, July 07, 2008
More American Revolution Movies Coming?
Why aren't there more American Revolution movies? Sure, there's the occasional made-for-TV movie, like The Crossing (about George Washington's audacious attack on Trenton when the Revolution was at one of its lowest points). And of course, there's the recent HBO Films' miniseries John Adams, based on David McCullough's Pulitzer-winning bestseller. But...what about the Big Screen?
The Bad News
The reason there aren't more American Revolution movies (or history movies in general for that matter) is that the Big Screen is skewed toward younger viewers. As Shannon Dortch wrote a few years ago in American Demographics: "For the most part, the [movie] industry has placed its bets for 40 years on the people most likely to go to the show--teenagers and young adults."
Movie studios, by and large, know they can churn out Saw X or Alien v. Predator IV or Napoleon Dynamite or The Girl Next Door -- and make a ton of cash from the 15-24 demographic. (Oh, if there were only a way to turn the Titanic with Leonardo Decaprio into a sequel). But will these same viewers (who dominate the movie-going demographic) pay money to see Founding Fathers in wigs debate the Constitution? Unlikely.
That's bad news for history buffs, because...well...young people just aren't that interested in history - unless it's a love story with Kate Winslet and Leonardo DeCaprio on a sinking ship or Russell Crowe taking care of business as a gladiator in Ancient Rome.
This is why Hollywood doesn't produce more American Revolution films - at least not for the Big Screen. There just aren't enough movie-goers willing to pay money for them. Yeah, there's the rare exception, like Mel Gibson's The Patriot. But, come to think about it, that's about the ONLY exception. (Al Pacino's mid-1970s Revolution was a flop and doesn't count).
Good News....Maybe
The good news comes on two levels. First, there IS interest in American Revolution movies (as well as Civil War movies, World War II movies, etc.) in the living rooms of older Americans. What this means is....television. That's right, there's a market on TV for history films. Witness the success of HBO's John Adams as proof.
The good news doesn't stop there, however. The film industry is changing. Like everything else, it is become more niche-oriented, appealing to specific, targeted segments of the population.
And making movies is becoming more cost-effective, provided that studios don't have to bank on Big Name marquee stars. This is why you're seeing more low-budget, independent features achieving mainstream distribution.
Here's an example. Consider Amazing Grace, the story of William Wilberforce's courageous fight against slavery. It appealed to African Americans, evangelical Christians, and history buffs. Niche appeal. And was made fairly cost-effectively. It wasn't a low-budget movie, but it was not a high-cost blockbuster either. We can probably expect more Amazing Grace type movies in the coming years, even on the Big Screen.
And who knows? Maybe....eventually...we'll see George Washington leading the Contintental Army to victory...while we sit in an air-conditioned theater, munching on popcorn. Hey, it's a dream! One can hope.
The Bad News
The reason there aren't more American Revolution movies (or history movies in general for that matter) is that the Big Screen is skewed toward younger viewers. As Shannon Dortch wrote a few years ago in American Demographics: "For the most part, the [movie] industry has placed its bets for 40 years on the people most likely to go to the show--teenagers and young adults."
Movie studios, by and large, know they can churn out Saw X or Alien v. Predator IV or Napoleon Dynamite or The Girl Next Door -- and make a ton of cash from the 15-24 demographic. (Oh, if there were only a way to turn the Titanic with Leonardo Decaprio into a sequel). But will these same viewers (who dominate the movie-going demographic) pay money to see Founding Fathers in wigs debate the Constitution? Unlikely.
That's bad news for history buffs, because...well...young people just aren't that interested in history - unless it's a love story with Kate Winslet and Leonardo DeCaprio on a sinking ship or Russell Crowe taking care of business as a gladiator in Ancient Rome.
This is why Hollywood doesn't produce more American Revolution films - at least not for the Big Screen. There just aren't enough movie-goers willing to pay money for them. Yeah, there's the rare exception, like Mel Gibson's The Patriot. But, come to think about it, that's about the ONLY exception. (Al Pacino's mid-1970s Revolution was a flop and doesn't count).
Good News....Maybe
The good news comes on two levels. First, there IS interest in American Revolution movies (as well as Civil War movies, World War II movies, etc.) in the living rooms of older Americans. What this means is....television. That's right, there's a market on TV for history films. Witness the success of HBO's John Adams as proof.
The good news doesn't stop there, however. The film industry is changing. Like everything else, it is become more niche-oriented, appealing to specific, targeted segments of the population.
And making movies is becoming more cost-effective, provided that studios don't have to bank on Big Name marquee stars. This is why you're seeing more low-budget, independent features achieving mainstream distribution.
Here's an example. Consider Amazing Grace, the story of William Wilberforce's courageous fight against slavery. It appealed to African Americans, evangelical Christians, and history buffs. Niche appeal. And was made fairly cost-effectively. It wasn't a low-budget movie, but it was not a high-cost blockbuster either. We can probably expect more Amazing Grace type movies in the coming years, even on the Big Screen.
And who knows? Maybe....eventually...we'll see George Washington leading the Contintental Army to victory...while we sit in an air-conditioned theater, munching on popcorn. Hey, it's a dream! One can hope.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Why Not More Revolutionary War Films?
HBO Films' current release of the miniseries John Adams raises a question...
Why aren't there MORE miniseries or films set during the period of the American Revolution?
Sure, there have been a few. On the Big Screen, you've got The Patriot starring Mel Gibson and Revolution with Al Pacino.
And that's about it for the Big Screen.
When it comes to the Little Screen, you've got a varied assortment of miniseries and lower-budget television movies over the years, including:
...and the incredibly hard-to-find, but pretty good...
Why not more?????
The answer seems to be that moviegoing audiences tend to be teenagers and young adults, and this demographic just doesn't find early American history that thrilling.
Older audiences prefer to stay home and watch TV, and this explains why David McCullough went to HBO to produce John Adams as opposed to 20th Century Fox or Touchstone Pictures.
For my own part, I think younger audiences WOULD find the Revolutionary War era appealing IF it was presented in a more gripping format than the tedious name-and-date history class model to which they are accustomed.
What do you think?
Oh, and rumor has it that Tom Hanks and HBO Films are planning to produce David McCullough's bestselling 1776 as their next project. I hope that rumor is true - and I can't wait!!!
Why aren't there MORE miniseries or films set during the period of the American Revolution?
Sure, there have been a few. On the Big Screen, you've got The Patriot starring Mel Gibson and Revolution with Al Pacino.
And that's about it for the Big Screen.
When it comes to the Little Screen, you've got a varied assortment of miniseries and lower-budget television movies over the years, including:
...and the incredibly hard-to-find, but pretty good...
Why not more?????
The answer seems to be that moviegoing audiences tend to be teenagers and young adults, and this demographic just doesn't find early American history that thrilling.
Older audiences prefer to stay home and watch TV, and this explains why David McCullough went to HBO to produce John Adams as opposed to 20th Century Fox or Touchstone Pictures.
For my own part, I think younger audiences WOULD find the Revolutionary War era appealing IF it was presented in a more gripping format than the tedious name-and-date history class model to which they are accustomed.
What do you think?
Oh, and rumor has it that Tom Hanks and HBO Films are planning to produce David McCullough's bestselling 1776 as their next project. I hope that rumor is true - and I can't wait!!!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Subscribe Here!
Posts
All Comments