The Patriot

by Stephen Molstad

In Tyranny's Fire A Hero Is Forged In Britain's American colonies, the cry goes out for freedom as the air from Lexington to the Carolinas burns hot with powder smoke and cannon fire. But Benjamin Martin has had his fill of war. A veteran of the fierce French and Indian conflict, he has renounced fighting forever, retiring to his South Carolina farm to raise his motherless children in peace.

Now the war has found his hiding place, bringing its senseless cruelty back into his life and destroying what he holds most dear. And Benjamin Martin must take up arms to fight again--to lead a makeshift army of brave farmers and craftsmen against a relentless, overwhelming enemy--in the blessed cause of liberty...and blood vengeance.

Genres: Fiction, Historical, War, Historical Fiction

304 pages, Mass Market Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

Reviews

[Wendy · Rating 1 out of 5]

I think anyone who reads this deserves a merit badge, a la the Boy/Girl Scouts, for making it through the whole thing.

Okay, let's get this out of the way first: The Patriot is not a great movie. It's an okay movie. It's an awesome movie buried underneath a bad one, which results in a mix of good and bad. It has moments that could've used a script doctor, and the whole thing was in serious need of an American Revolution scholar going over it with a fine-toothed comb, as I think everyone will agree! Probably not very many people will agree with me, but I also think it would have been better if they hadn't cast Mel Gibson as the lead.... ('Watch me swallow repeatedly, everyone!' says crazy Mel Gibson. 'I'm Acting!') But still, there were underused themes that could've been fleshed out that had the potential to make the movie great (the strongest one that comes to mind is the mirror of Martin vs. Tavington--Tavington is what Martin was in his youth, and that wasn't played up at all, although it would have elevated the movie considerably if it had been). Other than Mel Gibson and his amazing bobbing Adam's apple, there were a lot of very strong performances from some of the best actors in the business (Tom Wilkinson and Jason Isaacs spring most immediately to mind, although there were others, too).

And despite its flaws, the movie does have some really strong moments, moments that genuinely move you, make you cry, make you laugh, make you excited. This book, the novelization...has none of that. The flaws are all still there--the parts that needed a script doctor are more apparent than ever, and the historical inaccuracies aren't fixed. It's just that there are brand new flaws! I didn't feel attached to any of the characters, even the ones I'd enjoyed in the film. There was absolutely no attempt to add depth to any of them--not the heroes, and certainly not the villains! Oh, my gosh, let's make the British into cartoon archetypes of villains, shall we? Cornwallis was an effeminate, overgrown toddler who liked to throw tantrums when he didn't get his way, and Tavington was nothing more than a bloodthirsty ape who liked to pull the wings off of bugs and the petals off of flowers, just for the heck of it? I wasn't inspired to hate them by these attempts to make them dastardly and hateful in every way. And the heroes aren't any better off, either, mostly because they are, apparently, made of cardboard. They emote just about as much. Seriously, this was an opportunity to add depth and, you know, character to the entire cast, and it was utterly wasted.

And the writing itself is just awful. It's like a very detailed Wikipedia article describing the events of the movie. The few and far between (thankfully) attempts at poetic descriptions fall utterly and completely flat. The difficulty level is about what I would expect from a book written for fourth-graders--the problem being that fourth-graders should definitely not be watching this movie, given that it's rated R, and is what I would consider graphic in several parts. Since the movie wasn't intended for a young audience, the book shouldn't have been, either. But that's what it felt like, a junior novelization.

So, by this point, you're probably wondering why I stuck it out. Normally, if a book was so agonizingly horrible, I would have quit reading it about fifty pages in, right? Well, it ties in to the point I just made, about the reading level. The books I normally quit are at least written at an adult reading level (usually). This was just so simplistic and easy that it became a matter of pride to finish it. I probably would have been better off if I hadn't, but I just couldn't have lived with myself. I made it through War and Peace, dang it, I should certainly be able to make it through this! So I did. And now I feel really dumb for bothering at all.

I don't recommend this to anyone, at all, ever. Seriously. Just watch the movie. At least then you get to enjoy Jason Isaacs and Heath Ledger and Rene Auberjonois (hope I spelled that right...) and Tom Wilkinson and Joely Richardson and all those other fine actor folks. Well, and Mel Gibson, if you're into anti-Semitic convulsive swallowers. I kid you not, count how many times he swallows in this movie. Don't make a drinking game out of it or you'll pass out.

I may have more to add to this later, as an acquaintance of mine who isn't much of a reader asked to borrow it and has promised to relay his thoughts when he's finished. We shall see.

[Victor Orozco · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's always been said that the book is better than the movie, and I know the movie's screenplay came first, but still, the writing of this as a novel is superior to the movie. The movie was still a spectacular tale that worked as another success for Mel Gibson and another glorious notch for the talented Heath Ledger. With all the history involved, I am more than glad that Stephen Molstad added such impeccable detail to this story.

1776 - 1781. Benjamin Martin is a respected South Carolina farmer whose family lives a sheltered and comfortable life, but the storm of history bears down upon them as the American Revolution turns their world upside down. Vehemently opposed to war, Martin will not support the American Revolution, but his idealistic son Gabriel fights instead. All this as the British brought the fight and in some cases the heavy hand of tyranny - including the Martin's home. This forces Martin to fight, but it is not for the cause, but for revenge for the murder of one of his own. But war is not a simple matter of straight lines and order, it is a calculated use of time and tactics that bring the British to their knees. All this as Martin strives to protect his family.

This was a great reading, most likely adapted from the penultimate script. Still, there are plenty of things that I recognize from the movie, particularly deleted scenes that were placed in the Director's Cut. But reading this you get an idea for Benjamin Martin's wife as this stoic, proper lady who was initially aghast at the macho French and Indian War veteran, in fact, the only reason they got along at all was because her father thought him a good match for her. She eventually warmed up and married him. You learn why Gabriel cruelly put ink in Anne Howard's tea. The type of person Colonel Tavington was like after his wastrel father expended his inheritance. A look into the pride of Lord Cornwallis as well as the mindsets of Martin's servants, friends, and fellow soldiers. This was what makes reading great, capturing what movies cannot. I have to say that the history is flawed in some respects on film, but the movie captures things better. I still feel some of the characters were too sentimental or idealistic for their own good, but the story was well written as a book. Well done!

[Mati · Rating 1 out of 5]

There are books which are so bad that they are worth of reading during illness or on the beach. Unfortunately it was the first case in my case. I liked the movie Patriot which was according the book or rather book was according the movie. However the plot in both cases are very patriotic, very black and white but...there is one factor on which authors did not count. The power of Jason Isaacs in the role of very bad...rather the worse than devil...English colonel Tavington. The Nazi hordes would look like bunch of kittens if you compared them to Tavington and his boys. Hence Jason trotted in and made villain so sexy and so bad that you must droll over him and even pity him as poor English boy tries to be very good soldier in order to live happily ever after despite senile superiors and local folks which did the same to the English as he did to them. But you know they were patriots so in their case it was act of patriotic zeal. You should see the movie first, then read the book with mind picture of hadsome dragoon in your mind or Ben Martin or whomever you picked as your favourite.

[Jimmy Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

I always like seeing the screen-to-print novels, since these often give additional insight into the characters of the movies. This particular book offers direct quotes from the script, is well written, has color pictures from the movie (can't knock that), and could stand alone as a novel.

We have your retired French/Indian War hero-now farmer/widower/pacifist (for convenience we'll call him Mel Gibson) who is compelled to fight due to the (historically inaccurate, which for shorthand we'll note as "HA") atrocities committed by the (HA portrayed) General Cornwallis and his subordinate Colonel Tavington (HA portrayed based on real character Banastre Tarleton per Wikipedia). Once Mel Gibson begins fighting, he fully embraces the patriot cause as you might expect, and after a few fits and starts, inspires our (HA portrayed as up until now losing) militia. Mel Gibson single-handedly comes up with the concept of guerilla fighting, cuts off Cornwallis's supply line, and inspires the win at Cowpens. Not to mention influences the final surrender of the British. Oh, and kills the hideous villain Colonel Tavington, who none of us will miss, because he was really a bad guy.

So the good guys are good, the bad guys are really bad. My used book was actually highlighted, so I hope some student wasn't trying to learn some specific details about the American Revolution. Fortunately, the historical inaccuracies don't stand in the way of a good story - the flow is fine - it's a good read and enjoyable.

[Amy Gay · Rating 2 out of 5]

I've recently read articles about how much the movie skews history so wanted to read the book version. I am glad it was more detailed on the brutality of both sides, although it is definitely biased in its telling to really sell patriotism for the American side--although that's more on the entertainment industry than the writer.

[Troy Disabato · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed the novel ..

[Kim · Rating 1 out of 5]

The book, like the movie it was based upon, is a travesty in historical terms. But while the movie was at least somewhat enjoyable despite its inaccuracies, the novelization cannot even bring that much. There is no attempt to take the characters to new levels, to make them believable. Tavington is a monster bent on destroying everything he touches. Cornwallis is a stereotypical screeching aristocrat utterly undone by the wily common man. In addition, the scene of the Loyalist ball where Martin and the Rebels blow up the ship, Cornwallis is portrayed as a lecherous boar using the loss of his dogs to try and seduce a woman. It doesn't take much research to know how devoted Cornwallis was to his wife, even after her death.

Actually, even putting this on a historical fiction bookshelf is a bit of a misnomer. It can barely be called historical at all.

[Sammy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was written based on the film script. It isn't exactly the same and explores more, but I do like the film much better. Stephen Molstad is a talented writer and was kind enough to correspond with me when I was exploring the idea of becoming an author. He helped me build my writing style and gave me tips. For that, I am thankful. This book and its author will forever hold a special place in my heart.

[Sumit · Rating 1 out of 5]

Patriot is one of my favorite movies and although I am not a big fan of books based on screenplay I decided to give this one a try. But clearly this book is not worth spending that much time. The book fails to capture attention of readers and loses track at some places. Overall not a good experience.

[Karen Letourneau · Rating 2 out of 5]

In this case, the film, one of my favorite films of all time, was much better. Since the book is actually based on the screenplay, I guess it's not surprising.

[Cyl · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had seen the movie and enjoyed reading the adaptation to the movie. It was like watching The Patriot again. Very nice.

[Melody · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book because I was in loved with the movie.