Matthew_Capitano Steve Seagal is not so much The Patriot as he is The Aintriot.Passable Seagal flick, though not as stark as his other films while this concomitantly classifies as the end of his relevant film career.Some of those Montana mountain cabin love-it-or-leave-it dudes decide to poison society to help push their agenda that America is corrupted and going the wrong way, down the wrong road, upside down..... whatever.Steve to the rescue. He plays a Ph.D. here (*snicker*). He loves horses, insects, and his sweet little daughter who we all know will be kidnapped, but of course he will rescue her and we will all get up and leave the theater before the final credits role....She is, he does, and we do.

jbl-3 Steven Seagal's intent is to be commended, and his acting in this film is equal to that in many of his others, if you ignore the fact that he is supposedly portraying a brilliant scientist. The problem I had was with two items of the plot, which stretched my suspension of disbelief beyond the breaking point.First, how is it that a carefully engineered variation on a nasty germ, whose antidote must be just as carefully researched and engineered by a big lab, is cured by drinking tea from a flower growing high in the mountains? and that Grandpa's family seem to be about the only people who know anything about this?Second, and this one really takes the cake: Having gathered up enough of the cure to fix a whole town, wouldn't you expect the army to land the helicopter and start rushing bags of flowers to all the homes in this small town? No, they instead decide to sprinkle the flowers all over the town and force the sick people to go out and gather them up all over again. Just plain silly, unless under Native belief the power in the drug somehow depends on one's having gone out and gathered the flowers oneself.Add in the cardboard nature of the villains and the unsuitability of the title, and you might think my vote on this movie is actually high.

David Niezabitowski Man, I think people have forgotten how to watch a movie. Everyone thinks they're a critic. They comment on things that the average movie goer doesn't even know or think about.I enjoyed the film. It was what I was expecting therefore was not disappointed. Steven gets a bad rap for putting his views into his films but that's also a reason to watch. What's even more funny is the people that complain about his films, say he's the worst and that we shouldn't watch his films, yet watch his movies anyway. All so they can comment on how bad they are. Who's the dummy? If you don't like his work, don't watch it. Then you won't have to subject yourself to this supposedly painful event.Stop comparing movies to other movies and watch a movie on an individual basis and you may begin to enjoy films again.

Prometheus9263 It seems that all people didn't like Steven Seagal: Just take a look at his nomination list, there are only razzie awards nominations (with one win) for him, but I think he didn't earn anything of it. I saw good movies with Steven Seagal, I saw bad movies with Steven Seagal. And THE PATRIOT (1998) is one of his best movies, nearly as good as UNDER SIEGE (1992) or HARD TO KILL (1990). THE PATRIOT shows his activities to protect nature. Surely, this movie is not a great one, and I must say that there is more violence than I like, and why must Seagal's best friend L. Q. Jones die the death of a victim? The role of Dr. McClaren is one of Seagal's best performances. He has, as always, a very good charisma. And in summary, THE PATRIOT is good entertainment-and with an average rating of only 4 points the most underrated movie of all time.Regards, Hans-Dieter