उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

This is an outstanding A & E production with kudos for director Mikael Salomon. A very well written drama chronicling the fall of the infamous Benedict Arnold(Aidan Quinn)from distinguished Revolutionary War general and respected advisor to General George Washington(Kelsey Grammer)to reluctant traitor. Action packed insight to incidents of the American Revolution. Quinn and Grammer are to be commended. History buffs may want to pick this one apart, but it is well worth watching.

I learned a lot about one of history's most notorious people and enjoyed the experience. Aidan Quinn as Benedict and Kelsey Grammer as George Washington were great in their roles and the production values (photography, sets, script, direction and so forth) were very good. Many TV movies are more enjoyable to watch than current theatrical movies and this was certainly one of them. Applause should go to A&E for this work.

"Benedict Arnold" is a typical made-for-tv historical melodrama about a small portion of the life of the American Revolutionary War General whose name has become synonymous with "traitor". This A&E production takes a squinty look at the man's life, showing only the most historically significant portions which flank his defection to the British loyalists. The film shows spit and polish costuming where no such luxury was available while portraying Arnold as a man of poetic eloquence when he was more well known to be profane if not drunk or both. Etc. Etc. Melodramatic for entertainment value while taking liberties with history and providing only a piecemeal bio of the man, this film is marginal at best. Better entertainment is easy to find and there's plenty of solid historical info on B.A. right here on the Internet. (C+)

The name Benedict Arnold is synonomous with "traitor" today. Being this the case, it is hard to believe that during the early part of the Revelution, General Arnold was looked upon as a true patriot and hero. General Washington compares him to Hannibal in the beginning. We see him leading his troops heroically on the battlefield and saying "God Bless America". Arnold was actually horribly wounded in the leg by a huge musket ball and the opening of this film shows the horrifying conditions of Revelutionary War hospitals where amputation without anesthetic was the only solution. Aiden Quinn is probably best known for his role in An Early Frost, the first tv movie ever to talk about AIDS. He does a fine job here portraying Arnold. Was he a hero who just went the wrong way? What made this seemingly honorable man turn into the most infamous traitor in history? Was it greed, ego or his wife's ambition that did it. I don't know if the real Arnold ever really regretted his treason, but this film suggests that he did. As a soldier in the Army, it appalled me in the end when they showed Arnold dressed in a British uniform! Kelsey Grammar does his level best as George Washington. However, he will always be that guy on Cheers to me. He does a fine hammy job though. I think my favorite part was in the end when he found out about Arnold's treason, he says "From the tallest tree....LETS HANG THE SON OF A BITCH!!!!" I figure that is exactly how the real General Washington acted.

Few names are more infamous in American History than that of Benedict Arnold. Rarely though is it asked what led Arnold, a man who had been one of the American Revolution's greatest heroes, to turn traitor and betray the cause he'd fought so hard for. A&E's 2003 film Benedict Arnold: A Question of Honor explores the critical years and months of Arnold's life leading up to a decision that would make his name infamous for centuries to come.

Playing Arnold is Aidan Quinn who brings a brooding yet melancholic presence to the role. Quinn is believable in the various facets of Arnold's life from loyal soldier to military governor of Philadelphia before taking the journey that leads to the decision that will cost him the admiration of his countrymen. What leads Arnold to make his decision, and how Quinn portrays him as a man driven by a need to prove himself and his honor who faces thwarting at every turn, helps to make the film compelling. It's Quinn's performance, and to an extent the film itself, that makes this film a three dimensional portrait of a man often portrayed in the simplest of terms.

Contrasting with Quinn's Arnold is Kelsey Grammar as George Washington. Washington's journey in the film, his struggles as commander of the Continental Army, are similar to that of Arnold's but how they deal with their trials and the divergent paths they take makes all the difference. Grammar is compelling as Washington and quite believable in a role that gives him the chance to show off his dramatic range. Together, Quinn and Grammar help to make the film as compelling as it is.

The film has a good supporting cast as well. Flora Montgomery, while some years older than her real life counterpart, brings a sense of maturity to Peggy Shippen who will ultimately be the catalyst that will turn Arnold from hero to traitor. Rounding out the cast are John Light as British army Major John Andre, John Kavanagh as Peggy's father Judge Shippen and Tom Murphy as Arnold's aide Major Franks.

The production values of the film are good as well. The costumes are first rate, Grammar's uniform as Washington in particular being a stand out. The sets and locations are good as well, nicely evoking the period setting. At times though, the limitations of budget do show such as during the handful of battle sequences (such as the opening sequence where "the mightiest fortress in the Americas" is represented by a wall and a few soldiers). For a TV movie though, especially one with a period setting, the results are more than adequate.

Where the film is perhaps most mixed is in its script. While Arnold's story is certainly compelling, the script's job of making it so is less so. Part of it is in its dialogue where writer William Mastrosimone tries to use material from letters written at the time alongside where dialogue written for the film. The problem is the two are very different in tone and style and they sit uneasily next to one another, especially when used together in the same scene. Where the script works better is in exploring Arnold's personality and the aspects of it that drive him to make him the infamous man he will be known as. In the end, despite the issues with the dialogue, the script does a fine job of taking the at times complex story of Arnold and making it into a film lasting a mere ninety minutes.

Benedict Arnold: A Question of Honor, despite the faults in both its script and some of its production values, is nevertheless a compelling piece of historical drama. In particular, the performances of Aidan Quinn as Arnold and Kelsey Grammar as Washington, make the film as successful as it is. For those interested in American History or seeking a new perspective on a man often portrayed in little more than a single dimension, this film is well worth viewing.

I wonder how close the movie portrays reality. Did his wife have the influence this move enacts? Was he a hot head? The people were right about him marrying a loyalist, and the governor of Pen did the Job that was required, or this great nation and the republic it stands for would not exist today. Well acted and casted for a TV movie, but it is TV of quality. ABC, and the other 3 should watch out or there market share with cable will continue to dwindle. Tape it like I did and avoid the commercials. 6/10

First when i checked out this DVD, i thought that this was a documentary. I do like documentaries which are well made. But i was extremely delighted to find that this was a movie. It is actually one of the best "made for TV" movies i have seen in recent times. The acting is so real. And the dialogues so eloquent. Each word is as if it were chosen to convey exactly the feeling of the characters at each point in the movie. It was also delightful to learn a bit more about someone whom i have just heard as being the "worst traitor in the history" of the USA. All in all, the acting of Kelsey Grammer and Aidan Quinn, itself is a treat to watch. I would highly recommended movie to anybody interested in a history lesson on the formation of the USA. ****.

This is a good movie for those who enjoy history. Having been somewhat familiar with the real story here, though I did not know all the details, I was interested in what the film would have to offer. The film shows us Arnold during the American Revolution and then later as what is called a "Loyalist." I learned a great deal about Benedict Arnold and the circumstances that led to his treason. There is a lot to be learned here and it even got me interested enough to go read more about this afterward. Fascinating ...

The costuming was fairly good (except officers would not wear a baldric under their epaulet) but while the actors were all solid by previous performances, the writing of the script for this was so incredibly stilted one would think the screenplay was trying for a Shakespearean mode.

I highly doubt anyone spoke in the manner portrayed in this film. Certainly they WROTE letters in this fashion, but even today, written word is far more formal than spoken word.

What's more, Arnold doesn't gradually fall -- it's too sudden.

There is some accuracy here, but it is out of place and so on.

If only there was a HISTORIAN included...

This was a cleanly filmed background story of Benedict Arnold, trapped by conflicting circumstances, and judged harshly by history. The photography was simple, colorful and crisp, although some of the direction gave the characters an overly terse feel. The made for TV movie aspect contributed to its choppiness. Simply told, it helps us to ponder the complexities in early American history.

The movie itself completely awful. I thought I would turn it off several times, thought I found myself laughing near the end. The historical accuracy's in the movie start the very beginning and don't to the end. I.E. The Americans attacked Quebec in the winter of 1775, in the movie it look like summertime. When the Saratoga scene appears the Americans simply run towards the British redoubt (which is surrounded with a picket fence no less! Like you find in someone's backyard) while the British are screaming like men while wearing uniforms which were probably made by a blind tailor/Hollywood. They were awful. Not only was the clothing and dialogue wrong for the time period, the movie itself is really boring. Seriously, how many can truly believe a British officer would refer to Benedict Arnold as the "Hero of Saratoga." Come On. (and it was actually Gen. Horatio Gates who was called this. For anyone who wants to learn about Benedict Arnold, consider this a piece, NOT to learn from. It will bore you to death.

I really like this movie being from saratoga. However, it does have some flaws that are disappointing but are expected with a low budget film.

Like it says, the battle for quebec was fought at night during the winter. Arnolds force fought in the city while montgomery fought outside and got stalled at the gate. Also in the saratoga battle, arnold was riding a horse, not on foot. In addition, I believe major generals at the time had two purple strips on each arm on their uniform in addition to the pink sash seen the movie.

I thought the battle scenes could have been a lot better. First off, the battle of quebec could have been at least placed during the correct season and shown inside the city where it occurred. I would have also liked a few scenes of arnolds forces traveling to quebec. The battle of valcour island also was not great because they didn't show anything about the battle except arnold escaping in a row boat. I would have liked them having at least one large ship that took place in the battle instead of this small row boat. I would have also liked them to at least have a scene showing fort ticonderoga. I also think having him on the horse would have made for a much better scene.

However, I understand that it was a low budget film so these types of flaws are expected. I think the story of benedict arnold is perfect for future movies. Think of it, you have the battle of quebec, valcour island, saratoga, friendship with washington and his treason at west point. You cant have any better true stories then this, with a high budget, this could become an incredible film.

Benedict Arnold the tragic patriot made all that followed possible but never was to share in any of it. A hero in battle, admired by the troops, Benedict Arnold is the one patriot we are allowed to see the human side of. The rest now ensconced in stone it remembered were equally also human.

The traditional tragic story line is well staged in this movie. The gold leaf of the CiC well rests on Kelsey Grammer's shoulders who caught the charm and duplicity, the joy and pain, the courage and the ambition of the father of his country.

Aiden Quinn captured the anguish of Arnold trapped between love of country and of his shallow self-centered immature wife facing financial ruin and suffering egregious physical and psychological scars. Not shown in the movie was the usual "cure" of the pre-pencillin days. Arnold was probably drunk most the time all the plotting was done around him.

If there are bitter tears to be shed, it is for Arnold, the person who was simply over-reached and over-played.

Comparable films include John Ford's classic: The Informer and Scarlet Coat.

I can take or leave this movie, but what brought me to add a comment was how this is a perfect example of Hollywood's drive to "humanize" our founding fathers. Biography after biography of George Washington has driven home the integrity of his personal comportment and indicates he would *never* utter the vulgarities emanating from Kelsey Grammar's mouth. One biographer (I think it was Richard Brookheiser) said that would ask visitors to Mount Vernon to leave at the drop of a single profane word from their lips. I've enjoyed Kelsey Grammar in the past and he'll always be Frasier to me as he will to most others. But taking him seriously as George Washington, to whom faith, prayer, and Godly discipline in daily personal conduct were bedrock traits is impossible.

I thought that this film was very interesting. However, I wouldn't have minded if they would have stretched this out a bit in order to flesh the characters out a bit more. Also, some more historical background would have been useful for the uninitiated.

However, Kelsey Grammer does a splendid job as George Washington, and Aidan Quinn plays the title role with splash and vigor. We got a fairly good idea on his character's motivations.

Overall, a very educational and entertaining TV flick- kind of a History Lite.

I made the mistake of assuming that this would be something for the whole family. I guess the casting of Kelsey Grammar should've tipped me off. Though his portrayal of Washington is fairly straight, it includes at least one lewd comment. Not that I think Washington was a saint or that there wasn't lewdness galore in the 18th century. It just doesn't suit Washington. But it gets worse. There are two bedroom scenes with Benedict Arnold and his wife one of which is very suggestive (partial nudity). That and the harrowing battlefield medical procedures push this film to at least a PG-13 (if not higher). Unfortunately, since it was a cable TV production, there's no rating, and hence no guidelines for parents. Luckily my wife and I previewed it before deciding not to show it to the family. We'd seen "Master and Commander" which has some pretty gritty scenes -- also not for kids -- but in some respects I thought "Benedict Arnold" was much more objectionable for graphic gore and distress. I put aside questions of Mr. Quinn's over-acting. I won't say there was nothing good to the movie. It had potential. It just didn't live up to it.

The circumstances in history will make you think different about Benedict Arnold by watching the TV movie. His honor was questioned even by his friend George Washington. You will see the reason to the events leading to his actions effecting the course of history in America.

Fantastically good TV movie shedding light on one of the most fascinating episodes of American history. I saw the flick sitting on a shelf and was suddenly seized with a compulsion to know: "Why did he do it?" Since seeing the flick I've read and read about Arnold and I've concluded that this well-cast, well-acted film is very accurate. Besides, I was impressed by the passionate portrayal of Arnold and the refreshingly human Washington. But the lady who played Peggy stole the show; she did a brilliant job of showing how personal history can become. I don't think Arnold's treason would have happened without Peggy's influence. Wonderful film.

This is about as bad as historical dramas get. Short of the casting, the film is pure dribble. Arnold was an arrogant, quick-tempered but enormously brave man who, indeed, did the soldierly acts referred to (the attack on Quebec (in December in the snow, by the way), the first US naval engagement on Lake Chhamplain and the heroic action at Saratoga but virtually everything else is invented. Sure enough he was passed over as political appointments of lesser generals occurred and sure enough the idiots in Congress jerked him around with his pay and expenses but there was no justification to betray his country other than a big cash payout and high commission from the British government. If you think that's just cause, then you'll enjoy the film. The true heroes were young men like the fellow who came into the room when Arnold was with Washington and told him he had the honor to fight with Arnold in Quebec and Lake Champlain and would shed his last drop of blood fighting for Arnold. Or the soldiers who suffered through the Valley Forge winter. One could argue that Arnold's rashness that made him a hero, also made him a traitor and no amount of revisionist story telling changes that,

Though I myself am I woman, if I were Arnold I would have bitch smacked Peggy for shoving the idea of being a traitor into mind. This A & E special about the question of Honor of Benedict Arnold still makes us ponder that very thought. The acting was so-so, but the dialogue was great. 7 out of 10.

The movie slowly builds to a certain momentum and although production values suffer from time to time, the movie engages as it attempts to set the record straight about Benedict Arnold. History has registered Arnold as a traitor, but here he's clearly a Patriot who's actions to turn Red Coat reflect what he perceived as a slight by the Continental Congress to not only protect him from a rogue member ruling Philadelphia with an iron hand, but to remunerate him for his war expenses. Quinn's performance transcends the Washington of Fraser Crane (oops, Kelsey Grammar) and brings dignity to a movie that has benefited from the brilliant writing of the award winning Mastrosimone. Direction is straightforward and not inspired. Tech credits are good.

This movie was horrifc, you couldn't possibly have gone more inaccurate when telling a true life story.

Nothing at all in the movie was what actually happend during that famous act of treason, and of course they had to throw some stupid love story into it...not once in the history books does it mention any woman or child of Arnolds having anything to do with his decision to betray his country...anyone who sees this movie will automatically lose 15 points on thier IQ.