Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaThe story of a group of very different men fighting in the American Colonies for freedom, and how they will shape the future for the United States of America. Based on true stories.The story of a group of very different men fighting in the American Colonies for freedom, and how they will shape the future for the United States of America. Based on true stories.The story of a group of very different men fighting in the American Colonies for freedom, and how they will shape the future for the United States of America. Based on true stories.
- Premi
- 2 vittorie e 7 candidature totali
Sfoglia gli episodi
Recensioni in evidenza
Very few movies or shows about this period of history so if you're interested it's worth watching. But if you are a history buff you'll be more irritated as the lack of historical accuracy and detail in a show produced by the history channel... almost like then didn't actually bother to learn it before making.
Casting is poor, many of the actors are inaccurately cast for the age of the person
Uniforms, formations, mannerisms, field commands, etc for the redcoats are pure fiction other than their red jackets. At one point general gage (who was 55 at the time yet played by a much younger actor) use the command "rapid fire" to describe the artillery bombardment of bunker hill. Rapid fire 🙄
Much of action is too stylized and martial arts style and does not resemble combat of the era.
The battle of Lexington and concord are a joke at best. Basically no display of the action at concord bridge and nothing of the patriots constant harassment of the British march back to Boston.
No details or depiction of the setting or scale or layout of the combat in the show.
General Washington is depicted as a war mongering tough guy who volunteers himself for commander in chief position when in reality he was nominated for the position and reluctantly accepted.
John Hancock is depicted as a faggy dandy with little to no backbone when in reality he was a savvy rich merchant and respected in the community.
No historical basis of general gages wife sleeping with dr warren. Totally made up bs that doesn't add anything to the story and appears to only be added so a female character could be included.
Any true American Revolutionary War fans or history nuts may wanna skip this mildly entertaining but historically lazy and irritating slap in the face to a great American story.
The history channel should be embarrassed of this. Embarrassed.
Casting is poor, many of the actors are inaccurately cast for the age of the person
Uniforms, formations, mannerisms, field commands, etc for the redcoats are pure fiction other than their red jackets. At one point general gage (who was 55 at the time yet played by a much younger actor) use the command "rapid fire" to describe the artillery bombardment of bunker hill. Rapid fire 🙄
Much of action is too stylized and martial arts style and does not resemble combat of the era.
The battle of Lexington and concord are a joke at best. Basically no display of the action at concord bridge and nothing of the patriots constant harassment of the British march back to Boston.
No details or depiction of the setting or scale or layout of the combat in the show.
General Washington is depicted as a war mongering tough guy who volunteers himself for commander in chief position when in reality he was nominated for the position and reluctantly accepted.
John Hancock is depicted as a faggy dandy with little to no backbone when in reality he was a savvy rich merchant and respected in the community.
No historical basis of general gages wife sleeping with dr warren. Totally made up bs that doesn't add anything to the story and appears to only be added so a female character could be included.
Any true American Revolutionary War fans or history nuts may wanna skip this mildly entertaining but historically lazy and irritating slap in the face to a great American story.
The history channel should be embarrassed of this. Embarrassed.
Reading a lot of these reviews, people need to get a grip. Please show me where the History Channel said this was a documentary or that it was an accurate story about American history. The History Channel is a company trying to obtain viewers and to make money. They are in the entertainment business. Why else would they cast someone like Dean Norris as Benjamin Franklin? The truth is, this was a very good mini-series. Loved the acting, loved the drama and the action intensity. Almost at the edge of my seat. If anything, it re-sparked my interest in American history and I bet the same will happen for you. I've been reading up on our American history and our founding fathers and noticed some information I didn't know before and that alone was well worth watching Sons Of Liberty.
So relax, take a deep breath and let's all get a grip. If you cannot handle a show like this, perhaps you need to turn the channel back to The Big Bang Theory or go watch PBS.
So relax, take a deep breath and let's all get a grip. If you cannot handle a show like this, perhaps you need to turn the channel back to The Big Bang Theory or go watch PBS.
Lots of people have written negative reviews but I found the series to be refreshing and a reminder of who we are and how we got here. Historically and culturally incorrect? A story needs to be told in a way that current culture can understand. It made me feel proud to be a citizen of the United States! What these men did was beyond courageous and I would have fought with them given the opportunity. I do worry that I may actually get that opportunity; like so many I'm fed up with taxation and the best government money can buy. The Founding Fathers would undoubtedly be calling to arms if they were here today. As with any historical series it's a story that needs to be told and this particular story should be told over and over again. I loved it! Best Wishes
My word, this stuff is some kind of Batman, Spiderman, etc version of the revolutionary days in Massachusetts. As a Bostonian who knows more than a bit about Sam Adams, John Adams, John Hancock, and even more about Paul Revere, I hardly recognized them, or even many of the events depicted. At first, I thought maybe I was getting senile, but the manure just kept piling higher til I realized that is what much of it is.
Sam Adams was deeply religious and had little (none) of the comedian about him. That is exactly why he doesn't get the recognition he DESERVES among the Founding Fathers. He was boring and RELIGIOUS. This series gets NONE of that right.
What in the universe does General Gage's WIFE have to do with anything? I'll tell you. Absolutely nothing. More completely fictional plot threads to ... what ... make sure some women keep watching and to make sure we understand how evil Gage was? Oh boy.
The Boston Tea Party!!!!! It seems the British soldiers were invited and they stood around and watched!!! LMAO!!! People, listen, most of this stuff in the first 1.5 episodes isn't really true. But still, thanks for watching, and now go learn about the REAL SAM ADAMS.
Sam Adams was deeply religious and had little (none) of the comedian about him. That is exactly why he doesn't get the recognition he DESERVES among the Founding Fathers. He was boring and RELIGIOUS. This series gets NONE of that right.
What in the universe does General Gage's WIFE have to do with anything? I'll tell you. Absolutely nothing. More completely fictional plot threads to ... what ... make sure some women keep watching and to make sure we understand how evil Gage was? Oh boy.
The Boston Tea Party!!!!! It seems the British soldiers were invited and they stood around and watched!!! LMAO!!! People, listen, most of this stuff in the first 1.5 episodes isn't really true. But still, thanks for watching, and now go learn about the REAL SAM ADAMS.
This miniseries is entertaining as a drama if you can set aside its various gross historical inaccuracies. So, pretend that it portrays the American Revolution in an alternate dimension, perhaps even pretend that it's a prequel to "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter," and you'll do much better that way. But, if instead you insist on expecting that its writers were objective wherever possible, keeping away from bias when none was required, then crawl back underneath your rock, please, because that has never been the History Channel's dealing. And this time, take a moment while you're down there to appreciate what a great name for a propaganda mill, "The History Channel" really is; it almost may as well call itself "The Ministry of Truth." What is most obvious and transparent about this miniseries' disinterest in truth is its disinterest in history.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizFilmed entirely in Romania.
- BlooperThe British flag depicted in the miniseries is historically incorrect. The flag shown didn't exist until 1806 (the union with Ireland).
- ConnessioniReferenced in Chelsea Lately: Episodio #8.109 (2014)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How many seasons does Sons of Liberty have?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti