Posted by Scott Bubar on July 16, 2001 at 18:24:09:
No sole(s).
Back after LOTM came out, I seem to remember one of the late-night hosts (Leno?) making jokes about Daniel Day-Lewis sprinting through the hills in his Adidas' (or was it Nikes?).
Well, the other day, I was sitting in my doctor's waiting room, and picked up an old copy of Smithsonian Magazine.
There on the cover, large as life, was Mel Gibson looking pretty spiffy in his 18th century garb, wielding a large American battle-flag.
But something didn't look quite right. The boots. They had *awfully* large soles for a riding boot of the period.
Took a closer look. No soles at all. They were only uppers pulled down over what appeared to be hiking boots or perhaps running shoes.
And I believe I've read somewhere that particular flag wasn't used in battle.
The article, of course, was about the fact that Smithsonian experts had served as consultants to ensure historical accuracy.
Now, I have to confess, I'm a bit of a nit-picker, but the fact is when I saw the movie with my son in the theater, I enjoyed it immensely. And it has grown on me since.
Being the shallow person that I am, the thing that bugged me most was depriving the loyalist dragoons of their lovely green uniforms.
But I'll grant that there are some larger historical issues, and I can see why the Brits gave this one a "warm" reception.
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I saw it with my son, and that whole father-son thing in the movie.
But then I was also very fond of Disney's "Swamp Fox", with Leslie Nielsen back in the fifties: "Swamp Fox, Swamp Fox, tail on his hat..."
So, no soles, perhaps, but plenty of soul in both movies, at least for me.