So apparently there is a new US series about the revolutionary war. I watched it. Like the Patriot, it has great production value and somewhat decent actors. And like the Patriot, it butchers history to an absurd degree in its desire to paint the British as evil villains. The British officers are either mercenaries or stuffy idiots who blab of secret military plans to civilians, or hulking brutes who go around threatening women with rape.
But guess who the main villain is. Because you see, the guy who wrote this:
was really a brutal creep who goes through women's cothing and their private affairs and who is an inch away from raping the female lead.John Graves Simcoe wrote:The principles of the British Constitution do not admit of that slavery which Christianity condemns. The moment I assume the Government of Upper Canada under no modification will I assent to a law that discriminates by dishonest policy between natives of Africa, America or Europe.
Character assassination through and through to cover up hack writing that is incapable of presenting anything in a contest between "freedoms" and "bad king forces". I kid you not, the turning point of the episode is where our "hero" is being persuaded to act as a spy because valiant patriot soldiers died "defending his freedom". Oh, and another US superspy is able to outrun indian trackers (!) after being shot by a sharpshooter in the right shoulder with a rifle ball (!!!).
Or, as Greg Caggiano put it:
He also has a great piece on just how awful this character assassination really is: (I will only quote a few sections)Within minutes, I knew this production was going to suffer from something known as “American History Textbook Syndrome”. While this series, and any like it, needs a villain to match with the obvious protagonists, the depiction of British soldiers in AMC’s Turn was in the light of evil, bloodthirsty, and out of control—another reviewer for a major entertainment site used the word “sadistic”. Every time the British are on-screen, we feel scared at what horror they might do, from bayoneting dead soldiers just to make sure, to wrongly and knowingly accusing someone of a crime they did not commit, to having an unquenchable thirst for an already married woman. Skipping right to the character of Major Hewlett, played by Burn Gorman, he apparently is the only soldier in the King’s Army with any sense of decency, and no doubt was only inserted to keep the entire army from being seen as animals.
There were a few observations that could have begun this first episode review of Turn, but my strongest feelings were that of how the British soldiers were represented. I expected them to be seen in a negative light because, after all, this is an American show, but I do believe the series went too far in trying to shove them in the viewer’s face as the unquestioned “bad guys”.
[...]
Alas, Robert Rogers and his Rangers always seem to be involved in something controversial. In Turn, they are bloodthirsty “mercenaries”, a highly inaccurate term.
So according to US TV, a guy who in reality was in favor of democracy and (unlike most US patriots) definitely not a racist got turned into a hulking brute who lechers after brave US PATRIOT WIMMENS. You know, this would have been a good character to build a masterfully grey and nuanced series on. Instead he (and John Andre, who in another great piece of character assassination is apparently a master at laying ambushes for brave american troops) is a stereotypical villain who dares to foil the plans of the BRAVE PATRIOTS.As elaborated on in my review of the premiere episode of Turn this morning, the British army is not exactly portrayed in a positive light. Though there needs to be an antagonist in the series, I believe the production went too far in trying to vilify the British, and one character in particular, Lieutenant John Simcoe. This man was the main villain in the opening episode, seen as bloodthirsty, threatening, and adulterous; someone who will try to get whatever he wants by any means necessary. In reality, there did exist a John Graves Simcoe, however, he was radically different, and almost the antithesis of what was presented on AMC Sunday night. The term used to classify taking a real person in history and then having their portrayal starkly inaccurate is called “character assassination”. We see it all the time in films, when dramatic license is taken to show a character in a certain light to fit the plot, or, quite frankly, to make it easier for the writer. The fact is, the real John Simcoe was a man so distinguished that he would eventually become the Lt. Governor of Upper Canada, someone responsible for the establishment of courts, trial by jury, and most importantly, leading an abolitionist movement that sought to banish slavery from Canada. This is a far cry from the wigged buffoon presented in Turn, who has murderous revenge on his mind when dealing with the main character.
Was John Simcoe a soldier who led men into battle, and in turn, killed other men? Yes, but how is that any different from any other soldier, on both sides, in any war ever fought? That does not mean his character (and I mean personal, real character) should be stripped of all its dignity to be portrayed in the worst way possible just because a “bad guy” is needed. Roland Emmerich did nearly the same thing in The Patriot, taking British Dragoon officer Banastre Tarleton, changing his name to William Tavington (possibly to avoid criticism such as this), and turning him into a mass murderer who orders his men to burn down a church packed with innocent civilians, including women and children. The creators of Turn have done something much worse, though, and that is keeping Simcoe’s name, and turning him into something that did not exist.
[...]As to his political views, here is a complete and total shocker: “Governor Simcoe recognized that most of the province’s first settlers had grown up or lived a good part of their lives in the United States, and would not be happy unless there was some form of democracy. Simcoe was certain that the limited powers of the Town Councils would be enough to appease the republican-minded Americans.”
Well done, US TV.
And of course, mainstream US reviewers eat it up:
L-FUCKING-OL.Working with Rose, the production staff strove for historical truthfulness in everything from plot to set details. [...]That said, detail-oriented Revolutionary War enthusiasts will spot plenty of historical faux pas.[...]John Graves Simcoe truly detested the Rebels but some of the significant things that happen with him in the series simply did not occur in real life. Most of the language is a fair representation of 18th century styles, but some modern terms sneak in, such as when Woodhull tells another character, “This is a one-time deal.” Actor Angus MacFadyen’s native Scottish burr adds to his portrayal of Robert Rogers as a scoundrel, but may be incongruous with the facts that Rogers was born in America to Irish colonists and grew up in Connecticut. And the white wigs that the British characters wear were out of style during the Revolution so I found them a little distracting.[...]But none of these details significantly detract from the series. The elements I noted above are certainly important to the Culper Ring story but they are not its core. Human interactions were the essence of Revolutionary War spying and that makes “Turn” a character-focused tale. Executive Producer Barry Josephson explained that the series required some minor liberties to support a better narrative arc, to best show how characters developed over time, or to allow situations to illustrate the experiences and emotions of the characters.
Yes, turning an abolitionist who tried to protect Native Americans into a Nazi is a minor detail.
Even worse, the show is just boring. Unlike what the cretin above wrote, the stereotypes ruin the suspense. You know the good guys will win because there is no real threat to their righteousness. The acting is wooden, most likely due to the terrible script. It is just not good TV. Contrast it with another show which takes liberties (like Vikings) but which stays faithful to the core history and is good, nuanced TV and this show looks like something out of a WWII propaganda movie.
