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.
24 Reviews
A Well Made Historical Drama
georgesh314 January 2003
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.
A mediocre history lesson
=G=24 February 2003
"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+)
a fine historical drama
dtucker869 September 2003
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.
Informative documentary.
rmax30482319 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I suspect that, if Americans are familiar at all with the name of Benedict Arnold, the related beliefs follow a lazy stereotype. Benedict Arnold is a traitor. Probably most Americans know that. Probably fewer know that he "sold" West Point to the British during the Revolutionary War. I doubt that very many know the reasons behind Arnold's defection. Even acknowledging that there WERE reasons, from his point of view, would contaminate the purity of the conception. He stands for "evil." He's not a human being at all.
Actually, according to this documentary, he was a courageous hero of the Continental Army who saved the United States twice and almost lost a leg at the Battle of Saratoga.
But he was also a man from a background of poverty, sold into indentured servitude by his mother. It appears to have left him anxious to have a solid bank account. On top of this he was an ambitious hot head who married into a prominent family of Philadelphia loyalists -- the Shippens, one of whom signed the Declaration of Independence and was one of the founders of what became the University of Pennsylvania. The loyalty of Arnold's wife, Peggy, was always weak.
Not an easy man to get along with, Arnold took easy offense and was given to issuing challenges. He suffered several slights from the Congress and, reluctantly, from his friend George Washington.
It was all too much for him. He asked Washington for appointment as Superintendent of West Point. There, he gave the finger to the United States and West Point to the British.
It's an instructive program. Aidan Quinn chews and snarls his way through the role, one foot in apoplexy. Kelsey Grammar is quite good as General Washington. The story sometimes smacks of soap opera but that doesn't detract from its overall quality.
Let me put it this way. F. Scott Fitzgerald once wrote of the actress Joan Crawford that, "If you ever gave her a stage direction like 'lying', she would practically give an imitation of Benedict Arnold selling West Point to the British." If this documentary does nothing else, it at least fills out that picture of betrayal and treason with a little human flesh.
Actually, according to this documentary, he was a courageous hero of the Continental Army who saved the United States twice and almost lost a leg at the Battle of Saratoga.
But he was also a man from a background of poverty, sold into indentured servitude by his mother. It appears to have left him anxious to have a solid bank account. On top of this he was an ambitious hot head who married into a prominent family of Philadelphia loyalists -- the Shippens, one of whom signed the Declaration of Independence and was one of the founders of what became the University of Pennsylvania. The loyalty of Arnold's wife, Peggy, was always weak.
Not an easy man to get along with, Arnold took easy offense and was given to issuing challenges. He suffered several slights from the Congress and, reluctantly, from his friend George Washington.
It was all too much for him. He asked Washington for appointment as Superintendent of West Point. There, he gave the finger to the United States and West Point to the British.
It's an instructive program. Aidan Quinn chews and snarls his way through the role, one foot in apoplexy. Kelsey Grammar is quite good as General Washington. The story sometimes smacks of soap opera but that doesn't detract from its overall quality.
Let me put it this way. F. Scott Fitzgerald once wrote of the actress Joan Crawford that, "If you ever gave her a stage direction like 'lying', she would practically give an imitation of Benedict Arnold selling West Point to the British." If this documentary does nothing else, it at least fills out that picture of betrayal and treason with a little human flesh.
Benedict Arnold - A Question of Conviction
LeslieLLKing26 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Benedict Arnold, A Question of Honor, step by step, maybe skipping some, portrays Benedict Arnold's (Aidan Quinn) rise in the patriot forces, under George Washington (Kelsey Grammar), during the Revolutionary War of 1776. Without Arnold receiving due recognition for winning the Battle at Saratoga, it remains the pinnacle battle, that provides for the Continental Army's freedom, in America. Surprisingly, the movie was filmed in Ireland, but looked very early American. Peggy's ( Flora Montgomery) relationship to John Andre (John Light), a commanding leader to the British forces, is weak to say the least, portraying her as an inexplicably unfaithful woman, one whom you might say is a traitor herself, ironically, to the poetic poignancy of an impassioned British soldier.
Her transition to falling for Benedict occurs quite customarily for the time period, at a dance, in Philadelphia. Exchanging British witticisms, it is clear that Quinn can deliver a more convincing dialogue, pleasing sight and sound. In this scene, Peggy delivers, but Quinn pales in comparison, maybe lack of true interest or confidence, for the flair such particular delivery authentically requires. It is as if he begins walking up a flight of stairs, tiredly without purpose, and before reaching the top to the next level, begins to slowly walk back down, unable to realize his own ability. He never reaches his destination, that of speaking his own lines more characteristically of a truly charmed nature, born of British descent. Such waning attempt diminishes from the more engaging reality we anticipate, if not expect in this scene.
Peggy's transition from British love, John Andre, to American lad, Benedict Arnold falls as easily, as turning a book page. What falls short is her due explanation to John Andre, now left only to piece together his own broken heart. Not only does the portrayed, dedicated courtly man of manners loose his love to Benedict, but looses his job and his life, hung in a Patriot spectacle. Arnold has his own problems, and honestly, love determined Peggy only becomes whimpering Peggy. Rather than encouraging Arnold to negotiate his wishes with Washington, like most Patriot wives would do, she persuades his heart to defend the Loyalists, obviously her heart's home, but out of truth or convenience. Her own switch of patriotism is as nimble and sudden as her heart's desire for love fulfilled. Rather than any artifice, it merely reflects weak convictions, that which we could all do without. At Peggy's self-seeking, comfy, cozy heart, in the midst of war, Benedict appears the buffoon, for not maintaining the new American decorum. Granted Washington is not perfect and communications between people regarding events falter at times, but that should have only encouraged Benedict to stay true to the new land, defending and developing the honor of his new country.
When Peggy and Benedict return to England, she weakly awaits in the carriage, while her husband and other man, gun duel, as the custom for the husband to defend his name's honor, when his wife has been unfaithful. We see no reason or action of events that might culminate in some more realistic credible affair. We just think, "Oh Peggy must have done it again, by gosh." And there she sits, like a coward in a carriage, while her husband might end up loosing his life, just to defend his pride, at her expense.
But as one can imagine a historian saying, "history is history." One might as well say, "No use crying over spilled milk." Peggy's nature is annoying and could be in part, accountable for changing the events of history. Nevertheless, this film over all, at its core, attempts to be grounded. It is played out engagingly with heart and soul, familiar to us in Quinn, and surprisingly by Grammar, in such fitting adaptation of George Washington, no small shoes to fill. Due to such important historicism, this film is an interesting and educational piece to watch, and learn.
Her transition to falling for Benedict occurs quite customarily for the time period, at a dance, in Philadelphia. Exchanging British witticisms, it is clear that Quinn can deliver a more convincing dialogue, pleasing sight and sound. In this scene, Peggy delivers, but Quinn pales in comparison, maybe lack of true interest or confidence, for the flair such particular delivery authentically requires. It is as if he begins walking up a flight of stairs, tiredly without purpose, and before reaching the top to the next level, begins to slowly walk back down, unable to realize his own ability. He never reaches his destination, that of speaking his own lines more characteristically of a truly charmed nature, born of British descent. Such waning attempt diminishes from the more engaging reality we anticipate, if not expect in this scene.
Peggy's transition from British love, John Andre, to American lad, Benedict Arnold falls as easily, as turning a book page. What falls short is her due explanation to John Andre, now left only to piece together his own broken heart. Not only does the portrayed, dedicated courtly man of manners loose his love to Benedict, but looses his job and his life, hung in a Patriot spectacle. Arnold has his own problems, and honestly, love determined Peggy only becomes whimpering Peggy. Rather than encouraging Arnold to negotiate his wishes with Washington, like most Patriot wives would do, she persuades his heart to defend the Loyalists, obviously her heart's home, but out of truth or convenience. Her own switch of patriotism is as nimble and sudden as her heart's desire for love fulfilled. Rather than any artifice, it merely reflects weak convictions, that which we could all do without. At Peggy's self-seeking, comfy, cozy heart, in the midst of war, Benedict appears the buffoon, for not maintaining the new American decorum. Granted Washington is not perfect and communications between people regarding events falter at times, but that should have only encouraged Benedict to stay true to the new land, defending and developing the honor of his new country.
When Peggy and Benedict return to England, she weakly awaits in the carriage, while her husband and other man, gun duel, as the custom for the husband to defend his name's honor, when his wife has been unfaithful. We see no reason or action of events that might culminate in some more realistic credible affair. We just think, "Oh Peggy must have done it again, by gosh." And there she sits, like a coward in a carriage, while her husband might end up loosing his life, just to defend his pride, at her expense.
But as one can imagine a historian saying, "history is history." One might as well say, "No use crying over spilled milk." Peggy's nature is annoying and could be in part, accountable for changing the events of history. Nevertheless, this film over all, at its core, attempts to be grounded. It is played out engagingly with heart and soul, familiar to us in Quinn, and surprisingly by Grammar, in such fitting adaptation of George Washington, no small shoes to fill. Due to such important historicism, this film is an interesting and educational piece to watch, and learn.
A Compelling Portrait
timdalton00712 March 2014
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.
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.
Good History Lesson ....
squeakycheeks13 January 2019
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 ...
Very well made TV movie
karvan_g5 May 2004
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. ****.
Not a bad TV movie, but still a TV movie.
mm-3916 January 2003
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
Stilted
yastepanov17 July 2009
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...
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...
Note the bullet size!
fmartin14 January 2003
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.
Awful.
hvwf21 July 2003
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.
Good movie with some flaws
jtomkovi5 November 2006
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.
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.
The Curse of Treason
deanofrpps15 January 2003
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.
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.
Who was that? It certainly wasn't Washington.
ddaanntt24 July 2005
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.
A Question Of History
bix77714 January 2003
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.
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.
Not a family film... or a very good film
glendalough29 July 2005
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.
A question of history.
cmyklefty20 January 2003
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.
cherchez la femme
tom_amity26 July 2010
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.
At least the uniforms were nice
spmlawyer-118 January 2011
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,
A Lesson from a wench
staisil28 July 2003
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.
An engaging attempt to change history's perception of Arnold
bertieclem28 October 2002
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.
Boy did this stink
Nellaberry3 February 2003
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.
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.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
