REVIEW: Docudrama ‘Battle of Bunker Hill’ Defends Truth and America
by Darin Miller
In his farewell address, the late President Ronald Reagan reflected on the state of America as his country entered the 1990s:
“Younger parents aren’t sure that an unambivalent appreciation of America is the right thing to teach modern children. And as for those who create the popular culture, well-grounded patriotism is no longer the style. Our spirit is back, but we haven’t reinstitutionalized it. We’ve got to do a better job of getting across that America is freedom—freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of enterprise. And freedom is special and rare. It’s fragile; it needs protection.”
His words ring as true today as they did then. Reagan understood that what we teach children about America’s past directly influences the country’s future course. “So, we’ve got to teach history based not on what’s in fashion but what’s important,” he said. Americans need to focus “more attention to American history and a greater emphasis on civic ritual.”
Newcomer production company Light A Candle Films has made Reagan’s plea their creed. Combining documentary footage with a dramatic story in a docudrama format, Light A Candle hopes to portray American history in a dynamic and accurate way. Their first docudrama focuses on The Battle of Bunker Hill.
The Revolutionary War began with the gunshots “heard around the world” fired at Concord and Lexington, Massachusetts. Following these battles, the British were besieged in Boston by colonial militia men. When the colonists learned that the British planned to expand their control to Charlestown, they massed at Bunker Hill and Breed’s Hill in front of it, building fortifications in a single night. The next morning, the British attacked. The battle of Bunker Hill ensued, and was the first major battle of the Revolutionary War, America’s war for independence. It was at Bunker Hill that the British learned of America’s resolve to cling to their self-evident rights, even in the face of death.
In high school I first heard the idea that American colonists were somehow wrong for revolting against the British. That the British were simply taxing the colonists to cover some of their expenses from the French and Indian War, which was fought on behalf of the colonists, sounded plausible.
Matthew Spalding defeats this argument in his recent book “We Still Hold These Truths.” He writes on page 31 (his emphasis):
The American Revolution began as a tax revolt. But it is important to understand from the start that the debate was never really over the amount of taxation (the taxes were actually quite low) but the process by which the British government imposed and enforced these taxes. As loyal colonists, the Americans had long recognized parliament’s authority to legislate from the empire generally, as with colonial trade, but they had always maintained that the power to tax was a legislative power reserved to their own assemblies rather than a distant legislature in London.
Spalding continues, “In making this argument, the colonials were objecting to being deprived of an important historic right.” This right was laid down in the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which forbid taxation without legislative consent. The colonists argued that since they had no representation in parliament, these taxes “violated the traditional rights of Englishmen.”
The film clearly points this out. Without representation, Parliament’s taxation amounted to little more than robbery. And that’s what unrepresented taxation—and in my opinion, much of the “represented” taxation that occurs today—amounts to: theft, no matter how justified a government believes it is.
What the film did right was avoid trying to create a feature-length full-scale production. This film accomplishes what it sets out to do: defend the truth of what happened that day and keep the audience interested, delivering facts in an entertaining and informative manner. It would serve well as an educational tool. I would recommend the filmmakers avoid trying to make jokes or use cliché terms too often. No need to call a grown man “lad,” as one of the officers does.
Light A Candle does not shy away from the fact that they work on a budget, a fact that is apparent when watching the film. The website reads:
Now, we’re a small company … completely self-financed. We’re doing this because we believe in the subject matter and the mission. So we’re not beholden to anyone, and no one has a say in how we style our content. And because we are also self-distributing, we don’t have to ‘adjust’ historical facts to sell to a particular region or school system.
Producer and director Tony Malanowski hopes it will educate young people about the true history of America. “We want to be the alternative to the revisionist, anti-American views that are being presented in many of our schools today,” he said. “By presenting the information in a narrative docudrama style, we make it easier to remember the facts, while also helping to offer a rich texture that can really make the historical period come alive, instead of just being dry dates and facts with no flavoring.”
So far he has received good reviews from viewers, many of whom have told him that they watched the film with their children.
“If we can keep doing that in subsequent DVDs then I feel we will have hit the mark,” he said.
While quality is often in the eye of the beholder, and the dramatic portion of the film could use some work, the documentary portion is solid, and the experts cited deliver thorough, informative historical commentary.






Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
47 Comments
exactly the nuance to bring to the debate…
It wasn't about taxes. It was about representation, and the utter lack of it. No free man refuses to pay a tax that he sees as either fair- or beneficial. They certainly won't revolt over that.
But do it in secret,in the dark of night, for reasons undisclosed. THEN you'll get a fight.
Sound familiar?…
It is simply amazing how poignant Reagan's speeches are today. Any potential conservative candidate has to study this man in order to be viable in the coming elections.
Ah, back when Boston had balls.
That's a refreshing change, and I look forward to seeing it. Those of us who were history majors in college always pointed out that the real battle occurred on Breed's Hill, and apparently they've done their homework. dcase and NeoConJedi are both right. The Star Chamber proceedings on health care show we are not truly being represented (in practice rather than in theory), and Reagan's invocation of the history of the Revolution is vital to the success of any future Republican candidate. Just ask the people in the Tea Party Movement.
Personally, I'm waiting for the Oliver Stone version of the Revolutionary War…
/sarcasm
No one is more acutely aware of the leftist slant of a telling of history than a homeschool Mom…I am currently seeking out textbooks covering US History, and considering how I know full well (and especially because Big Hollywood was instrumental in featuring it) how Howard Zinn's history revisionism has had its tentacles in high school curriculums all over the country, Ive been having fits over what a GOOD history book would be to use.
Thanks for bringing this film to light. Somehow, I suspect that Hollywood will never promote it or publicize it. I will put it on my list of "must haves".
This is what made the John Adams series on HBO so refreshing. It told the story with unabashed clear-eyed admiration for the protagonists, and what they accomplished.
and as much as people dislike Sarah Palin she is talking that talk. Plain, and simple. Representative government, by and for the people.
Not exactly rocket science. And the clueless academics running the show either don't understand this concept- or more likely loathe it…
About 15 years ago I found my girlfriend's daughter's fifth-grade history text on the kitchen table. I hadn't seen an elementary school textbook in eons, so I leafed through it. A couple of hours later, I felt like crying. There were scores of pages on slavery, genocide against the "Native Americans," the Japanese internment camps, slavery, Jim Crow, slavery, Dred Scott, slavery, Harriet Tubman, and slavery. There was practically nothing about the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or the reasons for the Revolution. There was more material on George Washington Carver than George Washington. By the end of the year, "someone" wanted to make sure that the kids understood the purpose of the United States: to enslave people, to institute genocide, and assist the rich and powerful exploit the poor and defenseless.
And this was in Fairfax County, Virginia.
I visited the Bunker Monument in October last year on a cold and rainy day. Actually climbed to the top of that monument (we won't talk about how long that took). It was a haunting and moving day, especially seeing the monuments containing the names of the falled located a block or two away.
If you want to read an exceptional book as to why we went to war, then check out Fred Anderson's The Crucible of War: The Seven Years War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766. If you start the unravelling of the crown and colonial relationship in 1754 instead of the late 60s or early 70s, "Give me liberty or give me death" becomes much more profound.
Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes…..I don't know about you people but I see Them.
hard to disagree with both your logic- and anyone named after Joe Kubel's titular hero… go Easy Co.!
Joe Kubert.
That Catholic School education again. : )
As I understand it, it was more about not having any real choice in the matter.
The first continental congress issued an open letter to the King of England in which yes, they demanded representation in parliament. They also demanded the king reign in the royal governors he appointed, claiming as subjects of the crown.
The king responded by sending over the royal army and navy, and basically giving them carte blanch to do what ever was necessary to put an end once and for all to these notions that the should do anything other than kiss the kings ass.
Of course, this happened both before, during and after Bunker Hill. Still a fascinating story.
They got another chance to prove they still do next week.
Fingers crossed.
Oliver Stone's version? Let me guess, Washington's a closet transvestite, Jefferson is a crack addict, and the Native Americans have found the cure for cancer, but when they try to share it with the evil whities, they stone the emissary to death while screaming and drooling "you different, ug, die! die! die!
Racist!
/snarc
You hadda be in the super-duper advanced class !
EdSki… that's…that's understood.
Excellent point, Ed.
A Scott Brown victory would indeed be a harbinger of a political ' revolution '.
And Brown IS a military man….
Been to the actual battle site, as well. When you get there and look at the hill your reaction is "The British slow marched up that!" And waiting for them on the top were the entrenched Americans. Courage by the bucketful on both sides that day.
If you really want to fall in love with your country all over again read "The Glorious Cause" by Robert Middlekauff, professor emeritus of colonial and early United States history at UC Berkeley. Don't let the author's gig at Berkeley dissuade you. This is no liberal tome. The author's admiration for and awe of the founding fathers shows throughout the book. It is far, far and away best book on the American Revolution I have ever read.
SgtRock: Ya got me. I'm pretty sure we learned that a lot earlier than college, but I'm a child who grew up in the fifties, and it wasn't until I got to college that I had the nerve to correct an adult. LOL
It never ceases to amaze me just how much p.c. junk is tossed in to even math word problems, spelling sentences, and don't get me started on social studies! I feel your pain.
You obviously didn't read the revised textbook or you would have mention Jim Crow twice. /sarc but not
Thanks for the tip. My daughter is currently in elementary school and, although many good texts are too old for her, I want to always be prepared to answer her questions.
Those of us who had Catholic School education knew it was actually ' Breed's Hill ' in 6th grade. ; )
Hell, LawHawk, it took all my courage to post that snide reply to you – 'Cause I've always seen you as a father-figure ! ; )
They loathe it, and her, and you and me.
Ha! Public school and I knew it by 3rd grade!
D'oh!
Life has shown me how cyclical history is, regardless of region.
Life has also shown me that those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it.
The progressives knew that: they've been dumbing down our history since they took control of our education.
I'm a homeschool mom whose working husband teaches a class each week for middle-school boys on "Great Battles in US Military History." He purchased this DVD as part of the class curriculum on Bunker(Breed's) Hill. It's been amazing to go through history battle-by-battle and see what each accomplished in terms of freedom and liberty versus oppression and tyranny.
Reagan was right, as usual: this information has to be taught, because the other side will most certainly twist it into lies.
One of the great things to see come out of this class was when the boys heard Oliver Stone's comment that we should admire Stalin because he fought Hitler harder than anybody. Even the sixth graders laughed. "Stalin totally admired Hitler," they said. "He only fought him when Hitler turned on him." Loved hearing them "get it."
Can't wait to see what this production company does next. Fight the good fight, you guys!
Even scarier then that is the textbooks they read in College. I was marked for academic purge for questioning a professor on his statement claiming that "Spain went to war with the United States because it knew it would lose." Progressive/Socialist revisionist history is the standard, and the ideas of Marx and his acolytes are revered and the ideas of Burke, Adams, Montesquieu, and the Founding Fathers are ignored. The recent issue of "Journal of American Historical Association, and a issue from the "Organization of American HIstorians" magazine last year, had a few articles that tried to prove that the Black Panthers were a civil rights organization and important in the advancement of civil and voting rights. The state of Historians is a sad one these days, and as a Historian I see that we have lost are way to studying history for truth. There was one professor who admitted the job of historians is to " fix history to achieve social justice". To say I was astounded is mild at best.
It's been on free-to-air for the first time here in Australia, the finale 'Peacefield' shows on Sunday night.
I haven't missed an episode and Giamatti is brillant.
There used to be a cartoon series, Johnny Tremayne, set in colonial Boston.
not sure where we disagree about this- you are, of course, correct. However, Sam Adams was the prime instigator of the tax revolt- and a darn good beer maker, too…
Doh! you are right, of course. Been a few years since we read one. Liked 'G.I. Combat' and the Haunted Tank the best…
There's another wrinkle besides taxation. For over a century the British had treated the American colonies with "benign neglect" by never implementing the full extent of mercantilism. After the French and Indian War, not only did the British impose taxes they also began enforcing their trade laws, which had a dire effect on the colonial economy. So the British not only taxed the colonies they also deprived of the means to retain they wealth to pay them.
I don't believe we disagree either, just having a discussion, not a debate.
I've read a little about Sam Adams, and yes he did seem to be a real community organizer. /snarc
But from what I've read he was more in the barely and hops trade than brewer, and he didn't appear to be very good at that, nearly going bankrupt. But that could have been because he was busy organizing a community, rather than tending to business.
I read David McCullough's 1776, and the concept just blows my mind. They get together at the first continental congress, send an open letter to the king of the most powerful nation of that time, demanding he respect their rights. And he replies by sending the biggest army & navy in the world, to kill them.
Holy Sh!t
I don't know if they didn't see that coming, but their only options were to surrender and hope for the best, run, or fight.
That's some big cojones.
watch 'Northwest Passage' and you'll see Sam Adams in the tavern clunking British soldiers over the head with pewter tankards…
So there's THAT…
I don't remember which book I read it in, and I don't remember which founding father it was, but after the revolution, one of went on a business trip to London.
When the locals at the Inn (and tavern) he was staying at figured out who it was, the played a joke by finding a drawing of Washington from one of the papers, and tacked it up in the out house.
When he came back from the outhouse he just sat down and finished his drink, while every one else in the place is laughing.
He says: well, that's the best place for the portrait, because no ones scares the shit out of the English better than George Washington.
the anecdotes from that time are both priceless and illustrative… when leaders were MADE, not 'annointed'. Good stuff, mate…
I understand where you're coming from. It's standard Marxist protocol: the only legitimate purpose of ANYTHING is to advance the cause of socialism. That includes ALL courses taught to ALL students, the mass media, the arts, and anything and everything the government does. Marxists define "peace" as the absence of opposition to socialism (if you keep that in mind, the words and deeds of "peace activists" become more understandable). Finally, Marxist doctrine holds that values such as "telling the truth" and "being honest" are fictions fosted upon the proles by the ruling class, and hence need not be obeyed by the Marxist in pursuit of social justice.
I don't believe we disagree either, just having a discussion, not a debate.
I've read a little about Sam Adams, and yes he did seem to be a real community organizer. /snarc
But from what I've read he was more in the barely and hops trade than brewer, and he didn't appear to be very good at that, nearly going bankrupt. But that could have been because he was busy organizing a community, rather than tending to business.
I read David McCullough's 1776, and the concept just blows my mind. They get together at the first continental congress, send an open letter to the king of the most powerful nation of that time, demanding he respect their rights. And he replies by sending the biggest army & navy in the world, to kill them.
Holy Sh!t
I don't know if they didn't see that coming, but their only options were to surrender and hope for the best, run, or fight.
That's some big cojones.
What a wonderful idea! Show the story rather than read a text book (just like every other class). How many video games can the kids memorize in minutes, but reading instructions for hours will not make a difference. (not at all against reading – there should be a lot of reading, but dramatized history telling is brilliant!) The film could connect children to the story as humans instead of abstract characters lost in a deluge of historical dates – an actual story can help the children picture the way it was….help them understand reality! I wish we would have had more history movies when I was growing up….it would have made remembering the truth a lot easier. I say GREAT WORK – Keep it up – make school a little more creative & interesting!
Great DocuDrama!!
You must be logged in to post a comment.