Just proof as to why you don’t mess with the Scottish, they will always beat your ass.
Enraged at the slaughter of Murron (Catherine McCormack) — his new bride and childhood love — legendary Scottish warrior William Wallace (Mel Gibson, who also directed the film) slays a platoon of the local English lord’s soldiers. This leads the village to revolt and, eventually, the entire country to rise up against English rule.
There’s a lot to be said about this film that hasn’t already been said before. It’s a great film, but its influence seems to be over-shadowed.
The influential thing about this film starts with its gritty look. Many epics before this film have either romanticized or cleaned up the look of 13th century locations. However, with this film, Gibson gives us a dirty, disgusting look, something that many back in 1995 haven’t seen before. The people in this movie are dirty (even though they have clear teeth), and the habitats they choose to live in are even worse looking them they are. Without this film we wouldn’t have been able to see the true disgusting side of the 13th century.
Another great thing about this film is that the great epic battle sequences are straight up in your face bloody. The best part of this film is obviously the awesome battle sequences that occur, but some seem to forget that these battles being so effin’ bloody, got other directors thinking, more blood the better. I mean look at any other epic battle film after 95: Gladiator, Troy, 300, hell even enough to say, Lord of the Rings, even though it isn’t as bloody as this. They all have a lot of bloody action, that brings out a lot of emotions by showing how brutal mid-evil times were.
Gibson as director, is spot on perfect here. He captures every single emotion there is to capture in a epic like this. The battle scenes are great mostly because of the way he films them showing every single detail of brutality. Another reason for it’s greatness is the message. The reality of freedom we live and enjoy started with a dream. A dream turned into reality by men with conviction like William Wallace.That comes with pain and sacrifice,and sometimes involves violence.
I did have some problems with this film though, as many others did when it won Best Picture. There is not much we know about William Wallace, a poem I think, but I couldn’t help myself to think that none of this actually happened. I remember quite faintly, that the big battle scene in the beginning, happened on a bridge in real history, and the primae noctis was never used by King Edward which starts the battles off in the beginning.
Mel Gibson possibly could be the greatest action star of all-time mostly thanks to this. Gibson creates this great character William Wallace, by backing him up with so much charisma, so much courage, and so much humanity, that it’s hard not to wish that he defeats the English. Wallace will be an icon in film for some time now, and when you scratch your head and wonder why, then check out this wonderful scene. Why Gibson wasn’t nominated for an Oscar, still baffles me.
Patrick McGoohan also does a great job at playing Edward Longshanks. He plays the villain the old-school way, but still shows us a great deal of depth, when he’s fighting against his son, demanding terrible orders, and overall being a total and complete jack-ass to everyone he knows. But hey, I hated him so it must have worked.
Consensus: Though it’s not completley accurate, Braveheart is still one of the best epics, with its great action sequences, influential gritty style, as well as a great directing job and acting job from one of the greats, Mel Gibson.
I hate myself. I always thought this film fell under the Gladiator, Forest Gump syndrome where everyone blows them out of proportion and thinks they are the greats movies ever made.
Maybe it’s just that I like smaller, more subdued films.
Am I crazy?
Your not crazy, I just think this movie, is kick-ass, and has a lot of good things going for it.
Not crazy from me Frank. Gladiator is a far superior film in my book as well, though Braveheart is a wonderful and brilliant film.
I’m not that hip to Gladiator either – I think it’s a good movie, but not as remarkable as most people. Crowe screaming and yelling and fighting doesn’t cut it for me.
What does is Crowe in The Insider which I think is an exceptional film, and a remarkable performance.
Frank, ordinarily I’m with you 100% — smaller is better in my book. I’m more of an intimate, not-much-happens character study kinda girl.
But for “Braveheart”? Well, for “Braveheart” I make an exception!
When “Gladiator” came out, I hated it at first because I saw so many elements that seemed ripped straight from “Braveheart.” But they are different, and really I prefer Mel Gibson’s William Wallace to Russell Crowe’s gladiator. It helps that the medieval warfare is as brutal as I’ve ever seen it, and this is the best performance (I think) Gibson has given. EVER. Rewatch the scene where he hunts down the men who have killed his true love; just look at his eyes! They are so … dead and freaky.
Yes! Thank you so much for realizing the greatness in this movie! I understand to a lot of people, Gladiator is very overrated, but Braveheart is the main reason that a lot of these midevil epics are so popular in today’s world.
Ahhhh…………Martin Riggs in the first Lethal Weapon is a going fight with that one M. Still one of my favorite performances EVER.
My favorite Gibson performance will always be in Signs – and after his film, The Passion of the Christ – and his DUI outburst, he’ll always remain on my shit list.
He was incredible in Signs, definitely one of his most noteworthy performances.
this is great fun. turn your brain off and enjoy.
how could it not be good – it has Brian Cox AND Brendan Gleeson
So did Troy…and that had Peter O’Toole as well – and that was pretty shitty.
mel gibson did a great job with this movie. as well as lethal weapon and mad max. he is still the best. he is better than that asshole tom hanks. i would see a mel gibson movie than a tom hanks movie.