kerrywins
(864 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:45 PM
Original message |
Why is Braveheart not the greatest movie of all time? |
tjdee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:46 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I don't think it is...can't pinpoint a reason. |
|
So very many of my male friends point to that as their favorite movie, or one of their favorites...just don't get it.
:shrug:
I do think it must have been a chore for Mel to direct and star in it.
|
Dookus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:47 PM
Response to Original message |
|
maybe because of the suckage?
|
Anarcho-Socialist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 03:40 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Braveheart is enabled with major suckage.
|
pinkpops
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:47 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Because there is too much competition? |
sundog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:47 PM
Response to Original message |
bigwillq
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:47 PM
Response to Original message |
5. I thought Braveheart sucked |
|
Just wasn't interested in yet.
|
ghostsofgiants
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:48 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Because Fight Club is... |
katinmn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
25. Fight Club. It's quite a movie! |
ProfessorGAC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 06:14 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
47. You're Not Supposed To Talk About Fight Club |
|
It's rule #1. The Professor
|
MASSAFRA
(461 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:48 PM
Response to Original message |
neuvocat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:49 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Because it is not The Lord of the Rings. |
DS1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:50 PM
Response to Original message |
9. Because there's no way it should be? |
warrens
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:51 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Oh, come on, watching Mel Gibson being torn to pieces |
|
You can't come much closer to wish fulfillment than that.
|
ReadTomPaine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
32. Point taken, but not good enough. |
|
For instance, that happens all the way at the end.
|
LiberallyInclined
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
49. but you don't actually get to see the disembowelment- |
Wickerman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:52 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Average NetFlix rating is 3 stars out of 5 |
|
so, going out on a limb I'm going to say its not the greatest movie of all time because it has a rating right up there with Addams Family Values, Cabin Boy and Private Benjamin.
Personally, I didn't like it. YMOV
|
ScreamingMeemie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:52 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Because Titanic was better. |
Jack Rabbit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:54 PM
Response to Original message |
13. Because there are dozens of better films |
|
Edited on Mon Apr-18-05 08:56 PM by Jack Rabbit
Citizen Kane The Bicycle Thief Dr. Strangelove Vertigo Some Like It Hot The Maltese Falcon The Searchers Grand Illusion The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari The Last Laugh Metropolis Potemkin Taxi Driver Network many, many more.
|
SnowBack
(335 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 08:58 PM
Response to Original message |
14. The homophobia in it is disgusting |
|
It's a piece of junk if you ask me....
:puke:
|
ReadTomPaine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
35. And completely gratuitous, to boot. |
|
I was struck by the "I hate fags" abrupt crudeness of it's inclusion.
|
sparky_in_ma
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 09:11 PM
Response to Original message |
15. The ending was far too violent |
|
without adding to the story. To be continued in the "Passion".
"Outlaw Josy Wales", best movie.:thumbsup:
|
kerrywins
(864 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
20. conservatives hate nudity |
|
liberals hate violence.....
|
Lorien
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 02:56 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
39. Conservatives hate their lust, and hate |
|
female nudity for having the power to make them lust. They don't see beauty in nudity, or in lovemaking, or in creation itself. Their self hate won't allow it.
They love violence though, because it gives them a sense of control and power over others, when they have none over themselves. Death and destruction Yes, Love and creation, absolutely not-proving once again that there's nothing remotely "Christian" about a republican.
The conservatives I know only find Cathrine McCormick's breast offensive in that film. One even told me that he would allow his 5, 7, and 8 year olds to watch the entire film if only the honeymoon scene were edited out. :eyes:
|
hyphenate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
46. You're partially right |
|
Conservatives hate the fact that sexuality exists for reasons other than reproduction (in other words, they hate when you're having fun having sex) and/or because they get caught abusing it too often (mistresses, getting caught with their dominatrix), masturbating, etc.), and liberals hate violence because they tend to believe we're more civilized (or should be) than we were 200-1000 years ago, which isn't necessarily true.
|
mondo joe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 09:15 PM
Response to Original message |
16. It sucks is why. "Freedom" my ass. |
|
Wallace was a royal himself.
What does anyone think - he wanted to establish a DEMOCRACY?
Then there's the homophobic content.
Bah.
|
Dogmudgeon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
|
Sorry, I didn't see any in the movie (but, in fairness, I did watch it on cable, so they might have edited it out). Could you give a few examples to maybe jog my memory?
Otherwise, I thought it was a pretty good movie. Maybe not the best one ever made, but it was good.
--P!
|
kerrywins
(864 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
21. you didn't know william wallace was scared of gays? |
|
thats common knowledge....thats how he lost....to a gay army....
|
stopbush
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 09:37 PM
Response to Original message |
18. Because Gibson filmed the Battle of Stirling Bridge without the bridge. |
|
And the bridge played a major part in the decision in that battle.
Don't tell me they couldn't afford to build a bridge for the movie.
|
NewJeffCT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
30. that was kind of important, eh? |
|
I thought I read in the history of Wallace that he got beat once by the English & basically went into hiding for several years before re-emerging. And, the whole thing of Wallace against the nobles - wasn't Wallace from a noble family IRL?
Though, the movie did do a good job with humor to get around the fact that Wallace, IRL, was supposed to be a huge man and Mel is not exactly Shaquille O'Neal.
and, I did like the movie quite a bit.
|
Anarcho-Socialist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 03:43 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
43. Exactly, Wallace was 6'8" in real-life n/t |
ReadTomPaine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
36. They claimed money in HC's "History vs Hollywood" ep about it.. |
kodi
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-18-05 09:37 PM
Response to Original message |
Parrcrow
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 07:38 PM
Response to Original message |
22. Because of the script, the directing and the acting. |
chaska
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 07:59 PM
Response to Original message |
23. See Rob Roy. Same movie, but much, much better. |
dflprincess
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
bridgit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 08:27 PM
Response to Original message |
26. tell me why mcgoohan wasn't up for supporting... |
|
as longshanks???????? :shrug:
|
ReadTomPaine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
33. Because he's had finer moments.. |
|
Edited on Tue Apr-19-05 11:57 PM by ReadTomPaine
|
bridgit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #33 |
37. missed point---------->0 |
Abelman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #33 |
|
That would be telling!
BWWAAAHAAAHAA!
|
Robeson
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 08:29 PM
Response to Original message |
27. Because its not Citizen Kane. |
MrSlayer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 08:44 PM
Response to Original message |
28. Very good movie but there were some mistakes. |
|
Like the battle scene where Wallace is running without his sword drawn, then it is, then it isn't. I also liked "The Patriot" better.
|
maveric
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 08:50 PM
Response to Original message |
29. Not to Hijack, but you are beautiful!! |
kerrywins
(864 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
|
ur 2 sweet..... i wish i could get compliments like that in real life....
|
grace0418
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-19-05 11:58 PM
Response to Original message |
34. It's not even in the ballpark. It's just another |
|
vehicle for Mel Gibson to preen in front of the camera. What a self-righteous prick.
|
d_b
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 03:37 AM
Response to Original message |
40. Because it isn't Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers. |
The Magistrate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 03:40 AM
Response to Original message |
41. Because Mel Gibson Is In It, Ma'am |
|
That lets it straight out of consideration. Though if they had actually hanged, drawn, and quartered the fellow at the end, it could have made an impressive run at the title....
|
MrScorpio
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 05:29 AM
Response to Original message |
44. Because it's not Love Actually |
|
(Yeah, I've been on a Love Actually kick lately... I just love that movie)
|
hyphenate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 05:48 AM
Response to Original message |
45. Because it's overly violent |
|
it's directed by fundie Gibson, and it's not a cinematic masterpiece?
|
mr blur
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 07:23 AM
Response to Original message |
48. Because it's just another average film |
|
and there are so many of those.They're even doing remakes of old average films.
|
LiberallyInclined
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-20-05 07:26 AM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 12th 2024, 03:56 PM
Response to Original message |