That was your response?!Author: SM_007 ()
Date: 2000-04-12 00:00:00
Lemme point a couple of things out about Braveheart:
1. Mel Gibson as William Wallace? Hey, I like Mel and think he is a great actor and everything, but seriously, he does not even begin to accuratly portray William Wallace as a person. Maybe the Hollywood version of William Wallace, but he does not portray the real life William, who wasn't exactly likeable. What I would love to see is a real story concerning the events in Braveheart. A movie that has no clear-cut good guys, bad guys, and a movie that doesn't butcher history. The film itself really screwed up the way things happened, and I don't think it's right for them to do that. If they made a movie about Adolf Hitler that basically had him not killing any Jews, don't you think people would be pissed off? William Wallace wasn't a clear-cut "good guy."
2. It's not nice to say someone's opinion is "totally wrong." Especially when that person is looking for a debate and you aren't even backing up your points, opting instead to just have a "What are you smoking?" type of response which irks me. C'mon and gimme some reasons, dammit!
3. Best movies of the year? Says who? The academy? The people who saw it and loved it without actually thinking about (a) how much they screwed up history, (b) how movies like that come out every single year (I think this year's edition was The Green Mile), and (c) how there are better movies that aren't sappy movies with a good ending and so forth out there, that will never get a clean break or hype from Hollywood? As for the academy, well, most people these days already know that they give awards to movies that won't cause any controversy, or in other words, movies which the public has swallowed without giving a fuss over. The winners of the academy awards are always the same people with the same sorta film. This year might have been an exception, but even American Beauty was still family-friendly enough that people enjoyed it. It beat you over the head with its ideals and theme, especially at the very end of the film; I still liked it, though.
4. What do you mean, you don't know where I got the word generic from? I hope I am not the only person here who saw through the high production values, the big name actors, the money, the "He's a loveable hero going against those evil oppressing countries who are chock full o' bad people" plot, instead of having one that makes you QUESTION whether or not he's a good person - I mean, it's a formula. A formula that's in most movies. It didn't impress me at all, to be honest. So even if you disagree, no reason to wonder where I got my ideas from. It's a typical Hollywood movie with a big budget.
Personally, I really like independent films, or at least, films that don't have, need or use a big amount of cash, or have big name actors. Those films are usually the most imaginative films and they have great plots; and I find them a lot more interesting than the next big hyped film that's taking theatres "by storm." If you back up and look at the big picture, you'll probably see where I am comin' from.
It's time to bust a rhyme! *Does the evahl happy disco dance.*
Why I hate Braveheart and Titanic. [I want feedback!] - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
-Die! - BandWidth - 2000-04-13 00:00:00
-Um... - SoulTaker - 2000-04-13 00:00:00
-why I liked them. - Tridus - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
-Uhh you're saying Braveheart is generic? - styx - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
--That was your response?! - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
---Yes it was. - styx - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
----I wouldn't have been able to reply to your points if I hadn't seen your point of view. - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
--You can hate Titantic for all I care though :P - styx - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
---Hehehe. *Stabs Leo DeCaprio to death with a spork.* - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00