Somehow I have never actually seen Braveheart. Watching it now it isn't very good but are the Scottish people the good guys? Because it portrays them as being less civilized than Africans. Without the convenient prima nocta fantasy I'm not seeing any reason why the Scottish people are the good guys, a people who have somehow made it all the way up to the middle ages and are still living in rickety little huts. Like is that supposed to make them sympathetic? "Look how rustic these people are" ok but they haven't made much progress in building, maybe that speaks to their status as a people
>>222356877That's the highlands, where yes people were poor. All the rich Scots lived in the lowlands, and the only time we see any of that is Robert the Bruce's castle.
Aspergers: The Post
Braveheart is actually very good
>>222356995It completely deserved Best Picture for 1995
>>222356957Is there some sort of historical reason for the divide in the highlands/lowlands?>>222356995Everything with Longshanks is good, everything else feels like a badly done version of Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves
>>222357087Prince of Thieves was dogshit and isn't even 1/100th as good as Braveheart.
>>222357143It's the exact same set up. You've got a little john character, the big brute you have to win over. And you've got a wily christian slater character who Gibson made Irish for some reason. And it is actually worse because it feels like a hollow copy without any meaning behind it.
>>222357197It's not the same, everything you mention is superficial. The only real commonality between them is that they both take place in the middle ages. Braveheart has better writing, better acting, better directing, better everything. And Mel actually tries to sound Scottish while Costner sounds like he's from Iowa. Prince of Thieves was a lazy and forgettable movie. If you want an actually good Robin Hood movie there's The Adventures of Robin Hood, hell even the animated Disney version is better than Prince of Thieves.
>>222356877You have terminal colonialbrain. I guarantee you're brown and worship the whites who colonized you.
>>222357351/thread
>>222357351>>222357400Are we really at the stage where we think that criticism of Braveheart means you are an Indian? It is not a good film. The entire pretext is incredibly flimsy and the only good character is the English guy, negating the entire emotional motivation for the film.
The film was made for an American audience, not a Scottish one. Everything was designed to cater to the American tastes of the '90s.>exploits the Americans' perception of the English as arrogant aristocrats. The prince is portrayed as a effete homo to appeal to that same prejudice.>Scots are noble savages, because this is the decade of Dances with Wolves and Last of the Mohicans. The heroic underdog has to live in a mud hut.>Scots are equated with Irish because lots of Americans are from Irish descent and they supported the IRA before 9/11 gave them a taste of terrorism on their own soil. The Amerimick could watch Braveheart and self-insert as Wallace battling the English.
>>222357959Yeah it feels cheap and cynical, like it is crafted for a specific audience rather than coming from a place of artistic inspiration
>>222357959except it’s even more popular in scotland. disproving your whole point.
>>222358056I'm Scottish and you're full of shit. Wallace is a national hero. Mel Gibson is not. Most of us see the falsehoods in the film because we all studied the Wars of Scottish Independence in school. It's a standard part of the curriculum, so we all know that Wallace didn't cuck Edward II and impregnate his wife.
>>222356877Kino
>>222356877This films defames the great King Edward Longshanks who was a hero of the crusades and who defenestrated sodomites.
Braveheart is about as historically accurate as Star Wars
>>222357559It’s on the same tier as Gladiator. A very watchable enjoyable 6/10 movie
