| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Which one? |
| Braveheart |
|
62% |
[ 30 ] |
| Gladiator |
|
37% |
[ 18 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 48 |
|
| Author |
Message |
chest rockwell
Joined: 16 May 2005
Location: Sanbon
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:31 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Like these polls or discussions get anywhere anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan The Chainsawman wrote: |
| MorgolKing wrote: |
| Dan The Chainsawman wrote: |
| but as a fan of Roman history they *beep* up the whole first scene so bad I nearly walked out of the theater. |
I want to hear some examples of how the first scene was messed up |
The Romans were not known for breaking ranks and charging head long into the enemy with their legionaires. It would have completely negated the advantages given to them by their weapons, armor, shield, and tactics. By remaining in formation they would have remained better protected by presence of numbers and mass of the formation. This would allow them to drive the barbarians back and with the gladius short swords use under hand thrusts to cut the guts out of their opponents. Worse they did not even show the legionaires with their pilums, or lances, that was one of their greatest weapons. The same the lance that prodded christ on the cross was hurled enmasse at the enemy in a huge volley prior to physically engaging the enemy.
In short the movie makers wanted to make the scene more dramatic so they added in all sorts of stupid things that left me annoyed as it paid very little tribute to the fighting prowess of the Roman military machine. |
They use siege weapons when it isn't a siege as if they were modern artillery. They have prepared positions which the Germans are conveniently stupid enough to attack. And the cavalry play a crucial role in the battle instead of a minor supporting role. And they don't throw their pilums.
Later when Roman soldiers form a ring around the gladiators they point their pilums as if they were guns, rather than holding swords.
Other than that though, I liked Gladiator a lot. The cinematography was great and the acting was pretty good too.
Braveheart was good too except for certain irritating details like the idea that the only reason English lords go to Scotland was for 'primae noctis', or the princess who gives to the poor, or the idea of a medieval Scot (or even a modern Scot) shouting 'Frrrreeeedom!!!' when he dies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
el naked mariachi
Joined: 28 May 2006
Location: sounding like Depeche Mode
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Braveheart.
Despite better acting, diretion and production value in Gladiator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greekfreak
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Braveheart.
Gladiator was Ridley Scott's regret for not directing Conan The Barbarian, which looks much better than either film, and he relied far too much on CGI.
Braveheart has numerous editing problems, but the script/humour/character actors were much better than in Gladiator (though Ridley did manage to corral Derek Jacobi!).
Rob Roy was released at the same time as Braveheart and is equally good in different ways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| eamo wrote: |
| Gladiator: Because I have a hate on for Gibson these days.... Peter Pompous is my new name for him. |
ohh dont tell me you're a jew!!
mel is awesome!! always has and always will!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
FFFRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDOOOOOOOOOMMMMMM
come on!! everyone loved this movie when it was first released back in 93
its an awesome MOVIE!! and kicked serious ASS!!!
ive seen this movie about 50 times!! its my all time favorite movie..
nothing comes close to this movie!! its everything an Epic should be!!
mel deserved the two goldern boys without a doubt!!
gladitor was a good film.. but not fantastic!!
mel turned down the role of maximus and told ridley to give it to russel crowe!!
russel was great in the movie! but gladitor had alittle bit to much CGI
braveheart was raw film making!!
braveheart hands down!! for me.,. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:43 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
1) No roman emperor was ever slain by a gladiator in the Coliseum. (Commodus was actually strangled by a gladiator/wrestler in his bath in a plot by his mistress). So nothing historical here.
Opening scene? That Roman armor is way cleaner than it should've been.
2) The year before Gladiator won an oscar for best movie, American Beauty won and Magnolia lost. Magnolia was wayyyyy better than any movie that came out the year Gladiator won.
3) Some parts of Braveheart are silly (see mooning the enemy), but, were it Gladiator, it would've ended with William Wallace slaying the King of England in a cage match.
4) Ergo, silly vs. ridiculous.
Braveheart, fer sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:33 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
2) The year before Gladiator won an oscar for best movie, American Beauty won and Magnolia lost. Magnolia was wayyyyy better than any movie that came out the year Gladiator won.
|
Magnolia: biggest piece of garbage ever commited to film. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Billy Pilgrim
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:42 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
2) The year before Gladiator won an oscar for best movie, American Beauty won and Magnolia lost. Magnolia was wayyyyy better than any movie that came out the year Gladiator won.
|
Magnolia: biggest piece of garbage ever commited to film. |
Keep on trying, mate. The title of World's Worst Taste in Everything is well within reach for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:06 pm Post subject: Re: Movie Poll: Braveheart vs Gladiator |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
Ok, which was the ultimate "My family/lover was murdered by an evil ruler/state and Im going to get revenge and kill a whole bunch of people with a sword" flick.
I chose these 2 cause I think they are the best ones in this genre and also because they are the only ones that actually brought a tear to my eye. |
Using these criteria, why not include, "The Princess Bride?"
"Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my Father. Prepare to die." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan The Chainsawman
Joined: 05 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Now that movie rocked. Andre the giant on silver screen heheh.. priceless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiwigirl :O)
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bundang
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i like gladiator better as i have a fascination for the ancient civilisations...it was awesome to see how they recreated the colliseum (???? spelling) in rome...
braveheart had some good one liners..
"you may take our lives but you'll never take our freedom" (or something to that effect..ive not seen the movie in a while)
but lets face historical accuracy is not always important when making a hollywood blockbuster...
kg  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll never understand why people get bent out of shape over a HOLLYWOOD movie being historically inaccurate. It's bloody entertainment! If you want accuracy, stick to the Discovery Channel of National Geo.
Jinju, great call on Magnolia. Are you sure you're really a photographer? You seem way too normal to have any artisitc talent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Newbie wrote: |
I'll never understand why people get bent out of shape over a HOLLYWOOD movie being historically inaccurate. It's bloody entertainment! If you want accuracy, stick to the Discovery Channel of National Geo.
Jinju, great call on Magnolia. Are you sure you're really a photographer? You seem way too normal to have any artisitc talent. |
Magnolia was the most disjointed movie ever. Would be ok if atleast one of the storylines in it was entertaining. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
somebody mentioned the patriot. i'm no movie snob. i liked braveheart, and i've sat through gladiator more than once. but i'm currently surviving through 'the patriot', with the help of three liters of hite, and it's still as atrocious as i remember it being.
i just saw the scene where the bad guy shoots the reverend, and the reverand has just enough strength before he dies, to toss his musket up to mel gibson's son to shoot the bad guy, who then feigns dead long enough to stab mg's son, who takes a full five minutes to die.
think that's bad?... how about the line about twenty minutes ago?
"may i sit here?" "it's a free country... or at least... it will be."
if jinju said the sky is blue, i might argue with him. but as much as it pains me, i have to agree that 'the patriot' was crap. no... not crap. if crap were a living being which consumed matter, 'the patriot' would be what was excreted by said living crap.
don't get me wrong. i really wanted to like it. i was still riding on the wave of braveheart when i heard that mel gibson was going to be doing a film about the american war of independence. outside of world war two, that's the only other war i really had any interest in.
that film only served to feed into what jinju claims to think about americans in general. it was, and is, truly painful to watch.
mr. chainsaw man, believe me that i hold you in the highest regard. but please tell me what, outside of mel gibson going apesh*t with a tomahawk, you found at all good about this film. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
