The trouble with this category, is that obviously the Most Over-rated Oscar winning film is Titanic. That is just in no doubt whatsoever. Therefore, I returned to the oracle of the stupid and indifferent that is Wikipedia and looked at previous Oscar wins. That list, Ladies and Gentlemen is impressive. It is an ode to fantastic film making, much of it groundbreaking and heartbreaking in it's content. Show me the person that does not shiver with the opening lines of 'Last night, I dreamt of Mandarlay...' or cry like a baby with Gone with the Wind....I'll show you a hard hearted soul indeed.
Braveheart...well...let's see what irritates...ummm...Mel Gibson Scottish/Aussie accent which sounds occasionally as if he's got marbles stuffed in his cheek; his hair, which is a mullet by any other name and I suppose, if that's the total amount of ire I can muster about this, then you see why it's on here. It's a mediocre film. It neither raises my heart, as did Gladiator or hurts my soul as did The Deer Hunter. In fact, a far better and underrated film of this type is Rob Roy with Liam Neeson. Though I will admit to some bias as far as Liam Neeson is concerned, he does make me want to lick the screen when I see him with his long hair and in a kilt.
Anyway, Ladies and Gentlemen, my offering for MCW for the Most Over-rated Oscar Win, I give you Braveheart!
It's rubbish as history, too.
ReplyDeleteIm with you on Rob Roy being a better exponent of this type of film (and a similar penchant for Liam Neeson).
ReplyDeleteHowever, I still very much enjoy Braveheart - the kilts, the blue faces, the elderly hero trying to look like a youngster. At the end of the day, it is a good story and well-told :)
Haven't seen it but was considering renting it one of these days.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the heads-up.
dave ~ yeah, I figured that too.
ReplyDeletems cake ~ we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It might be good enough to while away a cold, boring, Winter's evening, but as an Oscar winner? No, not good enough.
mj ~ it is worth seeing. Just don't have any great expectations about it. I'd get Gladiator out instead for a really great movie experience. Or Rob Roy.
Braveheart definitely took some liberties with history and some of the plot was ridiculous (A queen sleeping with the leader of the rebel force that's trying to bring down your country and who probably hadn't taken a bath in like - forever). But I loved the battle scenes, Patrick McGoohan was a great villian as Longshanks and David O'Hara as Stephen was funny as hell. So we'll have to disagree on this one.
ReplyDeleteStephen: [to William Wallace] God tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he's pretty sure you're fucked.
Happy MCW!
You can take my life ... but you can never take my Braveheart!!!!!
ReplyDeleteBuzz, you may love the battle scenes, but they are amongst any of the historical innaccuracies. The great Scots victory under Wallace was Stirling Bridge (the clue to what's missing in the film is in the name - they missed out the bridge, which was a bottleneck and allowed the English forces to become divided - by the diciplined Scots army of spearmen, who marched in solid block, defeating the English horse - not charging around like madmen as in the film).
ReplyDeletebuzz ~ I'm not desputing that it's an entertaining film. Of the crap I watched recently, it's a much higher calibre than Supergator vs. Dinocroc (yes, I really did).
ReplyDeletexl ~ don't worry honey, I don't want your Braveheart. You can keep it dear.
dave ~ exactly that.
Please bear in mind, I'm not quibbling about the entertainment value of Braveheart; it is entertaining.
My point is this: I believe an Oscar winning film should be well beyond bad accents, improbably plot points and inaccurate history. Either that, or it's got to be totally excellent to make me suspend all belief, as Gladiator or Lord of the Rings.
Braveheart doesn't do that.
AMEN! I've rarely been as bored watching a movie as I was watching Braveheart.
ReplyDeleteWell, maybe Lord of the Rings. Yet another overrated movie.
nicely done! And XL stole my line. Bwahaahahah. I never understood why Mel Gibson was cast in this movie, but that's before he went off his rocker and people in H-Wood loved him. I never saw, the paint on his paint was enough to keep me away.
ReplyDeleteHappy MCW!
Remember, Movie Clip Wednesday is open to EVERYONE! next week's theme is "Best Political Thriller".
ReplyDeletecyberpete ~ I don't mind Lord of the Rings, though I have to set a whole day aside to watch the lot. At least I'm prepared to watch it again...more than I can say about Braveheart.
ReplyDeletems boxer x2 ~ thanks honey.
Dave, she means you! You've got to play next week.
Twas the mullet that did me in. I can't abide a mullet, regardless of century.
ReplyDeleteyeah, Mel is like 50 years old and takes a child bride. I have to say that the scene where the queen torments the dying king with the info that her child is that of a scottish man is a satisfying moment. I didnt hate this movie, but there were some lame moments.
ReplyDeleteHappy MCW!!
my entry is here
buzz reminded me how much i liked the crazy irish guy in this. yes!
ReplyDeleteYou know, I've never seen Braveheart, a fact which causes dropped jaws all over the place, particularly when I worked in NYC as it was the first topic that always came up when people found out I was Scottish. How can you be Scottish and not have seen Braveheart? Answer: Easily.
ReplyDeletemoi ~ for me, it's the obvious hairspray job that does it. I just can't look at him.
ReplyDeletek9 ~ agreed that was a great moment, but just not an Oscar moment.
veggie ~ don't rush to see it. If you're bored out of your skull and in channel hopping you fall over it, be entertained. Otherwise, I wouldn't go looking for it.
Another Mel Pearler...
ReplyDeleteThe only good bit was the kilt lifting cancan girls...
princess ~ cancan girls? I must have fallen asleep at that part.
ReplyDelete