They're pretty bad in fact. Probably the two most overrated films made after 1990.
They're pretty bad in fact. Probably the two most overrated films made after 1990.
You're right, they aren't good movies, they're great movies.
I bet you like The Godfather, which is THE most overrated movie of all time.
Newsflash wrote:
They're pretty bad in fact. Probably the two most overrated films made after 1990.
While I would agree that they might be a bit overrated (no way Gladiator should've won best picture), there is no way that you can classify either as "pretty bad".
I'm a bit shocked that Gladiator won Best Picture, but I Braveheart was a great movie and deserved it.
But, the run from 1992-1994 was awesome, with some incredible movies, that in ANY other year in the 90s could have won.
What deserved to win over Gladiator? I bet you can't name two other nominees for Best Picture that year without looking them up.
sounds 'Anti-Australian' to me...
Godfather was made in the 70's, and it is THE most overrated movie of all time. So I guess you lost your bet.
And I don't care about what movies won what awards, that's all bullshit anyone most the time. I care that the public in general worships these movies as masterpieces, when really they are mediocre pieces of trash. Mel Gibson and Russel Crow (sp?) are not good actors at all, why everyone loves them is BEYOND me.
"at my signal, unleash hell" - that quote alone makes gladiator a great movie. [quote]uh oh wrote:
Newsflash wrote:
Godfather was made in the 70's, and it is THE most overrated movie of all time. So I guess you lost your bet.
And I don't care about what movies won what awards, that's all bullshit anyone most the time. I care that the public in general worships these movies as masterpieces, when really they are mediocre pieces of trash. Mel Gibson and Russel Crow (sp?) are not good actors at all, why everyone loves them is BEYOND me.
Sorry, but Russel Crowe is a fine actor. Did you see him in "A beautiful mind" ? Very good performance.
Gibson?? He's ok, not so great. But a decent director.
He's decent in a Beautiful Mind but that's the only movie I can respect him in. He must've laid off the chain smoking for that one.
I thought they were both great, but something about Braveheart really stands out.
The music, the scenery, the battles, that movie was awesome! Wallace's pre-battle speeches and his final 'FREEDOM!' cry is absolutely awe-inspiring. Gibson was amazing in that role.
Commen Cense wrote:
The music, the scenery, the battles, that movie was awesome!
this right here is the reason for this little disagreement. i agree that the music, the scenery, and the battles were great. i doubt you'll get a disagreement.
yet i noticed that you didn't mention the writing or the acting. don't those things seem pretty important? it's what separates great entertainment (braveheart, gladiator, etc.) from art. me, i enjoy both, so you won't get criticism from me either way.
uh oh wrote:
What deserved to win over Gladiator? I bet you can't name two other nominees for Best Picture that year without looking them up.
While I do enjoy Gladiator, I thought Traffic (another nominee that year) was a better film.
I actually think "Braveheart" is a terrific movie. I don't even think "Gladiator" is even decent. The first hour is a total bore.
What about Spy games? LoL!
Gladiator was really good.
Braveheart was alright.
I'll tell you one movie that really sucked:
Spartacus
the end just ruined it for me. I am a history scholar, and I can tell you that Spartacus died in battle in real life.
Braveheart is a rip off of Spartacus.
The main guy has no real personal issues with the ruling Empire until his woman is taken from him and then it's personal! Then let's unite everyone and fight for our freedom... because they took my woman away from me and now I give a shit!
And you want to talk about inaccuracies? Gladiator ends with the Empire reverting to a Republic -- didn't happen!
I had a PHD in English history tell me that Braveheart was close to historically accurate except for one major flaw: That Princess that William Wallace had an affair with was really 9 when he was romping around the English/Scottish countryside.
v1s1t0r wrote:
Braveheart is a rip off of Spartacus.
The main guy has no real personal issues with the ruling Empire until his woman is taken from him and then it's personal! Then let's unite everyone and fight for our freedom... because they took my woman away from me and now I give a shit!
And you want to talk about inaccuracies? Gladiator ends with the Empire reverting to a Republic -- didn't happen!
Longshanks tricked and killed his father, boyhood friend, and many other local townsmen after promising a truce or did you skip the beginning?
Neither movie was supposed to be non-fiction so I don't get where all the bitching is coming from about inaccuracies. It's not like Wallace was wearing a Rolex or anything.
only little girls don't like the movie Gladiator