Another film comparison to ponder upon.
Easily Lawrence. They spent years of on location shooting getting every natural special effect right, and every shot with perfect lighting. They went to much more painstaking lengths to evoke the period. Thousands of set pieces, costumes and actors that are so much more convincing than in Braveheart. It takes us through much more space and time. The score alone is far more grand. The script covers a whole lot more ground. Lawrence feels so much more massive of a film when you watch it.
I will admit, however, that Braveheart’s main character fits the “hero” archetype more closely, lending itself to a traditional epicness.
You’re kidding, right?
No question…LAWRENCE OF ARABIA contains some of the greatest images ever put on film. BRAVEHEART is a very good movie…but LOA is in the pantheon (along with CITIZEN KANE, POTEMKIN, INTOLERANCE, 8 1/2 etc)
Lawrence of Arabia, for sure, and no question. The first time I saw it was in the 1970s, well after it came out, but on a BIG SCREEN. My Dad took me, knowing it was an epic worth seeing in a theatre. Once you see it that way, you’ll realize that much more so why it’s considered an epic. The desert scenes alone are worth it, but of course so are the great performances throughout by many great actors, British and otherwise, not to mention Lean’s direction. And also the incredible Maurice Jarre score.
All I can remember from Braveheart is Mel Gibson with a bad Scottish accent and super mullet yelling “Freedom!”
Not so epic.
Not even taking into account film quality, LoA just feels more like an epic film to me, whereas Braveheart just seems like a long movie.
Danny, you sometime scare me. Do you honestly think these two films are even comparable? Or is it the ‘Best Picture’ part that gets you most? You do seem to be fascinated by Oscars and, forgive me if I’m overreaching, but I’ve read enough of your posts and it seems you equate “Oscar Winner” with"Great Film." Nothing could be further from the truth.
Sometimes … Every once in a while … Rarely … the “Academy” will get it right and actually award something or someone with a statue based solely on artistic merit or simply because its greatness is too obvious to ignore (let’s all assume it was thus with Lawrence of Arabia). But this always is the exception rather than the rule. The Oscars are good to study in terms of history and sociology and to see where the moods of the film community and sometimes the country were at a certain period. That’s about all they’re good for unless you win one and then you have a nice conversation piece.
I was there the night when Sidney Poitier said Braveheart won. There were already groans in the audience, and at the parties afterwards there was open laughter about how future generations were going to cal it a colossal boner to choose that film.
I saw Lawrence of Arabia on the big screen when I was in college. The visuals were impressive, and they were memorable moments, but, overall, I didn’t really enjoy the film. Honestly, I enjoyed Braveheart a lot more. Basically, Braveheart worked better for me as an action-adventure than LoA. Indeed, do people even consider the latter an action-adventure film? (Not that it has to be, but I’m just wondering.)
Christopher said, Danny, you sometime scare me. Do you honestly think these two films are even comparable?
If he did, I’d guess you just made him feel bad—at least I might feel that way, especially if I were a young person (I’m not sure about Danny’s age.) Anyway, as I said above, I enjoyed Braveheart more. I’m not sure if it’s better than LoA, though. I’m curious to hear what makes LoA so great.
Jazz : You know, LoA wasn’t my cup of tea either, but like I said I would definitely categorize it as an Epic but I’m not sure I’d categorize Braveheart as one. So I’m wondering, Danny were you questioning this aspect or just looking for which film people liked more??
The LoA blu-ray is coming out next month, correct? Long time coming.
Oh yeah, I forgot “epicness” was the issue. Several ideas come to mind when I think of an epic film: “grand visuals,” a long journey and maybe huge set pieces involving lots of people. On all three counts, LoA probably surpasses Braveheart, at least in terms of filmmaking. In terms of which movies was more enjoyable to me, I’d take Braveheart, though (although it’s not a film I love).
What Sepesy and Brad said.
Larry of Arabia is finally coming to BD this fall.
BRAVEHEART is the FORREST GUMP of epics, while LAWRENCE OF ARABIA is the LAWRENCE OF ARABIA of epic filmmaking. LAWRENCE never panders to its audience the way Gibson’s putrid atrocity does.
If you look at my filmography, I saw parts of Braveheart and HATED it. The fact that it had won so many Oscars bewilders me.
Yep, Braveheart is miles and miles and miles behind Lawrence of Arabia as an epic.
It’s like someone put “period drama” and “action flick” into Jeff Goldblum’s telepod. They don’t splice very well.
In fact, as a Scot, it’s an insult to have a major part of our history summarised to the world with a Mel Gibson project (what’s worse is everyone in Scotland seems to love it – any excuse to seem patriotic, I guess). The only redeeming quality is the magnificent score, but it can’t prevent Braveheart from being a complete disaster.
Perhaps your question, Danny, should’ve been: Is there anybody out there in the world who likes Braveheart more than Lawrence of Arabia? If such a thing is possible. Cause it’s difficult enough just to imagine.
In LAWRENCE, the hero’s descent into bloodthirsty butchery (the appalling attack on the Turkish soldiers) is shown with real horror and revulsion, and is condemned pretty heartily throughout the rest of the film (“You talk to me of bloodshed?!”) as opposed to BRAVEHEART, where the hero’s descent into bloodthirsty butchery is applauded with a fervor that really nauseates.
LAWRENCE is anti-savagery. BRAVEHEART is pro-savagery.
Braveheart is boring, I haven’t even seen Lawrence of Arabia, but just the pictures and clips make the movie look almost breathtaking. With out a doubt, Arabia is more epic, and that’s coming from a guy who has only seen photos of the film.