Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Which movie do you like the most?

I like Gladiator alot, the story is epic. How a slave defys an emperor, the action is awesome. It's pretty damn cool.

Troy was good but i found it lacking. The action was awesome but, the main characther Achilles i dunno. Most of the movie he's ignorant and cares for no one but his cousin. Then when the ends nears he just becomes merciful out of no where.
Also i just expected more from the movie. In the beggining achilles said imagine a king who faught his own battles. He also said he wanted to become immortally famous. So imagined him doing amazing things throughout the movie.

I have not seen braveheart.

braveheart..but then...i'm biased

Braveheart is the best of those 3, Gladiator is very close though, troy on the other hand is not close to the 2, it lacks the dialog, Directing, and acting, and a bit more battles and, also some of hte stuff they wrote for Achillis was rather bad

Braveheart, hands down.

Braveheart is the best movie of the three. Althought , gladiator is pretty close and troy is only a good movie.

Troy was a good movie it just wasn't very epic or anything. There were some good quotes, like imagine aking who faught his own battles, or so many soldiers die for a king they've nver met. There was a good quote cant remember bout not serving the king.
The movie was only so so in the end.

"Braveheart" was riddled with inaccuracies and a lot was played up. "Gladiator" gets my vote.

Well... I would have to say Gladiator, even though I may get flamed for it. Braveheart was very good as well... but there is just something that I liked about Gladiator. Too bad I lost my copy...

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Well... I would have to say Gladiator, even though I may get flamed for it. Braveheart was very good as well... but there is just something that I liked about Gladiator. Too bad I lost my copy...

well i will stand bye you with picking Gladiator for sure.

gO GLADIATOR!

WHAT got played up in Braveheart?

So your saying that gladiator is more historically accurate then braveheart. Now I'm not saying that bravheart is fact, but its closer to history the gladiator. wait a minute i think i remember reading somewhere that in ancient Rome a slave killed a Cesar then he became Cesar. nope didn't happen

My vote goes to Braveheart just because it's a movie that has drama and a bit of light-heartened fun. However, Gladiator was an excellent movie. Troy doesn't measure to either of them, even though it stars three of the hottest actors in the world, it can't live up to the Ancient Epics of Gladiator and Braveheart.

I like Braveheart, then Gladiator and Troy about the same.

Originally posted by TommyBoy2005
So your saying that gladiator is more historically accurate then braveheart. Now I'm not saying that bravheart is fact, but its closer to history the gladiator. wait a minute i think i remember reading somewhere that in ancient Rome a slave killed a Cesar then he became Cesar. nope didn't happen

"Gladiator" is mostly fiction, taking a few cues from Ancient Rome just for credibility. "Braveheart", like I said, was inaccurate. It's all right here if you want to read about it.

i know that neither of them are documentaries, you just make it sound like gladiator was more real the braveheart. which it isn't. lets just agree that they both have inaccuracies

Well, he may have been saying that Braveheart was supposed to be more real, because it was based on a real man's life and real events, unlike Gladiator, which was Historical Fiction. So, Gladiator did not have to be as historically accurate as Braveheart, and Braveheart apparently wasn't that accurate anyway...

Braveheart hands down.

Troy was shit IMO and Gladiator wasnt much better.

what does IMO mean again?

in my opinion

accuracy doesnt really mean that much in this context imo... they arent documentaries...

i say braveheart, then gladiator...

i don't even include troy because of how bad it was...

^^ yeah, Troy was garbage.

Originally posted by Discos
i very very much enjoyed TROY. i am well into my Mythology and was very taken by TROY.

really.

well here is some things about the film that go against the mythology.

deep breath.

The movie suggests that Troy was sacked about a month after the Greeks landed; Homer's "Illiad" has the siege lasting over ten years. - Menelaus was not slain by Hector; he outlived him and was one of the soldiers in the Trojan Horse. He was eventually reunited with Helen and they apparently lived a happy life until his death in Sparta many years later. - Agamemnon was not killed by Briseis at Troy; he survived and returned home only to be killed by his wife Clytaemnestra and her lover Aegisthus. - Patroclus was not Achilles cousin, he was probably his lover. - Achilles was killed by a single arrow shot by Paris, way before the Greeks built the horse. - Priam was killed by Neoptolemos, son of Achilles. - Patrokles was deadly wounded by Euphorbos and Hector then cut his throat. - Ajax was not killed by Hector, instead he committed suicide, after slaughtering a flock of sheep, which in a bout of madness he mistook for the Greeks that had refused him the armor of the dead Achilles. - Paris died of a poisoned arrow shot by Philoket. - Astyanax, son of Hector, was thrown to his death from the walls of Troy by the victorious Greeks. - Andromache, wife of Hector, was taken as a slave by Neoptolemos. - Aeneas was a son in law to King Priam and the second in command of the Trojan forces. So Paris asking him his name at the end of the movie is rather strange.

this is why i didnt like the movie.

hmmm, i actually never saw braveheart, never saw all of Gladiator, but i did see all of Troy. Troy was a very good movie, i will admit, but from what i did see in gladiator it looked like it would've been better. ill have to see the whole movie then get back to you

braveheart
i hated gladiator and troy was just boring

Braveheart gets my vote for sure.

Whilst I liked both Gladiator and Troy, they just don't attract my attention as much as Braveheart!!

i like troy probly cuz its just one big war and the bad guys win

Another chance to rant about Braveheart. Excellent.

Braveheart is historical mince. I can enjoy the film but I always get pissed off cos of the lack of history.

Wallace did not outlive Edward I
He didn't get his hole from the Queen.
Bruce NEVER fought for England.
Bannockburn did not win Scotland independence.
Wallace wasn't a peasant.

I could go on, but I think this site has finally made me sick of ranting about bloody braveheart.

Originally posted by baracustastic
Another chance to rant about Braveheart. Excellent.

Braveheart is historical mince. I can enjoy the film but I always get pissed off cos of the lack of history.

Wallace did not outlive Edward I
He didn't get his hole from the Queen.
Bruce NEVER fought for England.
Bannockburn did not win Scotland independence.
Wallace wasn't a peasant.

I could go on, but I think this site has finally made me sick of ranting about bloody braveheart.

you could indeed go on...the biggest gripe being that wallace and robert the bruce never met

I didn't see Gladiator, but I liked the other two movies. Braveheart was so good. I thought Troy was good too. I think it's cuz I am really into Greek mythology and stuff. And I know a lot of the things in that movie were inaccurate, but for some reason I was captivated. Lol. I liked how they portrayed the death of Achilles and how the myth about him was created. I dont know. I just dont think it was that bad of a movie...

Originally posted by bakerboy
Braveheart is the best movie of the three. Althought , gladiator is pretty close and troy is only a good movie.

What he said.

Why is this in sci fi/fantasy?

I like Troy in terms of the huge battle scenes.

Gladiator, then Braveheart.

Originally posted by Myth
Why is this in sci fi/fantasy?

shrugrin

People these are movies for pete's sake, they do not have to be historically accurate unless otherwise stated at the begginning or end of the movie, which of the 3 the only one that does sort of commit to that is Braveheart. Gladiator in no way is suppose to be historically accurate, its just a dam cool fictional movie with a dam cool fictional protagonist. And Troy! How is Troy going to be Historically accurate when for the most part none of it is really true. Its a story written by a man, who cares if somebody else decIdes to make a movie out of it and changes some things up, it never really happenned, if you want to find out what really happenned in any of these movies watch the history channel or read a book about them. IMO all three of these movies were highly entertaining (which is the main purpose of a movie) and for what they were, somehwhat informative.

Troy was a big steaming pile of shit bar two or three scenes...

Brendan Gleeson getting paid to beat the shit out of Orlando Bloom (i'd do it for free) was good, and the Achilles v Hector battle, good choreography... Other than that, the movie is nothing but an excuse for Brad Pitt to take his clothes off... Ridiculous...

Originally posted by Clovie
braveheart
i hated gladiator and troy was just boring

How is Troy boring? i could understand lame story, or pointless. But damn near the whole movie was action?

I liked Troy as an action flick. I don't think the story is all that bad either. I like gladiator in an entireley other way. I like it for it's excellent story line and drama. You cannot take one scene out of that move without altering the entire thing. Everything is essential. It's a good movie.

By the way i watch movie's for movies for entertainment. Thats all they are meant to be. They are not documentarys. They are movies.

Originally posted by Stealth Agent
How is Troy boring? i could understand lame story, or pointless. But damn near the whole movie was action?

I liked Troy as an action flick. I don't think the story is all that bad either. I like gladiator in an entireley other way. I like it for it's excellent story line and drama. You cannot take one scene out of that move without altering the entire thing. Everything is essential. It's a good movie.

By the way i watch movie's for movies for entertainment. Thats all they are meant to be. They are not documentarys. They are movies. I didn't like Bloom's monologues

Bloom was a pansy in the movie. He had two small action sceanes. I would say the rest of the action kept me on my feet enough in order to not let orlando bore me though.

I loved Troy. Although it didnt have all the aspects of Iliad still loved it.

I'm partial to Gladiator. I'm not a huge fan of Braveheart and Troy was justbad. Very Very Bad

My vote goes to Gladiator..I love that movie

hmmm, well i saw gladiator a few days ago (all of it this time) and ive gotta say, better then troy. still havent seen all of bravehear, but my vote is gonna go for gladiator

Gladiator wins hands down, braveheart has past its time, and troy was rubbish. In gladiator, the musics and effects are amazing and the actors are brill and can act, i mean Joaquin Pheonix and Russel Crowe, it doesn't get much better, it made me cry at the end crybaby and 'Now we are free' is my fav song of all time!

gladiator gets my vote

braveheart sucks because of mel gibson

yey GO GLADIATOR

^ I luv that sig

Definitely Gladiator. Braveheart was good too and so was Rob Roy.

Troy was rubbish. 'Hector!!!...Hector!!!'...argggg....ughhhh

Why is this in Sci-Fi/Fantasy?

I kind of wish they would have had an alternate ending for Gladiator where Maximus got his army, then had a huge battle against Commodus. Then the two of them ad there fight as they were the only two left standing.horse That would have been great..

^
Nah, that would have been way too scripted and a nice neatly packaged story book ending with of course Maximus defeating Commodus in the end with no loss of life of his own.

Besides, why would Commodus have been the last one standing? He wasn't even a soldier, he didn't fight in any wars. The only way Commodus would have fought him was the way he did in the movie by cheating. He was way too scared to fight someone like Maximus on an even keel and again it wouldn't have been much of a fight cuz he would've gotten his arse kicked.

I like the ending the way it was. It was different and not usually the type of ending that's expected. Truly Fantastic!

Of course that kind of ending can only take place in a fictional movie, in real Rome it would've never happened.

True but it would have been great to see another huge battle. By my meaning of Commodus left standing would be of course because he was not directly involved with the battle.

Just would have loved to see the Praetorian bastards get there's2guns Thats all.

True, it would have definitely made for another great battle scene. Personally, I would have loved to see Quintus die. If there was one thing that bothered me that was it, not seeing him get his deserved justice as well at the hands of Maximus.

'What We Do In Life Echoes In Eternity'

Yeah you got a great point there. He was a two timing f*g...ranting He should have totally gotten his.

Without a doubt Braveheart is the best, anyone who says they didn't choke up when Wallace ws getting tortured and they ask him to scream mercy but he screamed freedom is darn right heartless.

Historically incorrect (like it matters), but Braveheart is one of my favorite movies of all times. Great battles, drama, cinematography and casting. I loved Gladiator as well, allmost as much as Braveheart. Troy was good too, but not nearly as impressive as the other 2.

King Arthur was pretty good, Alexander was horrible! I'm a homo-phobic, lol. Nothing wrong with being gay, just don't tell me about it, too many gay scenes in Alexander...there should've been none, lol.
But those are totally unrelated to this topic, lol, I'm just avoiding making a decision because I enjoyed all three of those movies...
if I had to say though, I would choose Gladiator, Russel Crowe is a phenomenal actor, and the whole movie was very well done, no boring scenes at all.

Gladiator with Braveheart a close second, why is Troy there? Kingdom of Heaven was better.

Funny this topic should be bumped, I'm watching Braveheart right now. I ****ing hate the ending, it makes me hate the English. I've probably posted in this topic already, but I'll say it again, I like Gladiator a bit better than Braveheart, although both are very good.

While we are on the subject, '300' should get a mention.

Haven't seen Gladiator so I can't comment on that.

Braveheart was boring as hell to me.

Troy was alright, but Orlando Bloom irritated me, and the whole story irritates me. So much death for some stupid ***** and her airhead boy friend.

Gladiator, definitely Gladiator. It may not have the best story or characters but i feel that it was filmed better than Troy and Braveheart. Combined with a masterful score, raw acting and stunning visuals it is hard to not get emotional in some way while watching Gladiator. I'm sure that this is a biased answer but Gladiator has always struck a chord with me. It is probably Hans Zimmers score that does it for me.

I'd give Troy the second place. That movie is highly underrated. It takes a lot of flak for being historically inaccurate but out of all of these movies it is probably the most accurate just because it was adapted from a poem that is most likely pure imagination.

I think Braveheart is more professionally filmed than Troy and it also has some of the most visceral and life-like violence you will see in a war movie of it's kind but that movie is one hour to long for me.

You should throw King Arthur and Kingdom Of Heaven in this poll too.

Did someone come into the wrong forum...

I study Classical Languages and I find all three films amusing although I must admitt my preference goes to Troy and Gladiator for belonging to my study domain

Gladiator has some main inaccuracies when it comes to history: some legions are shown that only existed some centuries later and other stuff like that. It's historically correct that Commodus fought in the Colloseum but he didn't kill his father as far as I know but he killed his sister. Also some of the military equipment used in the film, wasn't used in the century in which Gladiator's events take place.

About Troy, it is just a diamond in the rough. There was some much potential but they kind of screwed it up. The credits claim that the film is based on Homer's Illias but some (major) elements such as Aeneas or the Trojan Horse were put in the film although they were mentioned by Vergil in the first age bc, not by Homer (which is 8th century bc).
It just showed too much that the film had to be a blockbuster with loads of action and a love story. Achilles had to live until the very end eventhough in the Illiad he dies before Troy is taken.

That's just my analysis of the movies but I know almost nobody (except for people who actually know something about it) notice these things or find them disturbing but if you spend as much time as me on these subjects, you'll notice them anyway. They're still very decent films that are great entertainment.

Also, why is this in Sci-Fi/Fantasy. It really doesn't belong here...

Originally posted by jaden101
braveheart..but then...i'm biased

............I can't believe you enjoy that horrendous insult to our history and culture.

I deplore that film and all it represents...

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Also, why is this in Sci-Fi/Fantasy. It really doesn't belong here...

Maybe the movie forum, but really, this is an appropriate forum. Action and fantasy, eh?

Braveheart was excellent, although it was historically inacurate in places, that's what the movie makers feel they have to do to make the stories more interesting.
Gladiator was excellent too. troy not so much
I can't remember but in Gladiator did Crowe sleep with the princess?
If he did he shouldn't of because he met up with his wife and son in the afterlife. and it would of been much better like that.

How about a call out for KINGDOM OF HEAVEN? It didn't get the recognition or make the money like these other worthy movies...but had decent actors and acting (liam neeson (sp), edward norton, jeremy irons, etc) and the seige at the end was spectacular.

I would say all of the above but If I had to chose then I would pick Gladiator all the way.

Troy was certainly not the best movie, but I love that story. Hector vs Achilles is a sick movie fight though.

Best movie between Gladiator and Braveheart is tough though. I'd go Braveheart.

Again - Wrong Forum.

Yep we have already established that...

brave heart it is good but the dialogues are not good politician only
speak like that kind of dialogue emotional person always liked braveheart
but true lovers of movies surely like gladiator
braveheart is good but dont compare with gladiator
gladiator rocks

I have seen all three many times, and here are my thoughts...

Braveheart - It was very nice to have a movie with such rawness, but it feels kinda like watching a Mini-Series balled up into one (Watching such a mini-series called Attlla, it felt very similar). The acting was top notch though. They tried to make it sound authentic, but entertaining at the same time. All in all I enjoyed it.

Gladiator - Quite simple in context, but it can come off as sophisticated. They keep you engaged by having a great balance of action, drama, and plot. The acting is very good. The lines are pulled off nicely. The only downside is the selection of actors (in my opinion). But its a great movie.

Troy - A bit disjointed. Not a bad movie, but not the greatest. The action is good, but not that memorable bar a couple of scenes. The acting is okay... But sometimes it looks like it's forced. The isn't that much consistency either. But it isn't that bad. Still worth a watch.

My verdict - My vote goes for Gladiator. Not as rich as Braveheart, but it fills the holes in all the right places.

Troy's the superior action film of the three, with the best visuals and fight choreography. The Hector-Achilles duel was one of the best fights I've ever seen.

Gladiator used to be my favorite "ancient/medieval" film, but after about 10 viewings, I've noticed some problems with the script and performances. Not to mention its historical inaccuracy. Commodus' character was just too crazy. Still good though, Maximus' monologue toward Commodus was chilling.

Braveheart's my favorite of the lot. Great performances can make up for a lot of shortcomings, like the hist.inac., and the condensed timing feel. Patrick McGoohan was badass, and the Battle of Sterling Bridge is still hailed as the best choreographed battle scene in cinema.

Braveheart and Gladiator are two solid action films drenched in drama. I'm about torn on which I like more, slight edge to Gladiator, but only because I greatly enjoy the ancient Roman eetting and Phoenix played one of the most hateable villains on screen. The first large battle in Braveheart > the large opening battle in Gladiator though.

Troy was retarded, enjoyable enough due to some of the fight scenes, but it was basically made so Brad Pitt could display how fit he got for the role and his overall cuteness. Watch the flick, it's a Pitt pose-off.

Did anyone ever read Nick Cage's far fetched script idea for a sequel to Gladiator?

As Maximus is killed at the end of the film, he is sent to Hell (Hades?) where he fights the hordes of demons & other warriors that have died in battle.

Maximus defeats all & becomes the God Of War where he is sent back to earth. He is cursed to have to fight in every battle throughout history & even in defeat & death, he is resurrected to fight all over again.

Cage's script even takes Maximus fighting into WW1 & 2.
The sequel ultimately ends in a huge battle in space...

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Did anyone ever read Nick Cage's far fetched script idea for a sequel to Gladiator?

As Maximus is killed at the end of the film, he is sent to Hell (Hades?) where he fights the hordes of demons & other warriors that have died in battle.

Maximus defeats all & becomes the God Of War where he is sent back to earth. He is cursed to have to fight in every battle throughout history & even in defeat & death, he is resurrected to fight all over again.

Cage's script even takes Maximus fighting into WW1 & 2.
The sequel ultimately ends in a huge battle in space... That. Is. Awesome!

Evidently, Nicholas Cage is the mastermind behind the God of War series.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Did anyone ever read Nick Cage's far fetched script idea for a sequel to Gladiator?

As Maximus is killed at the end of the film, he is sent to Hell (Hades?) where he fights the hordes of demons & other warriors that have died in battle.

Maximus defeats all & becomes the God Of War where he is sent back to earth. He is cursed to have to fight in every battle throughout history & even in defeat & death, he is resurrected to fight all over again.

Cage's script even takes Maximus fighting into WW1 & 2.
The sequel ultimately ends in a huge battle in space...

lol considering the crap that is coming out today that sounds like the best idea for a movie yet.

Scott supposedly is throwing around the idea of Gladiator 2, first it was thought it would be a prequel, but now it looks like a sequel sans Crowe or Phoenix.

AW SH#T F#CK F@CK!!!

I KNEW I MADE A MISTAKE!!!

I DIDN'T MEAN BLOODY NICHOLAS CAGE....I MEANT NICK CAVE!!!
THE SINGER & TALENTED WRITER, NICK CAVE.

I kept telling myself don't get them mixed up....groan

Easily..., Gladiator. Troy and Braveheart are both good films as well though.

Braveheart all the way. The most feel good and patriotic film ever.
SCOTLAND!!!!!!

Originally posted by darthmaul1
Braveheart all the way. The most feel good and patriotic film ever.
SCOTLAND!!!!!!

I'm sure you know it's about 95% fictional. But yeah, dope flick.

Originally posted by Robtard
I'm sure you know it's about 95% fictional. But yeah, dope flick.

Uhhh no it isn't, the way it was told didn't exactly match history (the time was compressed) but all those battles did happen. I'm not sure about the love intrest with the queen? But I would say it's about 30% fictional.

Originally posted by darthmaul1
Uhhh no it isn't, the way it was told didn't exactly match history (the time was compressed) but all those battles did happen. I'm not sure about the love intrest with the queen? But I would say it's about 30% fictional.

A 3 second google search of "how factual is braveheart" netted this, first link:

http://www.scottishhistory.com/articles/independence/braveheart.html

"One of the most common questions I'm asked is how factual Mel Gibson's portrayal of William Wallace was in the 1995 film Braveheart. The short answer is that is hasn't an iota of fact in it. The long answer appears below."

There's more links too, if you feel that one is biased in some manner.

The Scots are also all wearing kilts (too early in history) and they're backwards. I remember once reading that bagpipes didn't belong in that time either, at least not in the manner the film depicts.

Originally posted by Robtard
A 3 second google search of "how factual is braveheart" netted this, first link:

http://www.scottishhistory.com/articles/independence/braveheart.html

"One of the most common questions I'm asked is how factual Mel Gibson's portrayal of William Wallace was in the 1995 film Braveheart. The short answer is that is hasn't an iota of fact in it. The long answer appears below."

There's more links too, if you feel that one is biased in some manner.

This is true, but again, time was construded to tell a story and get the point accross. the battle at bannokburn didn't occur till someting like 10 years after wallace's death.
in the book at the battle of stirling the bridge was there. but in the movie for the first big battle it probably wouldn't of made it as grand. so that is why they changed it up.
the whole point is they told the story and people got the jist of it.

Originally posted by darthmaul1
This is true, but again, time was construded to tell a story and get the point accross. the battle at bannokburn didn't occur till someting like 10 years after wallace's death.
in the book at the battle of stirling the bridge was there. but in the movie for the first big battle it probably wouldn't of made it as grand. so that is why they changed it up.
the whole point is they told the story and people got the jist of it.

The point is, the story we're shown has little to do with facts about William Wallace and Scotland fighting for independence.

It's basically all Hollywood fantasy, but as the guy said, a great film nonetheless.

Historical accuracy should never be the deciding factor for cinematic quality.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Historical accuracy should never be the deciding factor for cinematic quality. That's what documentaries are for.

Almost equally about them, but I'd go with Gladiator.