Suchergebnisse
Suchergebnisse:
In the end, seeing Braveheart 20 years on was bound to be an anticlimactic experience, both because I was dreading it so and because in the end, time has reduced it to just a film—homophobic, reductive, overreaching, but exciting at times and artful in its brutality—and a mighty flawed film at that.
Braveheart's portrayal of Scots and the English is rife with stereotypes and inaccuracies. The film is full of misogyny, with the mistreatment and misrepresentation of female characters.
There was homophobia in the movie, as would have been appropriate for any movie set in that time period with a gay or bi principal character, because the time period (like much of Western history) was extremely homophobic, with execution being a common punishment for gay sex.
Historians haven’t been kind to Edward II and he was deeply unpopular but regardless of his sexual preferences and military ability, Braveheart just comes across as homophobic. Robert The Bruce Bruce was a troubled man during Wallace’s life.
There were equally wrongheaded attacks calling “Braveheart” homophobic because of a scene in which the English king, Longshanks, pushes his gay son’s lover out a tower window. In both cases ...
Braveheart"s representation of Prince Edward, however, is not simply anti-English, nor simply anti-gay: it is part of a much larger aesthetic project in the film, one which uses male sexuality generally, in a variety of different forms, as a means of expressing the moral worth of a nation.
In the mid-90’s, GLAAD organized protests over “Braveheart’s” depiction of a gay character, saying the film displayed “a typical homophobic caricature,” and in 1997, Gibson agreed to ...
