跟随勇敢的心读后感，跟随勇敢的心会让人记住一些词，记住一些人和书的名字，有助于生活。那读者是否被这本书吸引了呢?下面是我精心为你整理跟随勇敢的...
跟随勇敢的心读后感
跟随勇敢的心会让人记住一些词，记住一些人和书的名字，有助于生活。那读者是否被这本书吸引了呢?下面是我精心为你整理跟随勇敢的心 读后感 ，一起来看看。
跟随勇敢的心读后感篇一
在一个不易动情，在一个娱乐至上;在一个连雅致点的抒情也难觅，在一个连幸福的含义也改了的物理时代，书中的那些词、那些人、那些事无不都是对生命的召唤!像这样读到哪里，手中的笔就勾画到哪里、心受的撞击就跟随到哪里的书，在我的阅读里，仅寥寥几本，清晰可数。
任何升华，都需要一个开端!
“人类的善良品质，犹如一种奇妙的花香，从这本镶金边的书里飘了出来”，打开《跟随勇敢的心》，你将经历一次精神风暴，你将抚摸到生命的硬度。书中讲述了一些伟大的心灵、一些伟大的著作，这些伟大的心灵和著作曾携着电、裹着雷，闯进作者的不眠之夜。接下来，这“电”，将闪过每一个读者的心头;这“雷”，将响过每一个读者的头顶。正如作者在书的前言中所说的：“他们是锐角，暗夜中最嘹亮和惊险的‘锐角’。像矛刺、像号筒、像钢钉、像蒺藜，锋芒所向、剑气所指，无不是黑夜中最黑、最毒、最凶、最险的东西……他们是诗人，是作家，更是斗士和良心;是知识分子，更是真正的爱国者和人道者。”
他们是——托斯妥耶夫斯基、奥威尔、加缪、索尔仁尼琴、伯尔、昆德拉、爱伦堡、克里玛、茨威格……书中有一个长长的名单，我们可能记不下他们中每一个人的名字，但更重要的是，我们不可能遗忘他们所做出过的艰难的伟大 反思 ，卓绝的反抗勇气，朝圣者的虔诚姿态，以及对人类自由精神的拼死坚守。他们显示着另一种活法，足以令一个活在名利场、黄金屋里的当下人——感到敬畏和惊羡，喟叹自身的平庸和粗糙，把自己看作是一个失败的人。
掌握了文字的人就是掌握了生命密码的人!
对作者文字的钟情到了想背诵整本书的地步，而后是学习之，模仿之!之前有读过作者的书《精神明亮的人》，并激动地推荐给了学生。
阅读《跟随勇敢的心》是一个整个情思都为页面上的词、句、段落所辐射出来的能量吞没的过程。分不清是作者在叙述，还是那些人物在发言。明明你能感觉到那一事件的沉重、那一存在的理性、那一思想的宏大，但你会不停顿地情绪在场，被震撼、被撞击、被抚慰、被感动!
我愿意长久地驻足在这样的语言胜地：
一个人在单独状态下容易恢复生命的真实。做一些含有孤独意味的事。权力欲望无边无际，它垂涎的是人之全部。
正统的思想就是不思想
如果你感到做人应该像做人，即使这样想不会有什么结果，但你已经把他们给打败了
进入“大事业”的行列，犯罪也就不再是犯罪。
我交给你今后道路上的座右铭
主人公虽是小人物，但沉溺的心理角色确实拿破仑
任何一种“主义”，都自以为掌握了绝对真理，破解了人类历史的方程和密码……也总试图用自己的原则和尺度占领世界，以自己的标准改造或消灭别的标准。
现世所有的明智，都享用了时间的利息。
同样夺人性命，但操作方式和杀人名义不同，凶手的权能和暴力解说词不同，结果也就不一样了。
一旦信仰成了行为的盾牌，个人的有限行为便被放扩成集团和民族在场的无限行为……
在动物庄园，没有这种集体主义的匍匐和催眠曲般的“咩咩”声，“拿破仑”什么也做不成。
“人”被世俗规则判了死刑。
这世界竟容不下一个按自己逻辑来生活的人!任何想溜出界的“局外人”都难逃“界内”的追击和惩罚!
做一个词语和表情上的爱国者是很方便的……
有的人活着，就已经成了纪念碑
我但愿，有头脑的躯体，变成街衢和国土
对他的爱，如同一切巨大的爱一样，很快就耗尽了语言所拥有的最好词句
美好的愿望和决心即是全诗的逻辑终点
哪怕情人之间，也只拥抱了他们共同的东西
为你一个人，认识了所有的痛苦
你必须生存到那想要哭泣的地步
跟随勇敢的心读后感篇一
在一个不易动情，在一个娱乐至上;在一个连雅致点的抒情也难觅，在一个连幸福的含义也改了的物理时代，书中的那些词、那些人、那些事无不都是对生命的召唤!像这样读到哪里，手中的笔就勾画到哪里、心受的撞击就跟随到哪里的书，在我的阅读里，仅寥寥几本，清晰可数。
任何升华，都需要一个开端!
“人类的善良品质，犹如一种奇妙的花香，从这本镶金边的书里飘了出来”，打开《跟随勇敢的心》，你将经历一次精神风暴，你将抚摸到生命的硬度。书中讲述了一些伟大的心灵、一些伟大的著作，这些伟大的心灵和著作曾携着电、裹着雷，闯进作者的不眠之夜。接下来，这“电”，将闪过每一个读者的心头;这“雷”，将响过每一个读者的头顶。正如作者在书的前言中所说的：“他们是锐角，暗夜中最嘹亮和惊险的‘锐角’。像矛刺、像号筒、像钢钉、像蒺藜，锋芒所向、剑气所指，无不是黑夜中最黑、最毒、最凶、最险的东西……他们是诗人，是作家，更是斗士和良心;是知识分子，更是真正的爱国者和人道者。”
他们是——托斯妥耶夫斯基、奥威尔、加缪、索尔仁尼琴、伯尔、昆德拉、爱伦堡、克里玛、茨威格……书中有一个长长的名单，我们可能记不下他们中每一个人的名字，但更重要的是，我们不可能遗忘他们所做出过的艰难的伟大 反思 ，卓绝的反抗勇气，朝圣者的虔诚姿态，以及对人类自由精神的拼死坚守。他们显示着另一种活法，足以令一个活在名利场、黄金屋里的当下人——感到敬畏和惊羡，喟叹自身的平庸和粗糙，把自己看作是一个失败的人。
掌握了文字的人就是掌握了生命密码的人!
对作者文字的钟情到了想背诵整本书的地步，而后是学习之，模仿之!之前有读过作者的书《精神明亮的人》，并激动地推荐给了学生。
阅读《跟随勇敢的心》是一个整个情思都为页面上的词、句、段落所辐射出来的能量吞没的过程。分不清是作者在叙述，还是那些人物在发言。明明你能感觉到那一事件的沉重、那一存在的理性、那一思想的宏大，但你会不停顿地情绪在场，被震撼、被撞击、被抚慰、被感动!
我愿意长久地驻足在这样的语言胜地：
一个人在单独状态下容易恢复生命的真实。做一些含有孤独意味的事。权力欲望无边无际，它垂涎的是人之全部。
正统的思想就是不思想
如果你感到做人应该像做人，即使这样想不会有什么结果，但你已经把他们给打败了
进入“大事业”的行列，犯罪也就不再是犯罪。
我交给你今后道路上的座右铭
主人公虽是小人物，但沉溺的心理角色确实拿破仑
任何一种“主义”，都自以为掌握了绝对真理，破解了人类历史的方程和密码……也总试图用自己的原则和尺度占领世界，以自己的标准改造或消灭别的标准。
现世所有的明智，都享用了时间的利息。
同样夺人性命，但操作方式和杀人名义不同，凶手的权能和暴力解说词不同，结果也就不一样了。
一旦信仰成了行为的盾牌，个人的有限行为便被放扩成集团和民族在场的无限行为……
在动物庄园，没有这种集体主义的匍匐和催眠曲般的“咩咩”声，“拿破仑”什么也做不成。
“人”被世俗规则判了死刑。
这世界竟容不下一个按自己逻辑来生活的人!任何想溜出界的“局外人”都难逃“界内”的追击和惩罚!
做一个词语和表情上的爱国者是很方便的……
有的人活着，就已经成了纪念碑
我但愿，有头脑的躯体，变成街衢和国土
对他的爱，如同一切巨大的爱一样，很快就耗尽了语言所拥有的最好词句
美好的愿望和决心即是全诗的逻辑终点
哪怕情人之间，也只拥抱了他们共同的东西
为你一个人，认识了所有的痛苦
你必须生存到那想要哭泣的地步
勇敢的心读后感
勇敢的心读后感 （一）
《勇敢的心》是一部悲壮的、融合血泪传奇史诗片。它所获得的奖项包括在1996年第68届奥斯卡金像奖角逐中获得最佳影片、最佳导演等5项大奖。
为什么《勇敢的心》这部影片能获得如此多的荣誉，而且影片上映后卖座率空前呢？
首先，此部影片是根据13世纪末发生在苏格兰的真实事件改编而成。主人公威廉·华莱士，不但确有其人，而且他的英雄事迹更使得他成为苏格兰的民族英雄。这在一定程度上提高了影片的真实感和历史感，在这方面上就比其它历史题材的影片来得真实；外加正义感十足，主人公的勇敢与对“自由”的向往，无不引起了观众的共鸣。
最重要的是，在当今影坛娱乐片盛兴，技术电影一味追求消遣、刺激和高票房的同时，《勇敢的心》大胆创新，起用了沉重压抑、忧郁愤懑的历史题材，将公元十三世纪的苏格兰人民大起义这一重大历史事件搬上银幕，以宏伟壮阔的气势为影片赢得了史诗巨片的称号。在影片中我们看到苏格兰的山脉、森林和村庄，凄婉的风笛和苏格兰人民在贫苦中发出的反抗的凄厉的呼号，人们感受到了真实的生活和历史。
同时梅尔·吉卜森除饰演男主角外也自任导演，他在影片的结构上。也没有忽略人们的欣赏心理。在刀光剑影铁血争战中，缠绵着温柔的爱情主题，让人体会到英雄传说的荡气回肠与铁血柔情。
影片中的华莱士是一个命运多羁的人物，他返乡是希望能过平静的生活，但无奈的是，此时的苏格兰仍处于暴君“长腿”爱德华的残酷统治下。曾经也是因为爱德华对苏格兰的暴政，华莱士失去了父亲和哥哥。
他注定摆脱不了暴君爱德华的魔掌。其实全苏格兰人民都被掌控在爱德华的魔掌中，但是华莱士是第一个揭杆起义的人，失去父亲和哥哥的他在修复好自己内心的伤痛后，竟又再次失去了自己的爱妻。这种伤痛化作了悲愤，更多的应该是愤怒。
华莱士的行为得到了许多人民的响应，但是就在他的军队势如破竹的时候，华莱士又再次受到了伤害——华莱士遭到联合的`苏格兰贵族的背叛，在福柯克之役战败。
后来华莱士与多次帮助他的伊沙贝拉。再后来华莱士再次被出卖——被布鲁斯的父亲及其他贵族出卖，华莱士被抓住了，而布鲁斯也正式与父亲决裂。
相信到此时，华莱士对人性的丑恶一面已经看得太透彻了，对于命运的不公，他也只能承受。
华莱士在受到英格兰行政官审判时，只要他承认叛国罪就可以减轻罪刑，然而华莱士坚决不向罪恶妥协，声称他从未效忠于爱德华。在伦敦的审判广场上，华莱士遭受各种折磨仍不肯屈服，此时连伦敦的群众也被华莱士的勇气所感动，纷纷大喊审判长开恩。
华莱士利用仅剩的最后一口气大喊：“自由（Freedom!!!）。”
在华莱士眼中，没有名利，没有金钱，有的只是对真实的幸福，和平，人与人之间的平等和真情的追求。
在丑恶的年代，华莱士显得格外美丽，他的精神，也愈加熠熠生辉。
勇敢的心读后感 （二）
这是一部悲壮的、融合血泪传奇史诗片。这是一个为了自由，为了国家，为了民族，为了爱情，英勇作战，坚贞不屈的英雄故事。
影片根据13世纪末发生在苏格兰的真实事件改编而成。故事主人威廉·华莱士，不但确有其人，而且他的英勇事迹更使得他成为苏格兰的民族英雄。《勇敢的心》主要描述这样一个故事：苏格兰被英国统治，威廉·华莱士的父亲被英国人杀害，本来愿意做一个安分守己的人，然而妻子梅伦却被英国贵族无理抢去，并遭杀害，华莱士终于爆发了，在广大村民高呼“英雄之子”的呼喊声中，他们揭竿而起，杀英兵宣布起义。
《勇敢的心》大胆创新，起用了沉重压抑、忧郁愤闷的历史题材，将公元十三世纪的苏格兰人民大起义这一重大历史事件搬上银幕，以宏伟壮阔的气势为影片赢得了史诗巨片的称号。在影片中我们看到苏格兰的山脉、森林和村庄，凄婉的风笛和苏格兰人民在贫困痛苦中发出的反抗的凄厉的呼号，人们感受到了真实的生活和历史。他在影片的结构上，也没有忽视人们的欣赏心理。在刀光剑影铁血争战中，缠绵着温柔的爱情主题，让人体会到英雄传说的荡气回肠与铁血柔情。
影片中的主角威廉·华莱士，苏菲·玛索的演技也是可圈可点的。片中饰演威廉·华莱士的是着名的演员梅尔·吉布森，他那棱角分明的脸庞、英俊刚毅的气质、至刚至阳的男人血性，使他完美地为世人奉献了用生命b^卫神圣家园的伟大的爱国者，凭着自身的实力成为好莱坞顶级的电影巨星。在片中他那深邃的眼神透着无比的坚毅，当英军围攻苏格兰军队时，华莱士和他们的士兵正在按他们的安排进行浴血奋战时，这个时候原来答应好做接应的苏格兰贵州军队却望着他们傻笑，领军的手还骑着马在原地打圈，华莱士拿着剑停下了，他望着他们，一种很复杂的表情，他的眼神里满透着不解和愤怒，华莱士很聪明，但是他始终不能了解为什么他们要这样子做，这一瞬间时间凝固了，很让人有一种放弃的感觉，他将那种感觉饰演的很好。
在视听语言方面，该片构图角度多变，战场气势恢弘。整个片子飘荡着苏格兰的风笛，我们还可一看见苏格兰的美丽自然风光，与当时的格局形成对比，又凸显凄凉。该影片对于景别的运用，也下了一番功夫。在影片中，采用较多的中景和全景。景别的运用，使影片的剧情叙述，人物思想感情的表达，人物关系的处理更具表现力。
整个影片的节奏有松有驰。影片前面开始的部分节奏比较缓慢，还伴随着轻缓的风笛声及音乐；后面的一些部分节奏较快，在战斗时，节奏比较紧促，给人以紧张感，压迫感，战斗结束之后，节奏舒缓开来，在节奏上从急促到舒缓的变化，使观者的心理得到调整。整体来说遵循了画面内容的科学性、运动变化的合理性原则。
整个影片的镜头特点比较稳，使用摇镜头和跟镜头比较多，有些是推拉镜头。角度常用水平和俯拍，这样有利于观众看到事情发展的情节和演员做动作时的一个空间位置关系，俯视的镜头使视野更开阔。从光线色彩方面来讲，光线很多用的是前侧光与侧逆光，也采用了脚光，使片中的一些人物更加恐怖，起到丑化人物的效果。在色彩上，服装与环境的搭配还是比较和谐的，整个故事是在一片暗绿中展开，服装多是冷色调的。当然，还有一些温馨的画面，画面亮度调高，不再那么昏暗。
当然我觉得，有些地方是不是可以更好一些？比如，那段华莱士与梅伦的爱情可以在唯美一些，这样可以与当时的残暴局面形成更鲜明的对比；再比如，结局那段能否再往后延长一点，我想看到胜利的曙光。
无可否认的，这是一部好莱坞式的英雄片的巅峰之作，几乎包括了此类影片的所有元素，战争、英雄行为、爱情，背叛。英俊刚毅的男演员，高贵美丽的女影星，三千人，二百匹马的宏大战争场面，都为影片增色不少。
它是一部具有深刻民族主义和政治内涵的史诗巨片，一段缠绵而令人荡气回肠的铁血柔情。
勇敢的心读后感 （三）
现在的我是用什么样的心情在敲打键盘，感动么？不，也许更应该说是震撼。当William Wallace受着酷刑大声吼出freedom自由的时候，我留下了眼泪。正如老师所言，这句台词被华莱士吼得撕心裂肺。三个小时的电影却让我感觉自己被带入了那个时期，那个苏格兰人民为自由而反抗长腿国王暴政的时期。就让我把它当成一篇日记来些吧，写出自己的真实感想。
电影开始是一名俊俏的苏格兰小男孩出现在荧幕中，他与父辈进入了一间屋子，里面却尽是被吊起来的死尸，不得不说我自己都被那血腥的场面给吓到了。尸体们的眼睛都睁得圆滚滚的，从他们眼中我看到了愤怒与不甘，这就是死不瞑目了吧。之后，小男孩目送着父辈出门远征，回来的却是冰凉的尸体。我无法想象，一个年纪那么小的孩子该如何承受这般残忍的打击，可他仍旧留着泪接受了这个事实并随着舅舅离开了故乡。这个小男孩就是故事的主人公—威廉。华莱士。许多年过去了，学有所成的华莱士已经成年，回到了他的故乡展示了他的才华。令部落人民失望的是，他的目的只是安心种田，成家立室，安稳的过着平凡的日子。原来的华莱士愿望是那么的平凡，但谁说人就不能追求平凡的生活了？可偏偏世界总爱与人们开玩笑，很多时候总是事与愿违。在华莱士结婚后的第二天，他的妻子就遭到英格兰士兵的猥亵并被军官抹了脖子，一条鲜活的人命就这样被结束了。随后，华莱士以同样的方式结果了军官连同他所带领的士兵们的性命，小获胜利。
自此，华莱士没有任何苏格兰贵族的支持，单独带领着苏格兰人民奋起反抗。记得他对苏格兰贵族布鲁斯说过这样一句话：你们身为贵族，不应该认为人民是为你们效忠的，而是要用你们作为贵族的权利去维护人民的自由。他带领着平民军队四处征战，用他的智慧与勇气，一次又一次地战胜了英格兰重骑兵队。说到这里我想起了一幕让我作呕的场面，就是当苏格兰人民聊起裙子露出他们的臀部以及生殖器官向英军挑衅的时候，我当时就想把电影给关了，直到现在我都认为这部电影十分黄暴。虽然那些残忍的可怕的场面的确让我看到了苏格兰人民伟大的精神，但同时也让我感到无比恶心，这视觉刺激实在是太恐怖了，也许我的承受力太弱吧。而后在华莱士急需帮助，不得不与苏格兰贵族联合起来才能打败英军获得自由的时候，却遭受到了背叛，甚至还险些付出了生命的代价，华莱士就用他的方式开始了他的报复。但最后还是因为对布鲁斯的信任，两人都跌进了布鲁斯的父亲所设计的陷井，华莱士被送入大牢。
到了这，故事也就差不多收关了，期间我并未提及英格兰王妃与华莱士的邂逅，从某个角度来说我是不太喜欢王妃的，即使她很好她两次帮华莱士及其军队解围，因为我还是觉得她与华莱士背叛了美伦—华莱士已故的妻子。在邢台上华莱士的不屈服让我敬佩，他的智慧让我敬佩，他为人民争取上天赋予大家的自由让我敬佩，他真的是一个伟大的人。光用我的语言真的说不出这部电影所给我带来的震撼，我的泪应该不仅是为华莱士所流，还有他身后的为自由而浴血奋战的人民们。每一个我都非常钦佩，他们有勇气有追求，并且在华莱士死了之后完成了他的目标。
没错，我们每个人都应该享有享受自由的权利，任何人都不需要去效忠谁。我们每个人应该做的是效忠自己，对自己负责并且要为自己所拥有的或是所梦想的一切努力的去奋斗。《勇敢的心》给我带来了追逐梦想的勇气，告诉我不论何时何地自己一定要有一颗勇敢的心。
勇敢的心英文观后感
[勇敢的心英文观后感]Let us recall again the side to see the long process of history, how to create heroes, you will find from our own side, a life .There is a direct their shadow. First, the inheritance of childhood Wallace is not natural endowment from the hero, at best, is the future generations of civilians, although his father had led a The small protest, as compared to his later, many of immature, unsuccessful factor. His father was then the representative of the civilian population, he uprising, power lies not in its own class on free awareness and evaluation. Some Sense, he is in the conspiracy of hate and who are loyal to the feudal lords of the country against the conviction, not even defeat Opponents of intent, only to let him know that tyrant, civilians also have the courage to fight. England foot-long expansion annexation to the Scottish territorial ambitions, cloth snared all participants in the peace negotiation of the assassination of the Scottish your People, young retainers were not spared. With tears in his eyes. He finally knows what death is, it is meant losing familiar with the cordial, no longer has sufficient warmth. The film, his uncle put on his chin, said the sentence: "You truth your mother." The meaning of this statement is not as simple as literally, is only the appearance he sighs, only the sense of loneliness and fear Steep The Wallace declare: We are a, you still have to rely on close relatives.It was at that time Wallace explanation: He is one of the sentimental and weak heart.His uncle was a wise man, his brother died more than understanding the purpose and significance of protest. He has to learn Latin Wallace, Tell Wallace, learn how to use weapons, must first learn how to use the brain is more important to God through Latin understand where -- The truth was given to the people free. Young Wallace, of course, not completely understand this, he also constantly immersed in the native land of lost loved ones and seek grief Lane. In the dream his father and dialogue, his father said to him: "Heart is not detention, have the courage to pursue!" This undoubtedly is Health The earliest meaning of life Enlightenment. Wallace\'s uncle with his travels in Europe, he grew up in the maturity only after it will inherit from two ancestors on the Po Your legacy: good sense and courage, with his search for life from the free.Second, the aspirations of lifeOthers audience to participate in the wedding and let him do not realize that, in his country under the rule of the transient beauty, never impossible Emerging from the shadow of torn. No girl could escape long legs invention of the power with the intention of attracting domestic and nobles in Scotland reassuring presence on the land development. Such a person may be deprived of Road privileges, no doubt makes a deeper civilians heavy oppression. White bride no time to put her husband\'s embrace, it was rushed to the suppression of the British aristocracy. The groom in anger in the anti-intent Anti immediately by the sword on the neck-coercive. Bride inner scales choose his life, it Fukai swords hand, The ears of language, the wife finally let the vicious power by force, was forced to endure the pain of killing beloved cutter cut. At such times, the personal anger and resistance are so insignificant.
观《勇敢的心》有感
《勇敢的心》讲述了英国传奇人物华莱士的传奇一生。
11世纪的英国迎来了以为最凶残的国王——长腿国王。他的暴政本来就使生活艰难的英格兰人民雪上加霜。华莱士在学成回国后只想本本分分种田，可是他的妻子却惨遭地方官的杀害。华莱士被迫披上战甲为自由而战。
本片的主旨就使为了自由而战。英格兰人民长期被贵族奴役。他们的贫富悬殊很大。那些平民的房子全是用石块围砌而成，然后房顶是用草木树枝搭起来的。而贵族们却穿着锦帽貂裘，住着高贵ide宫殿。那些平民只想好好生活，片中他们在一起载歌载舞，共同锻炼，一起说笑，看出他们十分善良、淳朴。就因为这样，那些贵族便变本加厉地欺负压迫他们。但是他们不敢反抗，不敢为自己争取自由。这时候华莱士起来了。
华莱士是个非常有知识的人。他自小随叔叔游历各国，精通集中语言。他意识到只有争取到自由才能人们有幸福的生活。但当他们第一次打仗时，当他们看到浩浩荡荡，气势汹汹的重骑兵赶来时，有些人就胆怯了，说：“我们到这里是为了打仗，不是送死。‘便想逃跑。华莱士鼓励他们说：”逃跑？你就算逃走了，年复一年，你会心惊胆战，逃到哪里他们都会抓到你。但是，如果我们向前冲，可能会死，但我们会换取自由，没有自由我们就什么都没有了。“
华莱士的父亲当话来是小时候要去同他打仗时对她说：“你会是个优秀的战士。但你必须同时用这儿。“说着指了指华莱士的头。华莱士的叔叔要教他剑时对他说：”你要先会用这个。“说着指了一下他的头。然后说着拔出了那把射满寒光的宝剑，说：”然后再学这个。“这两件事都启发华莱士打仗作战时不仅要勇敢，还要有智慧。比如与重骑兵战斗时，他们先挑衅对手，使他们忍无可忍，直接发出骑兵。当骑兵疾驰而来时，华莱士并没有着急的`作出行动。而是等他们快接近阵营时，在下令将长矛举起。骑兵因为速度太快，更本没法停止，连人带马全部惨死在矛头下。华莱士不费一兵一组就干掉了敌人的主力部队。并且华莱士还让别的部落的部队佯作逃跑，其实他们绕到后面进行进攻，一方面使敌人高傲，失去警戒心，另一方面出其不意的出现是敌人惊慌失措，战斗力大减。
最后一战时，华莱士本来可以打败长腿国王，但关键时刻帮助他的贵族却突然撤退。华莱士输得非常惨。他只身一人准备干掉长腿国王，但是发现布鲁斯贵族却出卖了他。他坐在苍茫的草原上欲哭无泪。华莱士最终还是被抓获了。宫廷律师对他说只要他承认自己的错误并认长腿国王为王，他就会没有痛苦的死去，不然他会被折磨致死。在处决时，刽子手不断的折磨他，想让他屈服于国王。为什么国王这么想让他屈服呢？我想因为华莱士是个传奇，如果他屈服于国王，那么以后的起义军也就会丧失信心。
华莱士被折磨得惨不忍睹，他依然坚持着。台下的民众看不下去了，便齐声叫他喊开恩凯恩。突然华莱士的嘴抽动了一下想要说什么。刽子手停下手，众人屏下呼吸。华莱士便用尽自己最后一口惊天动地的喊了一声：“自由”。刽子手怒不可和，一刀把他的头砍了。就在砍头的瞬间华莱士手中的手绢从手中飘落。拿手绢像一片花朵慢慢的悠扬的飘落在地。他像落红一样为起义军的土壤注了丰富的养分，推动并鼓舞了人民争取自由的脚步。
影片最后，布鲁士拿着象征着友谊的手绢，带着人民继续争取自由。华莱士的剑永远插在英格兰的土地上，出战的风笛声依旧在风中飘扬。
11世纪的英国迎来了以为最凶残的国王——长腿国王。他的暴政本来就使生活艰难的英格兰人民雪上加霜。华莱士在学成回国后只想本本分分种田，可是他的妻子却惨遭地方官的杀害。华莱士被迫披上战甲为自由而战。
本片的主旨就使为了自由而战。英格兰人民长期被贵族奴役。他们的贫富悬殊很大。那些平民的房子全是用石块围砌而成，然后房顶是用草木树枝搭起来的。而贵族们却穿着锦帽貂裘，住着高贵ide宫殿。那些平民只想好好生活，片中他们在一起载歌载舞，共同锻炼，一起说笑，看出他们十分善良、淳朴。就因为这样，那些贵族便变本加厉地欺负压迫他们。但是他们不敢反抗，不敢为自己争取自由。这时候华莱士起来了。
华莱士是个非常有知识的人。他自小随叔叔游历各国，精通集中语言。他意识到只有争取到自由才能人们有幸福的生活。但当他们第一次打仗时，当他们看到浩浩荡荡，气势汹汹的重骑兵赶来时，有些人就胆怯了，说：“我们到这里是为了打仗，不是送死。‘便想逃跑。华莱士鼓励他们说：”逃跑？你就算逃走了，年复一年，你会心惊胆战，逃到哪里他们都会抓到你。但是，如果我们向前冲，可能会死，但我们会换取自由，没有自由我们就什么都没有了。“
华莱士的父亲当话来是小时候要去同他打仗时对她说：“你会是个优秀的战士。但你必须同时用这儿。“说着指了指华莱士的头。华莱士的叔叔要教他剑时对他说：”你要先会用这个。“说着指了一下他的头。然后说着拔出了那把射满寒光的宝剑，说：”然后再学这个。“这两件事都启发华莱士打仗作战时不仅要勇敢，还要有智慧。比如与重骑兵战斗时，他们先挑衅对手，使他们忍无可忍，直接发出骑兵。当骑兵疾驰而来时，华莱士并没有着急的`作出行动。而是等他们快接近阵营时，在下令将长矛举起。骑兵因为速度太快，更本没法停止，连人带马全部惨死在矛头下。华莱士不费一兵一组就干掉了敌人的主力部队。并且华莱士还让别的部落的部队佯作逃跑，其实他们绕到后面进行进攻，一方面使敌人高傲，失去警戒心，另一方面出其不意的出现是敌人惊慌失措，战斗力大减。
最后一战时，华莱士本来可以打败长腿国王，但关键时刻帮助他的贵族却突然撤退。华莱士输得非常惨。他只身一人准备干掉长腿国王，但是发现布鲁斯贵族却出卖了他。他坐在苍茫的草原上欲哭无泪。华莱士最终还是被抓获了。宫廷律师对他说只要他承认自己的错误并认长腿国王为王，他就会没有痛苦的死去，不然他会被折磨致死。在处决时，刽子手不断的折磨他，想让他屈服于国王。为什么国王这么想让他屈服呢？我想因为华莱士是个传奇，如果他屈服于国王，那么以后的起义军也就会丧失信心。
华莱士被折磨得惨不忍睹，他依然坚持着。台下的民众看不下去了，便齐声叫他喊开恩凯恩。突然华莱士的嘴抽动了一下想要说什么。刽子手停下手，众人屏下呼吸。华莱士便用尽自己最后一口惊天动地的喊了一声：“自由”。刽子手怒不可和，一刀把他的头砍了。就在砍头的瞬间华莱士手中的手绢从手中飘落。拿手绢像一片花朵慢慢的悠扬的飘落在地。他像落红一样为起义军的土壤注了丰富的养分，推动并鼓舞了人民争取自由的脚步。
影片最后，布鲁士拿着象征着友谊的手绢，带着人民继续争取自由。华莱士的剑永远插在英格兰的土地上，出战的风笛声依旧在风中飘扬。
求勇敢的心观后感一篇，英文的，300字左右
RT1
Wags enjoy razzing the 13th-century Scottish epic Braveheart, starring Mel Gibson in the role of freedom fighter William Wallace, as Die Hard in a kilt. Wait till they get to the knobby question of how Gibson's knees stack up against Liam Neeson's in Rob Roy. No matter. Gibson gets the last laugh. Braveheart resists glib categorization. This rousing, romantic adventure is laced with sorrow and savagery. The audacity Gibson shows as the film's director extends to the running time, which is nearly three hours. Hamlet, with Gibson playing the melancholy Dane, was shorter, and Braveheart isn't Shakespeare. Don't panic. Though the film dawdles a bit with the shimmery, dappled love stuff involving Wallace with a Scottish peasant and a French princess, the action will pin you to your seat. With breathtaking skill, Gibson captures the exhilaration and horror of combat in some of the most vivid battle scenes ever filmed.
Wallace was knighted for leading his people in the fight against domination by England. Few facts are known about his personal life, which frees Gibson and screenwriter Randall Wallace (no relation) to run with the legend passed down mostly from the rhyming verse of a poet known as Blind Harry. It's a shame that Harry predates Hollywood by five centuries -- he could have made a killing cranking out kick-ass crowd pleasers.
Gibson's Wallace is a potent blend of Robin Hood, Attila the Hun and, yes, the wags were right, Detective John McClane in Die Hard. Wallace could relate to any story that pits one pissed-off fighter against the system. He faced an English army led by bad-to-the-bone King Edward the Longshanks, played by Patrick McGooban in a classic portrait of slithering sadism. Wallace also had to inspire Scottish peasants and nobles to follow his lead against daunting odds.
It's a ripping yarn, and Gibson could have slid by with the usual hack heroics. Kevin Costner's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves did just that and still earned a pile. Gibson does it the hard way with attention to detail. He has retained the keen eye for character he showed in The Man Without a Face, his promising 1993 directing debut. Wallace doesn't spring to life as a full-blown legend, though he does speak Latin and French when he returns to his village in Scotland to settle down as a farmer and marry Murron (the meltingly lovely Catherine McCormack), his childhood sweetheart. It's the brutal fate dished out to Murron by the English that makes the farmer an outlaw.
That's when Wallace organizes the villagers into a ragtag militia. Brendon Gleeson's Hamish, James Cosmo's Campbell and Alun Armstrong's Mornay register strongly, as does David O'Hara's Stephen, the Irish warrior who joins the Scottish cause. The teasing camaraderie botched in Robin Hood is expertly handled here. Gibson's impassioned performance as the hero who would not trade his freedom for English gold doesn't shrink from showing the barbarian who emerges at a call to arms.
"Are you ready for war?" Wallace shouts to his outnumbered troops at Stirling. It's the film's first major battle scene and a triumph for Gibson. Trying to stir hundreds of fatigued soldiers to action, Wallace rides his horse back and forth in a frantic effort to be heard. In most historical films, the stationary star manages to move multitudes with a throaty whisper. Gibson jettisons the Hollywood fakery. Riding among the men, his face streaked with woad (a blue dye used to terrify the enemy) and his voice hoarse from yelling. Wallace is a demon warrior crying out for vengeance.
Cinematographer John Toll, an Oscar winner for Legends of the Fall, thrusts the audience into the brutal frays at Stirling, York and Falkirk. Superbly edited by Steven Rosenblum (Glory), these sequences recall the blood poetry of Welles' Chimes at Midnight and Kurosawa's Seven Samurai. Sophisticated weaponry was centuries away. The Scots used hammers, axes, picks, swords, chains and even farm tools to crack skulls as they battered the English in the mud. They also set oil traps on the ground to burn their enemies, though shields and chain mail offered scant protection against the rain of English arrows. "Quite the lovely gathering." says Longshanks, surveying the carnage and dispatching his officers to send in Irish volunteers instead of expert English archers. "Arrows cost money," he sneers.
Gibson's handling of Wallace at war is so thrillingly done that one regrets the subplots that distract from the action. Wallace's flirtation with the king's French daughter-in-law, Princess Isabelle (Sophie Marceau), is fanciful fluff that undercuts his undying love for Murron, and the king's homophobic revenge on his preening son, Prince Edward (Peter Hanly), and the son's boy toy, Phillip (Stephen Billington), comes off as inexplicable gay baiting. Judicious cutting might have sharpened the film's focus and impact.
Still, don't get your kilt in a bunch over a spectacle that provokes such lively debate about the method and madness of war. Filmed with furious energy and surprising gravity, Braveheart takes the measure of a hero with a taste for blood to match his taste for honor. Wallace is an inspiring, unsettling role, and Gibson plays him, aptly, like a gathering storm.
2
Braveheart is an action/drama movie about William Wallace (Mel Gibson). The film is no less than amazing in any way. Though the movie sports us with a 177 minute run time, it is amazing to see the interesting way in which, Mel Gibson behind the camera, works his magic. As the acting is magnificent, and the war sequences are brutal and violent, the film works out as a movie which will always be remembered as a classic.
The film focuses on William Wallace, growing up as a kid, his father was a fighter. After his death, his uncle took him in to watch over him, and teach him how to fight. When he is older though, he meets Murron MacClannough(Catherine McCormack). After he weds with her, she is murdered. Now avenging her death, William sets out ot fight for his freedom, his justice and the right to live.
Mel Gibson did really an amazing job on capturing the character of William Wallace. Putting on the Irish accent, he shows us that he is a great actor and can do some things which we never thought he could do. Behind the camrea though, Mel is a completely different kind of person. He captures the fight scenes perfectly and beautifully. The one thing that was done well though, was the greatly realistic violence and brutal warfare of the film. The violence is spilled nicely, and realistically.
3
Braveheart is another film directed by its star, Mel Gibson. Close on the heels of Rob Roy, this is the second tribute to a legendary Scottish hero, this time round William Wallace, the great medieval warrior leader. Though less clever than its predecessor, it is much grander in its nearly three-hour epic sweep.
The obvious comparison is with Henry V (the Olivier, not the Branagh), and even though Randall Wallace may not be quite so good a screenwriter as Shakespeare, the movie can hold its own. Randall Wallace calls himself the spiritual descendant of William Wallace, and he has deftly incorporated the not many known facts about his namesake, and addressed the legend with gusto and eloquence. The result is an epic that, a few excessively romantic touches notwithstanding, is more realistic than most. These medieval Scots live in ferocious-looking hovels, seem (at least the men) heroically unwashed, and have coiffures in which a kestrel could nest. The friendly punches with which they communicate could easily kill a lesser fellow -- an Englishman, say. Braveheart aims to be a thinking man's epic. ``It's our wits that make us men,'' young William's da tells him, and, after da and big brother are killed by the English, Uncle Argyll continues the boy's education along similar lines. Pretty soon William has turned into Mel Gibson, a young man who wants to settle down and live in peace. But the English are making things hard, what with such things as ius primae noctis (in the film, more tersely but less correctly, the prima nocte) giving the English magistrate the right to deflower each lassie on her wedding night. Braveheartrending business, that. Finally William secretly marries the bonniest of lasses, Murron -- played by the breathtakingly beautiful and talented Catherine McCormack -- but the English get wind of it, and when she won't put out for them, slit her throat in a shattering scene irradiated by Miss McCormack's performance. So William turns avenger and, by one small further step, leader of the Scottish populace (as opposed to the nobles, suborned by Edward Longshanks, the Machiavellian English king). There are plots and counterplots as the nobles sabotage William's efforts, and Robert the Bruce, who wants to help him, is prevented by his leprous father (well played by Ian Bannen), who expects the nobles to crown his son king. And much, much more. The love scenes are so-so, the political scenes ho-hum, but the fighting -- both individual contests and mass battle scenes -- is first-rate, barbaric, and sublime. You might think that so much battle stuff would pall after a while: how much slashing, chopping, stabbing, and skewering -- not to mention mangling and incinerating -- can there be without diminishing returns? Quite a bit; Gibson, to give him his due, comes up with new forms of warfare, better ways to turn charging men and horses into shishkebabs, new modes of battering down castle gates in a rain of boiling pitch from the battlements, fresh tricks to outsmart the enemy. And whereas this much violence with modern weapons would be unbearable, with medieval arms it becomes heroic and exhilarating. There is something appealing about Mel Gibson -- the ruggedly masculine countenance, the quick half-smile, the knack of conveying blue-eyed hurt (as when he discovers the Bruce under an enemy helmet), and a squarer-jawed determination than Dick Tracy's -- that sustains Braveheart even through the unlikely scenes with Isabelle, the Princess of Wales (indifferently played by Sophie Marceau), and through the Wallace's -- or the Gibson's -- unconvincing displays of polyglotism. Add to this the beauties of Scotland, searchingly chronicled by John Toll's inexhaustible camera, the solid supporting performances among which Patrick McGoohan's sardonic-sadistic Edward I is especially noteworthy (never before have terminal consonants been drawn out to such ironic length), and the intelligently deployed music by James Horner. A Scottish acquaintance, George Campbell, questions the use of the sweeter uilleann (Irish) bagpipes rather than the fiercer Highland ones during the battle scenes, but these scenes are so exciting Horner could have used marimbas and I wouldn't have noticed. The film put me in mind of a four-line poem by Scotland's greatest modern poet, Hugh MacDiarmid: The rose of all the world is not for me. I want for my part Only the little white rose of Scotland that smells sharp and sweet -- And breaks the heart. And that is high praise.
4
What is there that can be said about Braveheart that hasn’t been said before? It’s an epic movie that ought to be in the conversation about the best films of the past thirty years. And actually, “epic” might be too small of a word. Braveheart is as much about the inner drama of William Wallace as it is about the life-and-death drama of the war for Scotland’s independence in the late 13th, early 14th centuries. It’s a story told on a grand scale with a great deal craft – and flair (and humor). This is a movie that offers both style and substance. It’s a direct precursor to the success of the Lord of the Rings movies – indeed, one can argue that the success of Braveheart set the stage for those films. True, Braveheart may not have universal appeal in terms of genre, story, or its brutal portrayal of war. But there can be little doubt of the value of a film that is, simply, one of the best I have ever seen.
The success of the film rests on the balance with which the story unfolds. Put simply, there’s something here for everyone: romance, action, character, philosophy, conflict, cinematography, great lines, music, and so on … and it all fits together almost flawlessly. I’m sure if you looked hard enough you could find fault with some parts of the movie, but considering its nearly three-hour run time it manages to avoid pitfalls remarkably well.
This is William Wallace’s story. And through him, the audience is allowed a mirror with which to view itself. This is the true measure of a great story: its ability to not only provide commentary, but also to provoke introspection. And that happens here quite often. One of the film’s most quoted lines is “Every man dies, not every man really lives.” Within just those seven words there is a great deal of thought and sentiment. It encapsulates a philosophy, a raison d’être, that anyone can immediately identify with. And it’s a beautiful philosophy – like carpe diem. And it encourages us to find the purpose and meaning within our lives on a daily basis.
This is also a love story, between William Wallace and Murron – a childhood friend. Theirs is a story that flows effortlessly from childhood tragedy and bonding, to adulthood romance and marriage. Indeed, it is Murron’s murder that proves to be Wallace’s motivation to launch his personal war against England whose king, Edward ‘the Longshanks’ is portrayed with a powerfully brutality in the film, making him a very compelling villain.
Wallace’s quest is joined by a cast that is quite adept in their roles. There are hardly any weak links in the acting of this movie, which means that the underlying themes and conflicts are portrayed to maximum effect from start to finish. Mel Gibson’s directing certainly has to be credited for some of that success.
This is, without question, Gibson’s film. And it’s not without a certain part of vanity from the lead actor and director. If you were looking for a critique, this would be the most fertile ground for it. But for the most part, whatever vanity Gibson may have been displaying is overshadowed by the craft of everything else. The action is riveting, the dialogue is crisp (and profound) and the music is deeply, deeply moving.
James Horner’s score successfully taps into the heritage of Scotland while displaying a full orchestral presentation. The instrumentation and arrangements are all very well done, from wavering flute to the bagpipes to the thunderous percussion during battle sequences.
5
I used to think that the history of Scotland around the end of the thirteenth century was one of those really complicated and messy affairs that could send any historian into a fit of sobbing. So imagine my surprise as I discovered it's really all about a bunch of rowdy guys mooning each other across a battlefield and then playing dodgeball.
"Braveheart" is one of those audacious films that implies that war is "bad" by putting the violence at the forefront, slowing it down and tossing in lots of extra blood, piercings, stabbings, castrations, amputations and assorted mutilations with random insertions of Mel's butt -- just to make sure that the women get into it too. This is all topped off by a really long and protracted moment where the camera lovingly dotes on Mel Gibson as he is taken to a platform to be tortured. It's the kind of moment that makes preschoolers point to the screen and say, "Christ figure! Christ figure!" Either that or: "Look! He's shamelessly grooming himself for the Oscars!" (Oscar committees love Christ figures.)
After three delirious hours the message is clear: Buy an ax, kill a lot of people, wear a kilt, show your butt, screw a princess and (if you have some time left over) repeat this over and over and over and over and over... until you get caught. If ever a movie cried out for a halftime break, this was it.
Wags enjoy razzing the 13th-century Scottish epic Braveheart, starring Mel Gibson in the role of freedom fighter William Wallace, as Die Hard in a kilt. Wait till they get to the knobby question of how Gibson's knees stack up against Liam Neeson's in Rob Roy. No matter. Gibson gets the last laugh. Braveheart resists glib categorization. This rousing, romantic adventure is laced with sorrow and savagery. The audacity Gibson shows as the film's director extends to the running time, which is nearly three hours. Hamlet, with Gibson playing the melancholy Dane, was shorter, and Braveheart isn't Shakespeare. Don't panic. Though the film dawdles a bit with the shimmery, dappled love stuff involving Wallace with a Scottish peasant and a French princess, the action will pin you to your seat. With breathtaking skill, Gibson captures the exhilaration and horror of combat in some of the most vivid battle scenes ever filmed.
Wallace was knighted for leading his people in the fight against domination by England. Few facts are known about his personal life, which frees Gibson and screenwriter Randall Wallace (no relation) to run with the legend passed down mostly from the rhyming verse of a poet known as Blind Harry. It's a shame that Harry predates Hollywood by five centuries -- he could have made a killing cranking out kick-ass crowd pleasers.
Gibson's Wallace is a potent blend of Robin Hood, Attila the Hun and, yes, the wags were right, Detective John McClane in Die Hard. Wallace could relate to any story that pits one pissed-off fighter against the system. He faced an English army led by bad-to-the-bone King Edward the Longshanks, played by Patrick McGooban in a classic portrait of slithering sadism. Wallace also had to inspire Scottish peasants and nobles to follow his lead against daunting odds.
It's a ripping yarn, and Gibson could have slid by with the usual hack heroics. Kevin Costner's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves did just that and still earned a pile. Gibson does it the hard way with attention to detail. He has retained the keen eye for character he showed in The Man Without a Face, his promising 1993 directing debut. Wallace doesn't spring to life as a full-blown legend, though he does speak Latin and French when he returns to his village in Scotland to settle down as a farmer and marry Murron (the meltingly lovely Catherine McCormack), his childhood sweetheart. It's the brutal fate dished out to Murron by the English that makes the farmer an outlaw.
That's when Wallace organizes the villagers into a ragtag militia. Brendon Gleeson's Hamish, James Cosmo's Campbell and Alun Armstrong's Mornay register strongly, as does David O'Hara's Stephen, the Irish warrior who joins the Scottish cause. The teasing camaraderie botched in Robin Hood is expertly handled here. Gibson's impassioned performance as the hero who would not trade his freedom for English gold doesn't shrink from showing the barbarian who emerges at a call to arms.
"Are you ready for war?" Wallace shouts to his outnumbered troops at Stirling. It's the film's first major battle scene and a triumph for Gibson. Trying to stir hundreds of fatigued soldiers to action, Wallace rides his horse back and forth in a frantic effort to be heard. In most historical films, the stationary star manages to move multitudes with a throaty whisper. Gibson jettisons the Hollywood fakery. Riding among the men, his face streaked with woad (a blue dye used to terrify the enemy) and his voice hoarse from yelling. Wallace is a demon warrior crying out for vengeance.
Cinematographer John Toll, an Oscar winner for Legends of the Fall, thrusts the audience into the brutal frays at Stirling, York and Falkirk. Superbly edited by Steven Rosenblum (Glory), these sequences recall the blood poetry of Welles' Chimes at Midnight and Kurosawa's Seven Samurai. Sophisticated weaponry was centuries away. The Scots used hammers, axes, picks, swords, chains and even farm tools to crack skulls as they battered the English in the mud. They also set oil traps on the ground to burn their enemies, though shields and chain mail offered scant protection against the rain of English arrows. "Quite the lovely gathering." says Longshanks, surveying the carnage and dispatching his officers to send in Irish volunteers instead of expert English archers. "Arrows cost money," he sneers.
Gibson's handling of Wallace at war is so thrillingly done that one regrets the subplots that distract from the action. Wallace's flirtation with the king's French daughter-in-law, Princess Isabelle (Sophie Marceau), is fanciful fluff that undercuts his undying love for Murron, and the king's homophobic revenge on his preening son, Prince Edward (Peter Hanly), and the son's boy toy, Phillip (Stephen Billington), comes off as inexplicable gay baiting. Judicious cutting might have sharpened the film's focus and impact.
Still, don't get your kilt in a bunch over a spectacle that provokes such lively debate about the method and madness of war. Filmed with furious energy and surprising gravity, Braveheart takes the measure of a hero with a taste for blood to match his taste for honor. Wallace is an inspiring, unsettling role, and Gibson plays him, aptly, like a gathering storm.
2
Braveheart is an action/drama movie about William Wallace (Mel Gibson). The film is no less than amazing in any way. Though the movie sports us with a 177 minute run time, it is amazing to see the interesting way in which, Mel Gibson behind the camera, works his magic. As the acting is magnificent, and the war sequences are brutal and violent, the film works out as a movie which will always be remembered as a classic.
The film focuses on William Wallace, growing up as a kid, his father was a fighter. After his death, his uncle took him in to watch over him, and teach him how to fight. When he is older though, he meets Murron MacClannough(Catherine McCormack). After he weds with her, she is murdered. Now avenging her death, William sets out ot fight for his freedom, his justice and the right to live.
Mel Gibson did really an amazing job on capturing the character of William Wallace. Putting on the Irish accent, he shows us that he is a great actor and can do some things which we never thought he could do. Behind the camrea though, Mel is a completely different kind of person. He captures the fight scenes perfectly and beautifully. The one thing that was done well though, was the greatly realistic violence and brutal warfare of the film. The violence is spilled nicely, and realistically.
3
Braveheart is another film directed by its star, Mel Gibson. Close on the heels of Rob Roy, this is the second tribute to a legendary Scottish hero, this time round William Wallace, the great medieval warrior leader. Though less clever than its predecessor, it is much grander in its nearly three-hour epic sweep.
The obvious comparison is with Henry V (the Olivier, not the Branagh), and even though Randall Wallace may not be quite so good a screenwriter as Shakespeare, the movie can hold its own. Randall Wallace calls himself the spiritual descendant of William Wallace, and he has deftly incorporated the not many known facts about his namesake, and addressed the legend with gusto and eloquence. The result is an epic that, a few excessively romantic touches notwithstanding, is more realistic than most. These medieval Scots live in ferocious-looking hovels, seem (at least the men) heroically unwashed, and have coiffures in which a kestrel could nest. The friendly punches with which they communicate could easily kill a lesser fellow -- an Englishman, say. Braveheart aims to be a thinking man's epic. ``It's our wits that make us men,'' young William's da tells him, and, after da and big brother are killed by the English, Uncle Argyll continues the boy's education along similar lines. Pretty soon William has turned into Mel Gibson, a young man who wants to settle down and live in peace. But the English are making things hard, what with such things as ius primae noctis (in the film, more tersely but less correctly, the prima nocte) giving the English magistrate the right to deflower each lassie on her wedding night. Braveheartrending business, that. Finally William secretly marries the bonniest of lasses, Murron -- played by the breathtakingly beautiful and talented Catherine McCormack -- but the English get wind of it, and when she won't put out for them, slit her throat in a shattering scene irradiated by Miss McCormack's performance. So William turns avenger and, by one small further step, leader of the Scottish populace (as opposed to the nobles, suborned by Edward Longshanks, the Machiavellian English king). There are plots and counterplots as the nobles sabotage William's efforts, and Robert the Bruce, who wants to help him, is prevented by his leprous father (well played by Ian Bannen), who expects the nobles to crown his son king. And much, much more. The love scenes are so-so, the political scenes ho-hum, but the fighting -- both individual contests and mass battle scenes -- is first-rate, barbaric, and sublime. You might think that so much battle stuff would pall after a while: how much slashing, chopping, stabbing, and skewering -- not to mention mangling and incinerating -- can there be without diminishing returns? Quite a bit; Gibson, to give him his due, comes up with new forms of warfare, better ways to turn charging men and horses into shishkebabs, new modes of battering down castle gates in a rain of boiling pitch from the battlements, fresh tricks to outsmart the enemy. And whereas this much violence with modern weapons would be unbearable, with medieval arms it becomes heroic and exhilarating. There is something appealing about Mel Gibson -- the ruggedly masculine countenance, the quick half-smile, the knack of conveying blue-eyed hurt (as when he discovers the Bruce under an enemy helmet), and a squarer-jawed determination than Dick Tracy's -- that sustains Braveheart even through the unlikely scenes with Isabelle, the Princess of Wales (indifferently played by Sophie Marceau), and through the Wallace's -- or the Gibson's -- unconvincing displays of polyglotism. Add to this the beauties of Scotland, searchingly chronicled by John Toll's inexhaustible camera, the solid supporting performances among which Patrick McGoohan's sardonic-sadistic Edward I is especially noteworthy (never before have terminal consonants been drawn out to such ironic length), and the intelligently deployed music by James Horner. A Scottish acquaintance, George Campbell, questions the use of the sweeter uilleann (Irish) bagpipes rather than the fiercer Highland ones during the battle scenes, but these scenes are so exciting Horner could have used marimbas and I wouldn't have noticed. The film put me in mind of a four-line poem by Scotland's greatest modern poet, Hugh MacDiarmid: The rose of all the world is not for me. I want for my part Only the little white rose of Scotland that smells sharp and sweet -- And breaks the heart. And that is high praise.
4
What is there that can be said about Braveheart that hasn’t been said before? It’s an epic movie that ought to be in the conversation about the best films of the past thirty years. And actually, “epic” might be too small of a word. Braveheart is as much about the inner drama of William Wallace as it is about the life-and-death drama of the war for Scotland’s independence in the late 13th, early 14th centuries. It’s a story told on a grand scale with a great deal craft – and flair (and humor). This is a movie that offers both style and substance. It’s a direct precursor to the success of the Lord of the Rings movies – indeed, one can argue that the success of Braveheart set the stage for those films. True, Braveheart may not have universal appeal in terms of genre, story, or its brutal portrayal of war. But there can be little doubt of the value of a film that is, simply, one of the best I have ever seen.
The success of the film rests on the balance with which the story unfolds. Put simply, there’s something here for everyone: romance, action, character, philosophy, conflict, cinematography, great lines, music, and so on … and it all fits together almost flawlessly. I’m sure if you looked hard enough you could find fault with some parts of the movie, but considering its nearly three-hour run time it manages to avoid pitfalls remarkably well.
This is William Wallace’s story. And through him, the audience is allowed a mirror with which to view itself. This is the true measure of a great story: its ability to not only provide commentary, but also to provoke introspection. And that happens here quite often. One of the film’s most quoted lines is “Every man dies, not every man really lives.” Within just those seven words there is a great deal of thought and sentiment. It encapsulates a philosophy, a raison d’être, that anyone can immediately identify with. And it’s a beautiful philosophy – like carpe diem. And it encourages us to find the purpose and meaning within our lives on a daily basis.
This is also a love story, between William Wallace and Murron – a childhood friend. Theirs is a story that flows effortlessly from childhood tragedy and bonding, to adulthood romance and marriage. Indeed, it is Murron’s murder that proves to be Wallace’s motivation to launch his personal war against England whose king, Edward ‘the Longshanks’ is portrayed with a powerfully brutality in the film, making him a very compelling villain.
Wallace’s quest is joined by a cast that is quite adept in their roles. There are hardly any weak links in the acting of this movie, which means that the underlying themes and conflicts are portrayed to maximum effect from start to finish. Mel Gibson’s directing certainly has to be credited for some of that success.
This is, without question, Gibson’s film. And it’s not without a certain part of vanity from the lead actor and director. If you were looking for a critique, this would be the most fertile ground for it. But for the most part, whatever vanity Gibson may have been displaying is overshadowed by the craft of everything else. The action is riveting, the dialogue is crisp (and profound) and the music is deeply, deeply moving.
James Horner’s score successfully taps into the heritage of Scotland while displaying a full orchestral presentation. The instrumentation and arrangements are all very well done, from wavering flute to the bagpipes to the thunderous percussion during battle sequences.
5
I used to think that the history of Scotland around the end of the thirteenth century was one of those really complicated and messy affairs that could send any historian into a fit of sobbing. So imagine my surprise as I discovered it's really all about a bunch of rowdy guys mooning each other across a battlefield and then playing dodgeball.
"Braveheart" is one of those audacious films that implies that war is "bad" by putting the violence at the forefront, slowing it down and tossing in lots of extra blood, piercings, stabbings, castrations, amputations and assorted mutilations with random insertions of Mel's butt -- just to make sure that the women get into it too. This is all topped off by a really long and protracted moment where the camera lovingly dotes on Mel Gibson as he is taken to a platform to be tortured. It's the kind of moment that makes preschoolers point to the screen and say, "Christ figure! Christ figure!" Either that or: "Look! He's shamelessly grooming himself for the Oscars!" (Oscar committees love Christ figures.)
After three delirious hours the message is clear: Buy an ax, kill a lot of people, wear a kilt, show your butt, screw a princess and (if you have some time left over) repeat this over and over and over and over and over... until you get caught. If ever a movie cried out for a halftime break, this was it.
本文标题: 跟随勇敢的心读后感英(跟随勇敢的心读后感)
本文地址: http://www.lzmy123.com/duhougan/350697.html
如果认为本文对您有所帮助请赞助本站