Rate the Oscar-Winning Directing: 1995 (CLOSED)

8.5.

6. I found it bland. Gibson improved as a director over the years. It pales in comparison with Gladiator.

9

I love Braveheart, and Gibson's performance and direction, but I don't think it revived a lost genre at all, the way Gladiator did.

I don't think Braveheart is particularly far away from The Last Of The Mohicans as a bracing action romantic drama set within the last 900 years. Or even Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves, which was a huge hit. Romantic action dramas set in the middle ages and beyond were not an extinct genre. Films set in antiquity were.

What Gladiator did was revive the sword and sandal genre of films set in antiquity. Ancient history. Action dramas set before the middle ages. Gladiator revived a genre that which had basically been dead since The Fall Of The Roman Empire failed at the box office in 1964. Troy only exists because of Gladiator.

As for the topic question, I'd give Gibson's direction an 8. He didn't reinvent the wheel or anything (like I said, Michael Mann gave a very similar effort a few years before him), but he did it in a compelling and entertaining way.

8/10

Robin Hood is a brand unto itself, up to that point I think pretty much every big Hollywood adaptation had been a success, having an A-list leading man as Robin Hood would have been viewed as a low risk proposition in the early 90's. Obviously not the case today with how allergic everyone is to historical films now (unless its Nolan I guess). Last of the Mohicans was also based on a well known classic book that at that time was still regularly assigned in schools and in general the settlers vs Indians set up is familiar for movies, it's pretty much a western. Plus I think anything set in America is going to be a much easier sell than something set 700 years ago. 

Braveheart didn't have any of those extenuating factors and was just a big budget war film about an obscure historical event in the middle ages. Even with his mega star status Gibson had to get three different studios to split the budget because none of them would individually put up more than 25 mil or so. Find it hard to believe Gladiator gets made, and certainly with the budget it had, without Braveheart laying the groundwork. It even uses the same basic beats as Braveheart, it had to have been pitched as "Braveheart in ancient Rome" at some point. Your Joe Schmo movie goer isn't going to make any kind of distinction between Rome or the Middle Ages, it's all just guys in armor fighting with swords. 

8.5

8

7