Obviously, even Wallace, who was greatly beautified in the film, failed to meet the above requirements. Isn't his final tragic end the inevitable result of a series of errors?
On the contrary, the villain Edward "Long Legs" in the film did it perfectly.
"If our future queen dies, the King will definitely be our good ally. Everything has a good side."
"Bows and arrows will shoot our people, and they will also shoot them. Shoot it, anyway we have Reserve team." With all their
wisdom and decisiveness, they are also keen on picking up the dust with beautiful daughter-in-law. They are the outstanding representatives of the successful rulers in ancient times.
In this way, the heroic king has no reason to be merciful to the conquered people:
"Scotland, my land! If you can't manage your own land, how can you fight the world?"
"Or treat the people with generosity, or kill them, Mingu cherishes grudges because of small grievances, but when facing big grudges, he is worried."
"It seems that it is time to restore one of our ancient traditions... Chu Ye Quan."
" Chou Ye Quan", what a wonderful word, this system is both. The dignity of the ruled can be destroyed to the greatest extent, the support of the lords can be obtained, and the annexation of the blood of the alien race can be greatly accelerated. It is a peerless strategy with one stone and three birds! Although there is also a countermeasure, which is to "kill the first son", but what about it? It is impossible for an infanticide nation to generate cohesion, let alone the inevitable decline in the fertility rate of the entire nation. As long as the right of the first night is successfully implemented on a nation, the demise of this nation is only a matter of time.
It seems that His Majesty Longlegs intended to kill the Scots, but in fact he almost succeeded, if not because of the resistance of William Wallace-or according to history, because of the resistance led by Robert Bruce.
Long-legged Edward is one of the most promising kings in European history. It is really unwise to fight against such a ruthless character. Why bother? Why bother.
Freedom, a word that seems to contain infinite passion and romance, has a cold definition in philosophy: "Freedom is a category in which subjective needs and objective must be unified."
In other words, whether a person is free or not depends on whether the things he pursues have objective necessity. So the matter is very subtle: Compared with Scotland, which is a small country and few people, the strength of England is overwhelming. From a historical perspective, Scotland eventually became a part of Britain, and the pride of the Highlanders has long been a story.
Speaking of this, wouldn't Wallace become a clown with a worm and a tree, a clown with a praying man's arm as a car, and a reactionary who hinders the torrent of history from rolling forward? Praise the long-legged kings, what is the problem with spurning the Wallaces?
If this is not the case, the question is: what exactly is William Wallace and the heroes who have been eulogized?
I think the answer lies in the bottom of my heart.
We live in an era of consumerism. Ordinary is our destiny, and mediocrity is part of life. We, who have long abandoned the tradition of martial arts, can no longer understand the sense of honor that "we are a few enemies, even though we are defeated." We, who have gradually lost our sense of cultural identity, disdain to mention "the place of righteousness, although tens of thousands of people will go." Perhaps the only thing that arouses our interest is the opportunistic philosophy of survival such as "the crying baby has milk to eat".
But why, why do we still have tears overflowing into our eyes when we hear that roar that resounds through the sky?
Perhaps we have been tortured by trivial livelihoods torture physically and mentally, perhaps we have been accustomed to the injustice and injustice in the world, power has worn away our edges and corners, and numbness covers our hearts. But this cry still reminds us that the free soul cannot be bound by any chains, and the spirit of striving will not be distorted by any tricks; this is tears of comfort, because we understand that even if we become a cog in the institutional machinery, Even if we become a battery in a huge matrix, we still will not give up the ability to shout for freedom!
I know that no matter what kind of passion is passed, life will continue tomorrow. But, but at least while the aftermath of the film is not over, while Wallace's call is still in our ears, let us at least shout in the bottom of our hearts, freedom!
And until we die, we will remember: at least for a moment, we were free.
==================================================
Postscript: This article was written six years ago. At that time, I was very young and innocent. He didn't know much about Scottish history at the time. Although I knew vaguely that the film had a fictional plot, I later learned that it was basically all fiction. . Now I know much more about the concept of nation and country than I did before, and I don't think so much about many things anymore.
But I won't modify the film review itself. After all, it represents my true feelings after watching the film.
View more about Braveheart reviews
