The Instigator
Adam2
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
whiteraven252
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

England is treated as a Scandinavian country in "Braveheart"

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/26/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 895 times Debate No: 41094
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Adam2

Pro

In this debate I will argue what I put as the topic. First round goes to acceptance.
whiteraven252

Con

England is not treated as a scandinavian country. In fact since the storyline takes place in Scotland and is about the Scottish people, England isn't really portrayed at all. The King, Longshanks and his court are really the only group we see that has any bit of meaningful dialogue. The soldiers that are there are simply portrayed as "big nasties" that beat up on the Scots whenever possible. Which is nothing but simple stry arc. If the English weren't "big nasties" then we the audience wouldn't be as inclined to take the side of Mel Gibson's character.
Debate Round No. 1
Adam2

Pro

"England is not treated as a scandinavian country. In fact since the storyline takes place in Scotland and is about the Scottish people, England isn't really portrayed at all."
For some reason you don't seem to refute what I said about England being portrayed as a Scandinavian country. You only say that England is not mentioned in the movie too much. It seems like the movie is anti-Germanic, portrayed the English in a way reminiscent of Bamboozled by Spike Lee, like card-carrying Klan members. Here's perhaps the most well-known scene that proves that England is indeed being portrayed as a Scandinavian country in this film: "The King of Scotland had died without a son and the King of England, a cruel pagan known as Edward the Longshanks, claimed the throne of Scotland for himself." He calls him a pagan, in a very insulting and disparaging way too. Only one region in the world is known for devout paganism, and that's Scandinavia. And this was in the narraration too. Put the Scandinavian traditions aside, Longshanks is portrayed in a rather heathenous way too. Like he has no regard for Catholic traditions or practices. In another scene, it's dubbed in a way that if you didn't know what they were really saying, you would think they were showing a Scandinavian disregard for the Catholic practices. In one scene Talmadge says, "Insolent bastard." However, you would only know that if you read the script or put it in subtitles. The way he says it, it sounds like, "Ancient bastard." Which one would assume reasonably. The movie earlier gave a hint as Longshanks being a cruel Scandinavian pagan who treated Catholics like garbage. Here it's not so much the possibly, but rather the way he said "insolent" is what's amazing about it. It's dubbed in such a way that if you didn't pay attention more closely, you'd think the English are indeed cruel pagans from Scandianvia who terrorized the original "Godly" (whether you agree or not) Britons.
whiteraven252

Con

Absolutely I refuted your argument.
You cannot reference an entire country based on the monarchy or how the monarchy is portrayed. As I said in my previous argument. England is portrayed as the bad guy because the plot demands it. If you were to ask Scottish people from that time period they would probably agree with the portrayal, while the English would vehemently disagree. It's all about Ethnocentrism. However, the very idea of a movie created in AMERICA with an AMERICAN director having a hidden agenda against a country that they have no current negative connection to absolutely laughable. If this were a movie about the middle east you might have a leg to stand on. As it is your stance is incorrect and somewhat silly. Longshanks is nothing more than a villain for a plot device.
Debate Round No. 2
Adam2

Pro

"You cannot reference an entire country based on the monarchy or how the monarchy is portrayed. As I said in my previous argument."
I never did that. All I was saying was the movie seems to be portrayed as a Scandinavian country. That's all.
"England is portrayed as the bad guy because the plot demands it. If you were to ask Scottish people from that time period they would probably agree with the portrayal, while the English would vehemently disagree. It's all about Ethnocentrism. However, the very idea of a movie created in AMERICA with an AMERICAN director having a hidden agenda against a country that they have no current negative connection to absolutely laughable."
I don't deny that England is portrayed as the bad guy because the plot depends on it. I will say why I said this, which I should have put earlier. In the field of anthropology, England is not Scandinavian. The field of anthropology pretty much agrees for the most part, that the English are a mutt of the Celts, Romans, Scots, Normans, Anglo-Saxons, and that England is not a Nordic country. However, watching
Braveheart, it seems like they're suggesting that it is. And I gave a little reason why.
I should go a little in depth about theTalmadge part. See earlier in the movie as I said before, Longshanks is portrayed as a pagan, and only Scandinavia is known for a rich pagan culture. Later on, one scene, Talmadge saying "Insolent bastard," is dubbed in such a way (perhaps intentionally to make the English look even more evil than they really are) to make it seem like he was saying, "Ancient bastard." It's like, if you didn't know what he was saying, you'd think they were Scandinavian pagans out to terrorize the Britons (in this case, the movie focuses on the Scots). Now, there's two reasons why this is relavent. One, one would assume they were saying it for 3 reasons: the way it was dubbed; the fact that earlier, the movie hints (well, more like mocks) Longshank's pagan beliefs, and three, the timing of the scene. This gives out that it was indeed meant to make English and Scandinavians look evil. Talmadge only says the dubbed phrase, when the Scottish priest gives the army a prayer before battle. They're shown doing the Catholic cross ritual (with the fingers). Even more indicting is that the English side is not shown doing this. I don't even remember seeing anything Christian, not even a Cross, on the English side. Another reason, I bring this is up, is one group of people were known for doing this, the Vikings. They were Scandinavians who terrorized the Britons and utterly disregarded Catholic churches, raiding them. It's as if Robert the Bruce was taking a shot at Scandianvians. In my opinion, this also reveals a troubling history between the Catholic countries and the pagan (later to be Protestant) Scandinavian countries. While Protestant countries did indeed do a lot of evil things, such as England and Denmark's empires, it started with the Vikings. The Viking atrocities against Cathedrials is disturbing similar to the Jim Crow atrocities against black churches (which I will make another debate on later, so look forward to it my friend, I'll actually invite you to debate it with me :) ). Anyways, why do I bring it up, even though it's not related to
Braveheart? It's all the way it's portrayed. It starts with Robert the Bruce's swipe at Longshanks and paganism, which only Scandinavia is known as having a rich culture in. That's one, then it's what explained happens in the Battle of Stirling. The way that Talmadge's line is dubbed to sound (perhaps deliberately), and the circumstances in which he says it. I thank you for debating me.
whiteraven252

Con

whiteraven252 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
It's OK
Posted by whiteraven252 3 years ago
whiteraven252
Sorry about that I didn't mean to dip out on you I was caught up doing something else and my time ran out.
Posted by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
If I make it three will you debate?
Posted by TheBajanConnection 3 years ago
TheBajanConnection
3 rounds is preferable because only one side will have the opportunity to refute the other if round 1 is acceptance.
No votes have been placed for this debate.