“Freedom！” Twenty-five years ago, Mel Gibson shouted out one of the most heart-wrenching lines in film history. Before you know it, Braveheart (which premiered in North America on May 24, 1995) has been in theaters for 25 years.
At that time, the production process was quite tortuous, but the 177-minute film unexpectedly won a battle and captured the hearts of audiences around the world. The film grossed more than $210 million, of which about 135 million (nearly 65 percent) came from overseas markets, which was rare at the time. At the same time, the film received a total of 10 Oscar nominations, culminating in five little golden figures including best picture, best director, and best cinematography, and also achieved the peak of Mel Gibson's career.
Braveheart Trailer:
For such a great epic movie, fans are naturally full of curiosity. On the occasion of the 25th anniversary, listen to director and lead actor Mel Gibson's own interpretation of the film.
Back in the early 1990s, Mel Gibson was already one of the most powerful superstars in the world of cinema. That's largely due to the astonishing success of his starring Lethal Weapon series — the first three films in the series grossed $670 million worldwide, and each one was more lucrative than the previous one. This achievement did not satisfy Mel Gibson, who was equally interested in standing behind a camera and telling stories, in addition to performing in front of the camera. He wanted to be a director.
Gibson's directorial debut was 1993's The Faceless Man, a very "small" drama. But his own taste has always preferred "big", whether it is about scenes or emotional impact. Just look at the three Mad Max he worked with George Miller and Hamlet in 1990. And eventually, when Gibson discovered the script about the 13th-century Scottish warrior William Wallace, he knew the "big story" he had dreamed of was found. However, despite Gibson's strong box office appeal and the script on hand, the film was difficult to find enough funds to invest, and eventually it became one of the few multi-party co-production films in Hollywood at that time - the United States and Canada were distributed by Paramount Pictures, and the overseas distribution rights were given to Twentieth Century Fox. And the investor's condition is that Gibson must be the male lead.
Based on a true story, Braveheart is set in England in the 13th and 14th centuries, with war at its core, telling the story of William Wallace, the leader of the Scottish Uprising, and the indomitable struggle with the rulers of England. He led the Scots to fight for several years, eventually being arrested by the British in Edinburgh. He shouted "Freedom!" before his execution, shocking everyone. His sacrifice eventually inspired the soldiers to fight against the British, allowing the scottish people to achieve national independence. 25 years later, as we re-read this epic classic, the perfect interpretation of William Wallace's Mel Gibson is undoubtedly worthy of our gratitude and respect.
In order to commemorate this film, in March this year, Paramount also specially re-screened in Scotland, where the story takes place. Once again, the film is connected to the real world in a wonderful way.
"When I went to look for investment, I was faced with a silence."
How did you know William Wallace in the first place? You don't know Randall Wallace's script until you read him, do you?
William Wallace did have this man, but the details of his battles and love story are largely undocumented. It was Braveheart that gave him more legend. The picture shows the statue of William Wallace. Image source: wikipedia.com
Mel Gibson: Yes. Randy wrote the story based on real people. He found some rough, simple historical records about Wallace, but I think that on that basis, Randy used more of a romantic, epic narrative. In addition to the historical sources, there is an ancient narrative poem about the legend of Wallace, which is said to have been written by a bard named "Harry the Blind". Whether these fragments of poetry are faithful to historical facts or processed by imagination, exaggeration, etc., in short, Randy mixed it with existing historical materials to create a play about Wallace's great achievements, almost a fantasy novel.
So I didn't pay attention to Wallace until I read Randall's script, and it took a long time to examine his history. And when I started delving into Wallace's history, I found things to be interesting, there are a lot of gaps in the historical record, and it's hard to know exactly what happened. It's nice to have a book written by André Fisher (written after our film), and he's pretty convincing in connecting the missing pieces like a detective. He reasoned about the brief historical record, "Why did this happen?" Why did that happen? And then restore the whole story in a reasonable way, and I like this book. In fact, that's what our film is trying to do.
Braveheart is a film with grand themes and deals with betrayal, courage, freedom, and so on, which emphasizes both individual heroism and a noble spirit of collective collaboration, but why is it so difficult to get investment in such a film?
Mel Gibson: Well, I think that period [investors] happened to have a bias against historical films. In those years, films like "1492, Christopher Columbus" and other similar films were not very successful, so for the capital, this is almost a lesson for the capitalists. At that time, when we went to find investment, we were faced with a silence, and I wanted to stand in the position of those big film companies, and investing money in our films at that time was like putting our own life roots on the chopping board. I can understand them.
Although Braveheart has these elements (grand themes, costumes, history), it is a whole new world for me, like going back to the 50s and 60s when epic films were still popular, such as Spartacus and Heroes of the Ages. I grew up watching these films, which fit the tastes of people at the time and were commercially successful. But in the eyes of the studios, they are somewhat obsolete, belonging to the genre that has been almost abandoned. At that time, I thought that if I could bring this genre back to the audience's attention and let them see the real war scenes, easy to understand and full of connotations, it would be a cool thing. I wanted to revive the film—a hard-core spirit that was in line with its parents, or even its grandparents, but with more courage and tenacity.
Mel Gibson's early image of tough guys and heroes is very much in line with Wallace's temperament, and the only problem may be the age gap. Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Looking back, in terms of William Wallace's temperament, the role fits you quite well. However, considering the scale of the film, did you really want to direct and act at that time, or did you say that you starred in the film out of the need to attract investment?
Mel Gibson: Exactly, both. But you're right, I didn't plan to star myself in the beginning. I starred on my own when I directed the first film, "The Faceless Man," and I felt a lot of pressure at that time. And that's just a small film, and it's even smaller than Braveheart. But despite this, I was already struggling to direct and act at that time. You're young, so of course you're energetic, but I was 37 years old [when I made Faceless Man], and I was 38, almost 39 by the time I made Braveheart. The real William Wallace died at the age of 28 — about the same age as many rock stars.
In Wallace's day, 30 years old was already quite big, right?
Mel Gibson: Well, especially in their situation, a lot of people may have broken a few bones and gone through all sorts of terrible things. So at first I felt that the burden of acting was too heavy, and it was better to let someone else act, while I focused on the directing part myself. It's a big production, and I think I need to put all my energy into it. But the producers convinced me, and they probably said, "Hey, why don't you act yourself?" So I had to sigh from them... But I didn't plan to act in the beginning, because I knew from "The Faceless Man" how difficult it would be.
You've always been known for your relaxed filming atmosphere, and after Braveheart was shot on the live tidbits DVD, you also thought you looked relaxed. Isn't that an extra role for you – walking around telling jokes and keeping everything organized in order to give everyone else confidence and a good mood?
Mel Gibson: Oh, that's so true. That's important. So, I think I'm going to have to play three roles at the same time. (Laughs)
"When I directed the scene, I was running around on the set in a Scottish dress and riding a motorcycle."
What part of filmmaking is the most exhausting for you? Is it pre-production, shooting or post-production?
Mel Gibson: The shooting part was the most boiling, I think, because it took so long. I mean, oh my God, you have to get up before dawn, and by the time you get things done and you can finally go to sleep, it's early in the morning, when I sleep less than 4 hours a day on average. And for many weeks you can't rest even one day. When you do have a day to rest, you don't want to talk to anyone, but instead shut yourself in your room, close all the curtains, and sit silently in the dark drinking tea and smoking. That's the way things are. The filming time is the most annoying, because you have to wear a hair cover, wear a costume and makeup, and you have to think about how to shoot. You have to be there before anyone else, and on some big days you have to face thousands of people and hundreds of horses. That's crazy.
Mel Gibson on set Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Is post-production difficult? You seem to be particularly comfortable with how to edit war shots.
Mel Gibson said there were very few remakes at the time, mainly close-ups of horses courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Mel Gibson: In order of difficulty, the shooting process is the hardest, then pre-production, post-production is the easiest, because by that point we have pretty much everything we need. All we have to do is carefully judge how to combine the footage, which ones need to be deleted and which need to be retained. There were very, very few scenes that needed to be reshot, and there were only about one or two scenes that I reshot in Arizona. (Laughs) Yes, my remake was taken from Arizona, hahaha, because I wanted to get those horses very close to the shot. In Ireland and England, where the horses are beautiful, the riders are brilliant, and there are great stunts, all sorts of stuff. But the only flaw is that you can't get those horses to squeeze right face forward into the wide-angle lens because they're scared. But we found some old cowboys in Arizona, and they had ugly old horses and told them to do whatever they wanted. They're literally scrambling into the camera.
So all of you actors perform the parts are okay, just remake the horse?
Mel Gibson: That's right! (Laughs) We found these cowboys in Arizona. It's genuine, it's all old-time Western style — bearded, chewing tobacco leaves, all rough guys. We stuffed these old cowboys into the knight's row, looked really funny, and then we shot the horses.
You mentioned "The Faceless Man" before, and you said that it is a very small movie compared to "Braveheart". But did the experience of making this debut help you direct Braveheart?
Mel Gibson: Oh, that's absolutely, there's no doubt I learned a lot from the first film I directed. If Braveheart had been my first film, I would have absolutely broken down. Filming "The Man Without a Face" gave me a lot of useful experience. If you don't know this in advance — from wearing a pair of comfortable shoes when shooting to how to naturally transition the plot and how to edit the scenes, it is almost impossible to complete. (From the first film) you learn about organizing scheduling, shooting lists, from lens selection to all sorts of other equipment to use.
Mel Gibson on set single-handedly played multiple roles, and the "amount of movement" behind the camera was no less than that of Courtesy of Paramount Pictures in front of the camera
When I directed Braveheart, I knew all about it, even though I had only done it once before. Of course, Braveheart is a much bigger movie, and sometimes I have nine cameras shooting at the same time to make big scenes. I was wearing makeup and riding around in front of the cameras on a motorcycle in my scottish skirt, and I had two or three monitors to see the A and B cameras, but I couldn't see C, D, E, F, G, and H, so I had to ride the motorcycle to see how the parts were progressing. (Laughs) That's cool! At that time, I really opened up and gave my all. Of course, even though I ate as much as a horse at that time, I kept dropping meat, after all, I only had 24 hours a day and only 7 days a week.
You mention the historical sources and ancient narrative poems that Randall Wallace referenced when he wrote the script, about William Wallace, and one of the things that is certain is that he was as fierce and cold as a barbarian in battle. Do you think that his animalistic savagery and his noble ideals in his heart are two sides of the same coin? Or do you feel that there is no connection between the two?
Mel Gibson: No, I don't think so. I think it was painful for him to be oppressed. Realizing that he was not a free man, that some people could trample their throats with iron boots and force themselves to do what they didn't want to do, drove him mad. He didn't want to be a slave. He had great hatred and prejudice against his enemies, and that had been going on a long time ago. He was probably only 17 years old when he killed the first person, and like the Berserkers of Norse mythology, he often went deep into the enemy alone and then killed, slashed, and set fires. He's a lunatic. He had a strong hatred for his southern neighbors and showed no mercy. He didn't want to breathe the same air as them. Wallace reminds me of the character of John Wayne in Searcher, who also hated the Indian tribes. I think he was brutally enslaved since he was a child, but when he grew up, he didn't like it very much, so he got up and changed it. If you are not free, you would rather die – this shows that he is a very passionate, but also a very violent, fearless person. Also, you're right, he's a barbarian who will peel the skin of his enemies and make them into belts as trophies.
Is it true that the version you initially submitted to the Motion Picture Association was rated NC-17? If so, how many things did you delete in order to convert to an R-rated film?
Inevitably, the film had some cuts, but Gibson said it didn't affect the viewing, and even many people had the illusion that they were seeing certain images courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Mel Gibson: I can't remember, but I remember saying it was too violent. But you look at the film now, my goodness, I've seen a lot of things that are much more violent than it. However, Braveheart does have some bloody episodes. For example, the scene of a villager being cut off his throat looks very uncomfortable. So in the UK, someone said to me at the time, I'm going to keep the scene or modify it so that the audience doesn't have to watch the man's neck cut open – that's the difference between level 18 and level 15 in their country (you can't see it between 15 years old). So I agreed to the change. In a sense, the effect is better after the change, because you don't have to see the scene of wiping your neck, just look at the ending. I went around to the back and re-selected the angle.
But there are many times when viewers claim to have seen scenes that they didn't actually see, such as when they think they saw the girl's throat cut — that's all behind the camera. We sped up his movements, then switched the camera to a close-up of the girl's face, and then her eyes slammed open, but there was never a scene of her being killed. But people are still frightened. I've seen a lot of things that are really "brutal" and people don't seem to be horrified, and I think it may be because they don't care so much about those people. If they care a lot about the fate of the people in the film, I think those films will make them more uneasy. So in a sense, it might mean you've reached your goal.
"James Horner didn't get best score, it's like being robbed"
The Battle of Stirling has become one of the classic war scenes in film history. Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Braveheart even boosted Stirling's tourism industry, with nearly tripling the number of visitors to Stirling Castle in the year the film's release, with 15 percent of non-local visitors saying they traveled here because of Braveheart. Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
The Battle of Stirling in the film partially shows wallace's barbarism, and this passage is considered one of the best war scenes in modern film history. How long did it take you to shoot this?
Mel Gibson: It was a long, continuous scene, with a lot of cameras to shoot and a lot of groundwork. Teams of men and horses appeared, and they were tossing coins and gambling their lives on their luck; the west wind was howling, and the people finished their pre-war gossip, and then turned over on their horses and rushed to the battlefield. That's the rough outline. The war scenes probably took me five to six weeks to shoot, and there was a lot of work to be done. Speeches, bows and arrows, horses, and melee battles, and then you have to integrate a big thing out of that, so that we have a rough picture of the war.
The historic Battle of Stirling Bridge was not like that, although the result was the same – the Scots were victorious. Because, first of all, we don't have bridges. (Laughs) But I wanted to make it spectacular, very... Movies, so we almost fought with horses and bows and arrows — and a lot of people, built the battle on their own. The whole scene basically did not use CGI special effects, except for some large scenes, in order to make them look more "big", we used stunts to add people and horses. In fact, we've used thousands of people to shoot these scenes. Another interesting point is that because there are two big war scenes in the film, when we shoot the second scene, we have learned and sold a lot of the experience of the first scene, and it took only two weeks to shoot. Of course, the audience with particularly sharp eyes may have found that some bells, whistles and the like in the second scene are very familiar, and we have transferred flowers and trees. This kind of trick can still be played. When filming the second battle, we added some fire into it and came out very well.
As you mentioned, the sub-scenes are basically live shooting rather than virtual special effects, so if you were to direct Braveheart today, would you change or add some parts of the film?
Mel Gibson: Sure, some of the images didn't work out what I wanted, but if you go to the VFX company and ask if you can think of a way, they can't do it. That was 20 years ago, and their technology was still limited. There are some parts that seem unsatisfactory now. But personally, I always have a feeling that when you look at the special effects, you know that you are watching the special effects, and there will be a little subtraction in the feeling. I vividly remember watching a film where I sat there and thought, "Wow, everybody knows it's a special effects shot." But that's okay. Because this scene is really difficult to shoot. "But sincerely, I don't want Braveheart to be like that. Even later when I made Apocalypse, I didn't use much special effects, even though there were some pretty wild shots in it.
Speaking of Braveheart, I remember that we had a scene where Wallace rushed to the middle of a group of people and swung his sword blade around like a helicopter leaf fan, and people did exactly that — rushing into the enemy line and then starting to cut melons and vegetables, and the scene was very disgusting. We were shooting that shot, and then we tried to show more detail with CGI, but that day we ended up giving up because the shot itself was bloody enough. (People have already said) "God, what a terrible violence! "The way Steve Rosenblum edits war scenes is so fragmented that we don't stay too long on all the shots, but instead design them into a series of short, powerful clips. It's moments of evil like these that inject tension into the battle scene and make it look more intense.
You've worked with composer James Horner before that, but the soundtrack to Braveheart was so successful.
Soundtrack guru James Horner is also a big contributor to Braveheart
Mel Gibson: James Horner gave a very good soundtrack to The Faceless Man, and this one was a big win (Editor's note: "score" in English means both a soundtrack and a score, and Gibson played a nice pun here). The soundtrack is unbelievably good! For me, it was the best soundtrack of the year. One of the most interesting things was that when the Oscar for Best Original Score was announced that year, they lost the answer — someone took the envelope away. So Sharon Stone, who presented the award, had to break the siege and say, "Let's enjoy a moment of peace of mind." "I think the guy who took the best original song before took it by mistake. (Laughs) So I don't know exactly what happened, but there was a sense of being robbed because James' soundtrack was fantastic. Of course, years later, if I remember correctly, he got that trophy with Titanic, but I think he deserved it that year. (Editor's note: At that year's Oscar, Luis Bakaloff beat James Horner for the Little Golden Man with "The Postman." Steve and I, who were in charge of editing, watched the whole sample and hardly needed any changes because the combination was so good. They are passionate and have a wonderful sense of rhythm, classical orchestral music made with strings, winds, drums, etc., which the London Symphony Orchestra interprets vividly. Then James helped me with the soundtrack for Apocalypse, which was a completely different style of music, with very simple and primitive instruments and hymns. That's enough to prove how genius he is.
Braveheart has a variety of elements, action, history, and love. When you chose two female actors in the play, what qualities do you value most? What made you choose Sophie Marceau and Catherine McMacquet?
The two loves of the film China Lex can be sung and wept courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Mel Gibson: Movies, it's a really interesting thing. Director Sergey Eisenstein once wrote that if you were to show you a picture of an old lady and then switch to something else, then, depending on the cut shot, you would then have different feelings about the old lady and interpret her emotional state at the time differently. For example, if she switches to a burning village and makes her seem to stare at it, the audience will think that she is shocked and sad. If you switch to two children playing together, then when you cut back to the old lady, the audience will think that she is reminiscing about her childhood. So when it comes to love scenes on the screen, I think the main thing depends on the way you shoot, because when you put those chemically complex elements together and arrange them one by one, specific feelings will undoubtedly and inevitably breed.
As for the reason why I chose these two actresses to star in Braveheart, the first thing is that they are both unusually beautiful, and there is something very similar but very different in their eyes and postures. Of course, the roles they play are very different. But they were all feminine and angry at the same time—in short, I chose them. In front of the camera, even if you let them play with the camel of Notre Dame (referring to Asimodo), there is no awkward feeling, because they, the whole situation is full of charm. I can't analyze too much like this, in fact, it is better not to analyze it, just look at it. In fact, before the shooting, there were also some criticisms about the script, questioning that the emotional drama of the characters in the play was somewhat abrupt and lacked sufficient foundation. That's when I said, "I don't know. Just put this on the screen, let the characters stare at each other, and whether the audience will buy it or not depends on the performance of the actors. "We found those beats, and I think it turned out to be pretty good.
Mel Gibson and Sophie Marceau courtesy of Paramount Pictures on set
"Everyone dies, but not everyone really lives"
Remember the day of the Oscars? Is there a feeling of shame in winning back the Best Director trophy? After all, it was so difficult to find investment before.
Mel Gibson: Ah, I never felt that way, but now you say that... It seems to be a little. That feels really great. The award proves that I made the right choice and that I have indeed made a film with great artistic value. Looking back, the other feeling is a sense of distortion. Participating in the Oscar race is like entering a whirlpool... The whole process is intense and intense, and you have to go to all kinds of lunches and dinners, and you have to meet and socialize with all kinds of people, which is a bit like a weird political campaign. And by the end of the night, by the time people played your name out, your feelings were a little numb, and then you tried to walk up the stage with the most graceful gesture you could, and then — okay, you can step down. But you've had a great time all season, getting 10 nominations and finally bringing back five little golden figures, it's a really ethereal feeling, even though I don't know what happened to the envelope for the best original soundtrack, hahaha. (Editor's note: Gibson has been resentful of Horner's failure to win the award for years, and many fans feel the same way.) ）
Braveheart may already be a part of your life and memory, and as time goes by, how do you feel different about rewatching the film? Also, do you have a favorite scene?
Braveheart brought Mel Gibson to the pinnacle of his career, and as a director, he also had more options after Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Mel Gibson: There's a lot of things in this film that I cherish, and sometimes I find more, but it can often surprise you, and that's the memory that haunts me. The film cost a minimum of $40 million, so it's really a big production. It wasn't a beast-level budget, but it was already expensive in its time. But we've tried our best to save money, otherwise it wouldn't be enough, after all, so many people, horses, blood plasma, and all kinds of scenes, castles, etc. were used in the shooting. A few years ago they had a retrospective of a new disc, and it was the first time I'd rewatched the film in a long time, and I couldn't help but sigh, "Wow, this film is really grand." "I think of a lot of things that I've completely forgotten. Those war scenes were hard-won, and so were some of the small passages. Sometimes the most hastily shots, which took only 30 minutes to complete, look amazing. Sometimes there are many, many bland moments, but something wonderful can be born in a matter of seconds. I take this lesson to heart.
As a huge production, "Braveheart" has a universal appeal, for Chinese film fans, some of the lines in the film have almost become classics in the hearts of many people. Are there any lines that are particularly memorable for you?
Mel Gibson: These wonderful lines are all thanks to Randy. I think what he liked the most was, "Everybody dies, but not everybody really lives." (Every man dies, not every man really lives.) This is one of the most moving sentences, so wonderful that it can be said to distill one of the themes of this movie.
Speaking of Randy (Randall Wallace), you've always had a great working relationship. He wrote Hacksaw Ridge, and then that's the film you're going to direct next, right?
Mel Gibson: Yeah, Randy gave me the script. It was co-written by him with another man. So I'll pick up that burden and see if I can make it fit. Let's walk and see (laughs). Fortunately, I still have some means left. This summer we will do the preliminary preparations, and then probably start shooting in the fall. But in Australia, where they were filmed, it was summer, or rather their twilight. The Australian scenery will be very beautiful in that season, and the staff there will be excellent.
The last most successful director, can you tell us your views on the international market that is becoming more and more important at present? Especially for the Chinese market.
Mel Gibson: Well, as far as I'm concerned, in the stories that draw me in, I always try to keep something of universal significance. I want my films to resonate when they are screened in countries of any cultural background. In the past two decades, foreign markets have developed really fast. I guess someone must have said that now they don't say "foreign" markets, but "international"! (Laughs) The world is really big. I remember that ten years ago, a film could reach the domestic and international box office for almost five or five, but the balance has been broken in these years, and now it is generally four or six, so the importance of the international market is becoming more and more prominent, and because of Russia and China, this growth will continue. I recently watched a report about Jackie Chan's new film "The Heavenly Hero" (there were reports that Gibson would join the film, and it seems that the two sides may have negotiated), which has an incredibly high international box office. If a movie like Braveheart can resonate in China, that's great. If I could make a film that meets the audience's tastes, I would persevere.