Braveheart

On my list of the greatest movies of all time, BraveHeart ranks as number 3. It is by far one of the most epic stories ever told. Mel Gibson deserved all the credit he recieved and more. His portrayal of William Wallace, one of Scotlands most mightiest warriors, was spot on. The only part that lacked was the romantic affair of Princess Isabella and Wallace. It historically never happened. This movie also has other historical errors but WHO CARES!

The Battle of Stirling has to be the second most graphic piece of footage ever shot next to Omaha Beach in Saving Private Ryan. I love the part where the English Commander gives the order to charge and Wallace sees this and raises his broadsword into the air and starts yelling. He charges the field with the Scots and I'll let you see the movie to see what happens next.

Wallace's emotional speech at the battle of Stirling still is inspirational and I think that the REAL William Wallace would be proud of the way Mel Gibson portrayed him.

My hat goes off to Mel Gibson. I hope he makes a few more movies like this one.

Out of ten............10/10!

Someone really missed out on a good story here. The William Wallace story is exceptional so why do Hollywood have to "improve" it and turn it into a second-rate, overlong mess of a film? How can you have the Battle of Stirling Bridge _without_ the bridge? Producers have claimed that the bridge "got in the way". Funny, the English army discovered that too. And why demean the hero by having him up against such a pantomime villain - sure Edward was a twisted b*****d, but the filmmakers might as well have given him a sidekick called Igor and have him cackle at choice moments throughout the film, he was that unsubtle. Most importantly, however, it seems a real shame that it should be this film that should have captured the hearts of the Scottish nation, they deserve so much better. Would you believe there is now a hideous statue of Mel Gibson at the foot of the Wallace Memorial in Stirling? Would you believe people are leaving flowers beneath it? This film is a travesty of both a good story and history itself. Scotland deserves so much better.

My old dad used to treat this Mel Gibson Best Picture Oscar-winner with utter scorn and derision, especially with reference to the actual facts as known. He always started off with the respective differences in size between the real William Wallace's true dimensions and the much less imposing Mel Gibson while anyone who does the mildest of diligence into the historical facts will see just how much licence director Gibson and his screenwriter Randall Wallace took with the Scottish rebel-hero's story. I know and knew all this even as I rewatched the film again but despite the overwhelming number of plot contrivances served up, I have to admit as an independence-leaning Scot myself, the film never fails to stir my own blood.

We follow the young Wallace from his early childhood, almost literally blooded early in life to hate the occupying English army under the rule of their despotic King Edward Longshanks played with real brio by Patrick McGoohan. When he loses his father and older brother in another betrayal by Edward, it's clear that the now fully-grown, long-haired Wallace is only awaiting one final provocation before he accepts the freedom-fighter mantle and takes up the cudgels on behalf of his downtrodden people.

For those who don't know very much about Scottish history, it is filled with glorious failures and almost as often double-dealing, back-stabbing intrigue so that it's no surprise when his heroics are brought to an end by a combination of underhand scheming on the part of Edward and the connivance of the corruptible Scottish nobility, in particular the treachery of the future "try, try again" hero - King Robert the Bruce. But Wallace has the last word in more ways than one with his martyr's death and impregnation of the future English queen.

Certainly one of Hollywood's more outrageous retellings of a story from history, the movie bludgeons its way into the viewer's consciousness down to the twin combination of Gibson's muscular, gritty direction and his athleticism and conviction in the lead role. Sure, the accents across the cast are occasionally as convincing as a King's promise, but with effective use of crowd scenes and the gory, no holds-barred depictions of battleground warfare, laced with earthy humour and even a good old Highland romance, Gibson delivers a powerfully uplifting if historically inaccurate feature which has thrilled the Scottish national psyche and no doubt the freedom-seeking aspirations of many another country ever since.

What to say about Braveheart?

This movie holds up against the challenge of aging, its exciting, adventurous, funny and passionate. The movie is beautifully shot and sounds incredible.

Is it violent? Sure but what war isn't. I think Mel makes violence as much a part of the story in all his (relevant) films. The characters struggle through great violence and the impacts that is has on them, by not shying away from it we are allowed to get a small appreciation of it and them.

The movie isn't OTT but delivers great action that serves the story and entertains the viewer.

Its considered a classic film and so it is.

A simple message but even today, over seven hundred years later, there are far too many captive to their cultures, governments and institutions. They take a large slice, sometimes all of the freedoms William Wallace and so many others fought for. Keep up the fight because, like the tide, those oppressive forces wont curtail.

A rousing piece of cinema, you can forgive the historical inaccuracies in order for it to tell a hugely engaging and inspirational story full of hope, although it leaves you under no illusion of mans inhumanity to man and the vile and despicable things that can be done in the name of greed, power and control.