This production of the well-known British legend of a heroic queen leading a rebellion in the name of liberty against the brutal occupying Romans in 60 AD tugs at all the heartstrings, unfortunately by glossing over some facts. It tries for verisimilitude by having the Romans speak in Latin (the actors did a credible job, too), though it insists the fight is about freedom from a tyrannical occupier. It wasn't. Boudicca's husband was a client king, which Romans permitted in the interests of a peaceful transition to outright Roman rule. The king's possessions, his nation, however, were supposed to pass to the Emperor on his death, and the region would be ruled by a Procurator (most likely). The husband ignored this in his will, and tried to pull a fast one by giving only half of his kingdom to Nero, after living the high life from Roman bribes for a nearly 20 years. Naturally, the Romans put the new queen in her place, brutally, it seems, which sparked a revolt that quickly grew to a rebellion, although a lot of tribes stayed loyal to Rome or at least neutral, probably waiting to see the outcome. As in Gaul over 100 years earlier, massive mobilisation by usually divided tribal people was only effective in ambush, in wiping out defenceless towns and in seizing booty. When the Romans got their act together several months later and met Boudicca in open warfare, the result was a massive massacre. The history here seems real enough, but the continual references to liberty give the wrong impression, though quick cuts to various scholars admitting that the vengeful Iceni – Celts were just as savage in cutting down Roman civilians provides some balance. Charlotte Comer, who plays Boudicca with gusto, can't do too much with a script that turns her into a passionara. Not since Mel Gibson's Braveheart has so much ham been fed up in the guise of history, but it's not her fault. The supporting actors are mostly caricatures, but again, they are mouthing historical set pieces, though Mark Noble as Suetonius who defeats Boudicca is fine. All in all, there's enough documentary style cut-aways to give balance, despite the rhetoric. Finally, it's true that Celts did not have the Latin patriarchal tradition, but Romans did not disdain women, as it is implied here, nor is it entirely accurate that Celts had as many queens as kings, which is implied here by an explanation of the Celtic laws of succession. Most evidence suggests that they were guided by kings and priests (druids), despite reports of warrior women and a high degree of sexual freedom (compared to Rome). Still, it's all very entertaining. If you get a chance to watch this, do so. The rhetoric is a bit stilted but many historical fine details are accurate, especially the description of Roman tactics, which is often wrong in most movies. The combination of staged re-enactments and documentary style commentary is very effective. No doubt the real Boudicca was an extraordinary woman to create even a short lived union against the Romans, but be prepared for a degree of predictable myth-making with this production.