Very huge pile of inaccurate horseshit from start to finish, it really is quite laughable.
Along with hating the Jews, Gibson certainly does hate the English too.
I'm Deckard B26354, I retire Wokies, I'm filed and monitored.
i dont care about history inaccurate when i watch film. all i care about is being entertain and good action/battles. i think it do well in that respect. i much prefer this to gladiators. good musics and setting too. sophie marceau is v. nice.
"Along with the Jews, Gibson certainly does hate the English too"
gibbo is irish ancestrys. of course he hate english. in his bloods!
Braveheart is as historically accurate as is Spaceballs.
Braveheart is also an amazing masterpiece with fantastic acting, sets, costumes, sound, soundtrack, practical effects(!), cinematography, ... the list goes on.
The story is amazing and gripping, the characters are fresh, interesting and in some instances flat out mesmerizing.
Longshanks is brilliant, Hamish is brilliant, Steven is a bit over the top but still "serious enough" so the movie does not become ridiculous (like nowadays "Marvel humor" where everything's just silly and dumb because haha, gotta make GenZ laugh!).
So, seriously... historical accuracy aside - would you seriously say this was a bad movie?
Because the movie never claimed to be a documentary... you're stating the (very) obvious. Why?
You bastard! You just blew up my sarcasm detector!
Well said 💪🏻
shareMel is an alpha dog king!!!
share🥱🥱🥱🥱
shareLOL you're dumb.
shareWho the fuck knew ANYTHING about this story before Mel Gibson made the movie, besides Scots and historians? Exactly no one. Its not a documentary. Its a great film and it has everything. Its an incredible achievement in storytelling.
shareAre you English at all?
shareConsidering it was mostly filmed in Ireland, with Irish bagpipes on the soundtrack instead of Scottish, the Scots were portrayed as primitive, backwards people wearing the wrong clothes, Mel Gibson's a little weed compared to the real William Wallace, and the battle at Stirling bridge didn't actually have a bridge, there's more reason for Scots to get upset about the film than the English.
The film is militantly pro-Scottish/anti-English, irrespective of the inaccuracies, and was heralded as a stirring propaganda in the campaign for Scottish independence (which I admittedly have some sympathy for, as long as it's NOT tainted by unnecessary xenophobic/anti-Anglo bullshit).
shareI was being tongue in cheek but it is a curious film in the way it portrays Scots.
It's like a Victorian England outlook of the Scottish.
The moment where Gibson stands there covered in blood, raises his sword in the air, and yells like a football hooligan is cringeworthy.