Konrad von Carstein Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Trying to convince the GF (Polish, who loves the film) that this is no more than a fairy tale film, but not being particularly up on my Scottish history (emarassed smiley) I can only advise that we: Diddn't paint our faces blue Wallace didn't impregnate the Queen of England Can any one else provide further hollywoodisms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergio Garcia Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 The version shown of the battle of stirling bridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tams bird Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 William Wallace and Robert the Bruce wernt around at the same time I heard, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Just this year The Times announced Braveheart as the 2nd most historically inaccurate movie ever, tell her that. Just found this site which will give you more info: http://www.historicallyinaccuratetv.com/inaccurate/Movies/films/braveheart.html Quite a nice soundtrack though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodethejambo Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Princess Isabelle married the Prince of Wales three years after Wallace's murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beverley Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 terrific film but the only facts are in the region of william wallace was male, may have had sex, had a big sword and then died Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konrad von Carstein Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Am now being shouted at for spoiling the film cos I sent her the link provided by Slevin Kelivera via facebook chat:10900: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milky_26 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 yeah, it was the picts who painted their faces, the picts were the older "native" people in scotland before the scots came over from ireland and the face painting thing stopped Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Am now being shouted at for spoiling the film cos I sent her the link provided by Slevin Kelivera via facebook chat:10900: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konrad von Carstein Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Hope you are proud of yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Hope you are proud of yourself Trouble in paradise? I hope i havnt caused to much bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konrad von Carstein Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Trouble in paradise? I hope i havnt caused to much bother. Nah, i'm reasonably sure that the make up sex will be worth it:stuart: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Nah, i'm reasonably sure that the make up sex will be worth it:stuart: Legend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 prima nocta is latin for get her pumped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konrad von Carstein Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Legend I'll be thinking of YOU but perhaps not shouting your name Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beverley Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Nah, i'm reasonably sure that the make up sex will be worth it:stuart: and i you really wanna pish her off scream FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOMMMMMMMMMM right at that "special" moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konrad von Carstein Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 and i you really wanna pish her off scream FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOMMMMMMMMMM right at that "special" moment I think that would be her perogative after tonight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 and i you really wanna pish her off scream FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOMMMMMMMMMM right at that "special" moment that cracked me up. Maybe he should go the whole hog and come dressed as William Wallce, (the inaccurate hollywood verson.) As for the movie, even the title is wrong. Braveheart was referred to Robert the Bruce, after he died he wanted his Heart taken out and carried in front of a crusade so it was his "brave Heart." I cant stand the film as I am a history student and it has forever ruined the early part of the wars of indendence for historical accuracy of the general public. I feel a better subject for film is Robert the Bruce. A man who was so complex, life had so many stories and whose acts ultimatly changed Scotland for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Lighter Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I think probably the only historical fact the film got right was that Edward II was a poof. Of course this fact required no research whatsoever on the part of the film makers because everyone knows all Englishmen are poofs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsmak Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 prima nocta is latin for get her pumped. Can I use this as My Signature now? Please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam Tarts 1874 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 The statue of Mel Gibson at the Wallace Monument is a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Busby ! Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 William Wallace would not have spoken with a bąstardised Glaswegian accent (god knows who voice coached him...) , as of course the accent arose during the industrial revolution, from the citys mix of incoming Irish, highlanders and rural Scots, integrating with the existing population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I think probably the only historical fact the film got right was that Edward II was a poof.Of course this fact required no research whatsoever on the part of the film makers because everyone knows all Englishmen are poofs. Maybe the "sequel" will see the poker rammed up his fundament! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Can I use this as My Signature now? Please? i see no reason why not. best thing about braveheart is that billy connolly is the bitterest man alive at being overlooked for a part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 The girl who went on to be married to the future Edward II was 3 years old when Wallace was at large. So it is extrememly unlikely that he pumped her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Lighter Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Maybe the "sequel" will see the poker rammed up his fundament! Poofs and sadomasachists?It's worse than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Weathers Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Crane Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Bruce's so-called betrayal of Wallace at Falkirk apparently had a history tutor of mine at university shout "**** OFF!!!" while watching said film in the cinema. Bruce was said to be in France at the time recruiting for his own cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P-Dizzle Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Wallace was an english merc. He was also a gay pedofile who had sex with a two year old french girl and left love notes to Robert The Bruce on a wall in Gurness. According to Stuart Lee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 William Wallace and Robert the Bruce wernt around at the same time I heard, I'm sorry but they quite clearly were... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therapist Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Trying to convince the GF (Polish, who loves the film) that this is no more than a fairy tale film, but not being particularly up on my Scottish history (emarassed smiley) I can only advise that we:Diddn't paint our faces blue Wallace didn't impregnate the Queen of England Can any one else provide further hollywoodisms? I've never seen the film - nationalist propaganda pish - but I am led to believe that most of it was filmed in Oirland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Busby ! Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Were Wallace alive today, he would be a Hearts fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboBen Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The fundamentals in the film are all correct, Hollywood just exaggerated a few points. The bit about pumping the Princess of Wales is absolute humpty it's ridiculous, but he was rumoured to have been quite active "sewing his oats". There is no denying the fact that he was a great leader and fighter. You only have to go to the Wallace monument to realise how well he was taken by the Scottish people. That monument was built over 500 years, AFTER, he died. The film makes him out to be a nice gent, he was in fact so patriotic, his retribution against England was savage. In the old "eye for an eye" justice days, he felt it was appropraite to do to the English what was done to Scots. He went down to England to rape and murder as pay back. I don't think the film did the battle of Stirling justice, the way he managed to out wit the English there on the bridge was excellent. What the film did do well was to highlight the fact that not all Scots were on his side, especially the Nobles in Edinburgh. He was an outlaw and eventually betrayed. As I say, there are some fibs in the film, but fundamentally, events the major events that took place are factually correct, if not dramatised to some extent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotland Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Were Wallace alive today, he would be a Hearts fan William Wallace has a Gun! Wait, no that's not right..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 terrific film but the only facts are in the region of william wallace was male, may have had sex, had a big sword and then died Lies,lies, lies. The movie is based on fact. In fact a guy who went to school with my Dad was there. He wasn't involved in any the battles due to him having the flu at the time but he was there. I think he took some photos. I'll ask my Dad if he can get them and I'll post them on here. Blasphemy (blaspheme) to say William Wallace was not real. You'll be telling me next the filmed in Ireland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotland Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Real: Mel: Hmmmmm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallschunkychicken Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Proof: William Wallace wouldn't use hair straighteners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The fundamentals in the film are all correct, Hollywood just exaggerated a few points. The bit about pumping the Princess of Wales is absolute humpty it's ridiculous, but he was rumoured to have been quite active "sewing his oats". There is no denying the fact that he was a great leader and fighter. You only have to go to the Wallace monument to realise how well he was taken by the Scottish people. That monument was built over 500 years, AFTER, he died. The film makes him out to be a nice gent, he was in fact so patriotic, his retribution against England was savage. In the old "eye for an eye" justice days, he felt it was appropraite to do to the English what was done to Scots. He went down to England to rape and murder as pay back. I don't think the film did the battle of Stirling justice, the way he managed to out wit the English there on the bridge was excellent. What the film did do well was to highlight the fact that not all Scots were on his side, especially the Nobles in Edinburgh. He was an outlaw and eventually betrayed. As I say, there are some fibs in the film, but fundamentally, events the major events that took place are factually correct, if not dramatised to some extent! The Wallace Monument was erected in the Victorian era I think, at a time when a very "tartan" perspective of Scots History was being painted. I suppose the poem by Blind Harry was the first real popular story of Wallace (circa 1477). As for him being betrayed, again if you look at it in context you will see that the Scottish Nobles, Guardians of the Nation etc had come to a sort of truce with Edward I. Wallace was a thorn in everyone's side so he was turned over. I'm not saying that is right or wrong, but to view it specifically as a betrayal and thus a betrayal of Scotland is one dimensional (imho, of course!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tynie b Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Bravehearts a Freakin GREAT Movie...Couldn't care less if its Factual, Made Up or based on the life of Mel Gibson himself...It's was good, mind numbing veiwing and I enjoyed it!! Snobs, the lot O' Yeah!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Real: Hmmmmm: He looks like an absolute homo if that first picture is accurate. That statue is a joke, where is it situated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotland Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 He looks like an absolute homo if that first picture is accurate. That statue is a joke, where is it situated? It is, indeed as accurate as possible- as there were no photographs, a portrait is the next best thing. If we compare it to another portrait of wallace done around the same time, we realise that most of the attributes are the same. Well, the beard. Wallace Monument Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 It is, indeed as accurate as possible- as there were no photographs, a portrait is the next best thing. If we compare it to another portrait of wallace done around the same time, we realise that most of the attributes are the same. Well, the beard. Wallace Monument I like his hat. Thanks for that, a bit of a ridiculous statue to have sitting next to the Wallace Monument in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotland Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I like his hat. Thanks for that, a bit of a ridiculous statue to have sitting next to the Wallace Monument in my opinion. The one in aberdeen is much better IMO - Sorry for the extremely large picture, it was the only one i could find: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The closest the film got to historical accuracy was that it shows Mel Gibson up to be a racist yob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 He looks like an absolute homo if that first picture is accurate. That statue is a joke, where is it situated? sadly at the Wallace Momument. JamboBen, yes Wallace was a great leader (and a minor noble, so he was not from the people as Braveheart tries to make out) but at Sterling there was another notble Scots leader who is often forgotten but can be argued was just as influential if not more leading up to the battle, Andrew de Moray. Unfortunatly he died of his wounds from the battle so is easily forgotten from Scottish history and it has been argued by some historians that Moray was the brains behind the campaign and was a key reason why Wallace had very little success following Sterling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The one in aberdeen is much better IMO - Sorry for the extremely large picture, it was the only one i could find: Hm slightly better, at least he resembles the pictures. Gay tights though not a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotland Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I found this. Found it rather amusing. Compared to the real Wallace, Mel Gibson's character gets of comparatively easy in the death scene. The real Wallace was emasculated and eviscerated. There is a part at the end of the execution scene where the camera focuses on Gibson's face after the executionor introduces a sharp-looking torture instrument. Something nasty is clearly happening, but we aren't told visually what it is. I am 100% fine with this vagueness. Even those of us who belong to ethnic groups slandered by Mr. Gibson do not particularly want to see him castrated...at least not most of us...I don't think. It would just be nice if we could feel sure that he didn't hate us. He's even welcome to continue making historically inaccurate movies, because I get such a lot of mileage out of the many errors in his work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Cockade Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Many inaccuracies as in any historical film - and remember it was a feature film not a documentary but Wallace's wife was killed by the English, he did fight against the English (who were trying hard to oblierate Scotland), he was a good guerilla leader and he was betrayed to the English and tortured and butchered by that civilised nation on the pretext of treason (how can a Scotsman be accused of treason by another country?) So it wasn't all the fiction some on here make out Wallace was and is still to many a Scottish hero BB I like most of your postings on JKB but to say that Scottish national identity is a fiction created by the romantics of the 19th century isn't your finest hour! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Gordons Gloves Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Someone mentioned earlier that the film was mostly filmed in Ireland - which is totally accurate - mainly due to the UK government not allowing grants and tax breaks to the film industry unlike Ireland. As for it being nationalistic propoganda - i dont think that the SNP were financial backers of the movie It pains me that most Americans i meet assume that Braveheart is factually correct, it also gives me great pleasure to then point out all the historical inaccuracies and tell them the real story of Wallace, Bruce and the others that fought against their country being invaded by their neighbours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andi17 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Proof: William Wallace wouldn't use hair straighteners. Is that no the guy that was in 10cc and godley and creme:10900: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.