History Film / BraveHeart

30th Aug '17 5:56:44 PM BatmanKalEl
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The film treats using a hedge of long spears against horsemen as a revolutionary idea. It certainly wasn't. The idea goes back to antiquity.
What was new was the Scottish schiltrons formations. These were circular formations that presented pikes out toward the enemy in 360 degrees, rather like a hedgehog. At Falkirk, Edward I called back his knights before they took too many losses and just had his archers open fire on the schiltrons. Defenseless against bowmen, the schiltrons collapsed quickly afterward.

to:

** The film treats using a hedge of long spears against horsemen as a revolutionary idea. It certainly wasn't. The idea goes back to antiquity. \n What was new was the Scottish schiltrons formations. These were circular formations that presented pikes out toward the enemy in 360 degrees, rather like a hedgehog. At Falkirk, Edward I called back his knights before they took too many losses and just had his archers open fire on the schiltrons. Defenseless against bowmen, the schiltrons collapsed quickly afterward.



*** Boiling oil? No. Oil was expensive and hard to keep hot. Sand and water are cheaper and just as effective. Try to imagine how quickly heated sand would get through your armor. Other good options that were used include rocks, burning sulfur, and even beehives.

to:

*** ** Boiling oil? No. Oil was expensive and hard to keep hot. Sand and water are cheaper and just as effective. Try to imagine how quickly heated sand would get through your armor. Other good options that were used include rocks, burning sulfur, and even beehives.
14th Aug '17 9:55:26 AM shatterstar
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* BloodlessCarnage: In the case of Murron's death. The magistrate clearly slit her throat, yet her wound is obscured from view and there is no blood on the knife. But this may be a [[SpecialEffectsFailure goof]].
10th Jul '17 5:40:03 AM SimbaTheLionKing
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Prince Edward gets a strange form of this. Edward II is generally regarded as a mediocre king who may have had a homosexual affair but did have a wife and children by her. Gibson makes him medieval CampGay, and then uses that as a shorthand for evil and weak. He even gets taken down by a single bitchslap by King Edward after King Edward [[spoiler: murders the Prince's lover and the Prince tries to avenge him.]] It makes sense for Gibson to use this rather ugly narrative device given his well-documented homophobia.

to:

** Prince Edward gets a strange form of this. Edward II is generally regarded as a mediocre king who may have had a homosexual affair but did have a wife and children by her. Gibson makes him medieval CampGay, and then uses that as a shorthand for evil and weak. He even gets taken down by a single bitchslap by King Edward after King Edward [[spoiler: murders the Prince's lover and the Prince tries to avenge him.]] It makes sense for Gibson to use this rather ugly narrative device given his well-documented homophobia.]]
26th Apr '17 1:47:26 AM TheDocCC
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Evidence overwhelmingly points to ''Primae noctis'' or ''DroitDuSeigneur'' -- the right of a Lord to take the virginity of serf maidens within his lands -- being a fabrication of the modern era. Medieval marriage was controlled by The Church, which has typically championed marital fidelity. If any lord tried to claim the "right" to rape another man's wife, the least he could expect was excommunication, along with an almost certain peasant revolt (as Machiavelli wrote in ''The Prince'' a ruler could get away with a lot of things, but taking people's wives wasn't one of them). So, it's not that some lords didn't take advantage of their power to rape peasant women-they probably did. Claiming ''a legal right to it'', however, is ''extremely'' dubious. WordOfGod on the DVD commentary notes that they did this to make the English [[ArtisticLicense more villainous]] and they were well aware it was never a real thing.

to:

** Evidence overwhelmingly points to ''Primae noctis'' or ''DroitDuSeigneur'' -- the right of a Lord to take the virginity of serf maidens within his lands -- being a fabrication of the modern era. Medieval marriage was controlled by The Church, which has typically championed marital fidelity. If any lord tried to claim the "right" to rape another man's wife, the least he could expect was excommunication, along with an almost certain peasant revolt (as Machiavelli wrote in ''The Prince'' a ruler could get away with a lot of things, but taking people's wives wasn't one of them). So, it's not that some lords didn't take advantage of their power to rape peasant women-they probably women - they did. Claiming The claim that lords believed they had ''a legal right to it'', however, it'' is ''extremely'' dubious.almost certainly a fabrication. WordOfGod on the DVD commentary notes that they did this to make the English [[ArtisticLicense more villainous]] and they were well aware it was never a real thing.



** The Scots aren't innocent of it either, with their complete lack of massed pike or any real discipline whatsoever. Oddly enough, this winds up making the English ''look more competent than they were'' in at least one case. The Battle of Stirling in the movie features the two sides launching berserker charges at each other on an open field with neither side having polearms, with the Scots somehow winning a decisive victory in close combat despite wearing almost no armor and being outnumbered against the heavily armed and armored English troops. The historical Battle of Stirling ''Bridge'' saw the English launching a frontal assault across uneven ground and a narrow bridge [[TooDumbToLive against a Scottish pike wall.]] Also in the real battle, Scots were wearing armor similar to what the English troops had

to:

** The Scots aren't innocent of it either, with their complete lack of massed pike or any real discipline whatsoever. Oddly enough, this winds up making the English ''look more competent than they were'' in at least one case. The Battle of Stirling in the movie features the two sides launching berserker charges at each other on an open field with neither side having polearms, with the Scots somehow winning a decisive victory in close combat despite wearing almost no armor and being outnumbered against the heavily armed and armored English troops. The historical Battle of Stirling ''Bridge'' saw the English launching a frontal assault across uneven ground and a narrow bridge [[TooDumbToLive against a Scottish pike wall.]] Also in the real battle, Scots were wearing armor similar to what the English troops hadhad.
** When foot soldiers abandon their formation to intermingle in a chaotic melee with massive casualties on both sides, it's almost always HollywoodTactics. Before modern warfare, troops stayed in close order, forming pike blocks, shield walls, and so on where the men could support one another and prevent all-out carnage.
** The film treats using a hedge of long spears against horsemen as a revolutionary idea. It certainly wasn't. The idea goes back to antiquity.
What was new was the Scottish schiltrons formations. These were circular formations that presented pikes out toward the enemy in 360 degrees, rather like a hedgehog. At Falkirk, Edward I called back his knights before they took too many losses and just had his archers open fire on the schiltrons. Defenseless against bowmen, the schiltrons collapsed quickly afterward.
** Charging and storming castles was always a last resort and a very good way to take massive casualties. Attacks on fortifications were almost always long, drawn-out sieges in that era. Wallace never sacked York, and he would never have just rushed his men with practically no siege gear at a castle with that many defenders as shown in the film.
*** Boiling oil? No. Oil was expensive and hard to keep hot. Sand and water are cheaper and just as effective. Try to imagine how quickly heated sand would get through your armor. Other good options that were used include rocks, burning sulfur, and even beehives.
26th Apr '17 12:52:38 AM TheDocCC
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** Prince Edward gets a strange form of this. Edward II is generally regarded as a mediocre king who may have had a homosexual affair but did have a wife and children by her. Gibson makes him medieval CampGay, and then uses that as a shorthand for evil and weak. He even gets taken down by a single bitchslap by King Edward after King Edward [[spoiler: murders the Prince's lover and the Prince tries to avenge him.]] It makes sense for Gibson to use this rather ugly narrative device given his well-documented homophobia.


Added DiffLines:

* MeaningfulLook: The wedding, showing how much you can do with a few glances. Watch Prince Edward, his lover Phillip, Princess Isabelle, and King Edward Longshanks. The Prince is not at all attracted to the Princess and would likely much rather run away than go through with the ceremony, or at least replace Isabelle with Phillip. King Edward is aware of his son's sexuality, holds his son in contempt, and absolutely despises Phillip. Isabelle, meanwhile, has no desire to be a part of this and feels trapped. She has no idea what to make of Prince Edward and is intimidated by King Longshanks. Phillip is trying to offer some silent support to Prince Edward, and that royally irks King Edward. All of this is conveyed to the audience with a few meaningful glances, a line of voice-over that hints that Longshanks may try to bed his soon-to-be daughter in law, some unfortunate gay visual coding, and an awkward kiss. The scene lasts seconds.
17th Mar '17 4:53:02 AM NightShade96
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ArtisticLicenseHistory: In interview, Mel Gibson admitted that the film was heavily fictitious but claimed the changes had been made for dramatic purposes. The film is often cited as the least accurate historical epic of all time. It is estimated that more than 90% of the movie is fiction. The historical inaccuracies include:
** Much like the Balian of Ibelin in ''Film/KingdomOfHeaven'', this movie's main character is entirely a fictional construct, any similarities to the real William Wallace other than the events of the war against England are entirely coincidental. That said, writer Randall Wallace had very little historical evidence to work with in regard to William Wallace's life; he has noted that even Churchill's definitive work "A History of the English Speaking Peoples" observed in only a single line that virtually no factual material survives about the Scottish leader. Because of this, Randall Wallace relied heavily on a 15th-century romantic poem by the Scottish writer Henry the Minstrel ("Blind Harry") in constructing his story.
** The battle of Stirling ''Bridge''. The bridge itself played a key role in the battle by bottlenecking the superior English force, so they could not come after the Scots all at once, and it was entirely missing from the movie. The battle in the film is simply called "The Battle of Sterling".[[note]]When an extra pointed this out, Gibson explained that they had to leave out the bridge because it was too difficult to work around. The extra's priceless response? [[DeadpanSnarker "Aye, that's what the English found."]][[/note]]
** The sacking of York was invented for the movie. Wallace never got as far south as York during his invasion of northern England.
** "Braveheart" was actually the nickname of Robert the Bruce, not William Wallace.
** In the night scene after Malcolm Wallace's funeral we see the silhouette of a man playing bagpipes. Argyle tells William that they are outlawed tunes played on outlawed pipes. However, the bagpipes have only ever been banned twice in Scotland: in 1560 after the Reformation and again in 1746 after the Battle of Culloden. In the late 13th Century the bagpipe was much more popular in England and it certainly wasn't viewed as a Scottish instrument of any importance until much later.
** There is an in-joke in the film that William Wallace's private time with Isabella led to the conception of Edward III. This could not have been the case, since Edward III was born almost ten years after Wallace died. Also, Isabella of France was nine years old at the time of Wallace's death. And not yet married to Edward II. And still living in France.
** Edward II was not a successful king, but neither was he the prissy little coward the movie portrays him as. In fact his personal courage may have been his most oft-noted virtue; when the Battle of Bannockburn went against the English, his own men had to drag him away to save his life because he wanted to keep fighting. (And that's another thing -- he was at the Battle of Bannockburn.)
** The Scots won their independence at the Battle of Bannockburn after an English army had arrived to lift the Scottish siege of Stirling Castle, not after Robert the Bruce changed his mind about a peace parley. Incidentally, the film has the Bruce starting the Battle of Bannockburn immediately upon hearing of Wallace's death -- which was actually nine years earlier.
** The makers were very nearly sued by the Scottish government for this one. Robert the Bruce did NOT betray Wallace, and in fact is considered a much bigger hero than Wallace ever was (the name "Brave Heart" was actually given to Bruce, NOT Wallace). To be fair, Wallace was probably the one person Bruce [[ChronicBackstabbingDisorder didn't betray]] at one point or another, and that's mostly because they never actually met. That, and Wallace didn't support Robert's claim to the throne-he backed John Balliol, Edward's hostage in the Tower of London and the nominal and official King of Scotland. Winning the Battle of Bannockburn has given Robert the Bruce a HistoricalHeroUpgrade for years. He was an accomplished political manipulator, and was just as brutal as Longshanks towards his enemies - he invited John Comyn to peace talks in a church, then murdered him. His army then rampaged through the Great Glen, slaughtering Comyn's supporters. This was not only a treacherous move, but a stupid one, as it divided the Scots against the English, with the Comyn clan pursuing a blood feud against Bruce over this.
** The last scene in the movie has the Bruce starting the Battle of Bannockburn immediately after hearing of Wallace's death. While news did travel more slowly in those days, it did not take nine years for that bit of news to reach Scotland.
** All of the above aside, it's worth mentioning that the same historians who are quick to wag their fingers at this film are also quick to point out that the brutality of the battles is well represented, and in some cases ''understated'' in the movie, but, of course, if there's anything Mel Gibson unquestionably does well in his films, it's violence.

to:

* ArtisticLicenseHistory: In interview, Mel Gibson admitted that the film was heavily fictitious but claimed the changes had been made for dramatic purposes. The film is often cited as the least accurate historical epic of all time. It is estimated that more than 90% of the movie is fiction. The historical inaccuracies include:
** Much like the Balian of Ibelin in ''Film/KingdomOfHeaven'', this movie's main character is entirely a fictional construct, any similarities to the real William Wallace other than the events of the war against England are entirely coincidental. That said, writer Randall Wallace had very little historical evidence to work with in regard to William Wallace's life; he has noted that even Churchill's definitive work "A History of the English Speaking Peoples" observed in only a single line that virtually no factual material survives about the Scottish leader. Because of this, Randall Wallace relied heavily on a 15th-century romantic poem by the Scottish writer Henry the Minstrel ("Blind Harry") in constructing his story.
** The battle of Stirling ''Bridge''. The bridge itself played a key role in the battle by bottlenecking the superior English force, so they could not come after the Scots all at once, and it was entirely missing from the movie. The battle in the film is simply called "The Battle of Sterling".[[note]]When an extra pointed this out, Gibson explained that they had to leave out the bridge because it was too difficult to work around. The extra's priceless response? [[DeadpanSnarker "Aye, that's what the English found."]][[/note]]
** The sacking of York was invented for the movie. Wallace never got as far south as York during his invasion of northern England.
** "Braveheart" was actually the nickname of Robert the Bruce, not William Wallace.
** In the night scene after Malcolm Wallace's funeral we see the silhouette of a man playing bagpipes. Argyle tells William that they are outlawed tunes played on outlawed pipes. However, the bagpipes have only ever been banned twice in Scotland: in 1560 after the Reformation and again in 1746 after the Battle of Culloden. In the late 13th Century the bagpipe was much more popular in England and it certainly wasn't viewed as a Scottish instrument of any importance until much later.
** There is an in-joke in the film that William Wallace's private time with Isabella led to the conception of Edward III. This could not have been the case, since Edward III was born almost ten years after Wallace died. Also, Isabella of France was nine years old at the time of Wallace's death. And not yet married to Edward II. And still living in France.
** Edward II was not a successful king, but neither was he the prissy little coward the movie portrays him as. In fact his personal courage may have been his most oft-noted virtue; when the Battle of Bannockburn went against the English, his
Has [[ArtisticLicenseHistory/{{Braveheart}} its own men had to drag him away to save his life because he wanted to keep fighting. (And that's another thing -- he was at the Battle of Bannockburn.)
** The Scots won their independence at the Battle of Bannockburn after an English army had arrived to lift the Scottish siege of Stirling Castle, not after Robert the Bruce changed his mind about a peace parley. Incidentally, the film has the Bruce starting the Battle of Bannockburn immediately upon hearing of Wallace's death -- which was actually nine years earlier.
** The makers were very nearly sued by the Scottish government for this one. Robert the Bruce did NOT betray Wallace, and in fact is considered a much bigger hero than Wallace ever was (the name "Brave Heart" was actually given to Bruce, NOT Wallace). To be fair, Wallace was probably the one person Bruce [[ChronicBackstabbingDisorder didn't betray]] at one point or another, and that's mostly because they never actually met. That, and Wallace didn't support Robert's claim to the throne-he backed John Balliol, Edward's hostage in the Tower of London and the nominal and official King of Scotland. Winning the Battle of Bannockburn has given Robert the Bruce a HistoricalHeroUpgrade for years. He was an accomplished political manipulator, and was just as brutal as Longshanks towards his enemies - he invited John Comyn to peace talks in a church, then murdered him. His army then rampaged through the Great Glen, slaughtering Comyn's supporters. This was not only a treacherous move, but a stupid one, as it divided the Scots against the English, with the Comyn clan pursuing a blood feud against Bruce over this.
** The last scene in the movie has the Bruce starting the Battle of Bannockburn immediately after hearing of Wallace's death. While news did travel more slowly in those days, it did not take nine years for that bit of news to reach Scotland.
** All of the above aside, it's worth mentioning that the same historians who are quick to wag their fingers at this film are also quick to point out that the brutality of the battles is well represented, and in some cases ''understated'' in the movie, but, of course, if there's anything Mel Gibson unquestionably does well in his films, it's violence.
page]].
9th Mar '17 4:50:45 PM eroock
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* DramaticLandfallShot: The opening sequence starts with a camera flight over costal water after which the rough Scottish mountain landscape comes into view.
1st Mar '17 5:16:05 PM JulianLapostat
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* HistoricalHeroUpgrade: Wallace is made a lot more important than Robert Bruce, and the third key figure in the war, Bishop William de Lamberton, was cut out altogether. Another character cut out was Andrew de Moray, another Scottish noble who died after the battle of Stirling Bridge. Some historians have argued that his contribution to the war was just as important and more successful than William Wallace's.

to:

* HistoricalHeroUpgrade: HistoricalHeroUpgrade:
**
Wallace is made a lot more important than Robert Bruce, and the third key figure in the war, Bishop William de Lamberton, was cut out altogether. Another character cut out was Andrew de Moray, another Scottish noble who died after the battle of Stirling Bridge. Some historians have argued that his contribution to the war was just as important and more successful than William Wallace's.
** The real Wallace was son of minor nobility, and not only was he not a Highland barbarian StillFightingTheCivilWar of the Picts against Romans, he was a Lord with tenants, serfs and the works. In real-life the Scots pre-emptively attacked the English and Wallace invaded England sacking and pillage villages and attacking English peasants and serfs along the way.
4th Feb '17 12:03:10 AM alnair20aug93
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Surprisingly, the future Queen Isabella "the She-Wolf" of France got this one as well.

to:

** Surprisingly, the future Queen Isabella "the She-Wolf" "[[GodSaveUsFromTheQueen the She-Wolf]]" of France got this one as well.
14th Jan '17 3:48:49 PM ImpudentInfidel
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** The Battle of Bannockburn is shown as the Scotts unexpectedly attacking an English force that's only there as a formality while Robert swears his fealty to Edward II. The actual battle was the English trying to lift the siege of Sterling Castle several years into Robert's rebellion, long after they had both claimed their respective thrones.
This list shows the last 10 events of 241. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Film.BraveHeart