- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why was Robert the Bruce portrayed as weak in “Braveheart”?
Posted on 11/3/19 at 7:59 pm
Posted on 11/3/19 at 7:59 pm
Robert the Bruce is known as a great warrior who fought the English for Scottish independence and became king of the Scots.
Hell the nickname “Braveheart” was actually given to Robert not William Wallace.
So why in Braveheart is he a weak puppet until the very end of the movie? Doesn’t seem historically accurate
Hell the nickname “Braveheart” was actually given to Robert not William Wallace.
So why in Braveheart is he a weak puppet until the very end of the movie? Doesn’t seem historically accurate
15
Posted on 11/3/19 at 8:28 pm to Tiger1242
The entire movie is riddled with historical inaccuracies. Actually there’s too many to name, the Bruce being a pussy has never bothered me because I hated the actor anyways.
Posted on 11/3/19 at 8:28 pm to Tiger1242
Cause mel gibson was the star
Posted on 11/3/19 at 8:30 pm to Tiger1242
It makes for better drama, the betrayal and all. The historical accuracy of that movie is very bad in general and that's fine. It was meant to be a good movie first and foremost, artistic liberties were taken in spades.
Very little is actually known of Wallace outside of the fact he was a Scottish rebel who led a very shocking upset victory over the English in that one battle of Sterling Bridge and that he was eventually caught, tortured, and killed.
Outside of that everything else in the movie is completely made up.
Very little is actually known of Wallace outside of the fact he was a Scottish rebel who led a very shocking upset victory over the English in that one battle of Sterling Bridge and that he was eventually caught, tortured, and killed.
Outside of that everything else in the movie is completely made up.
This post was edited on 11/3/19 at 8:31 pm
Posted on 11/3/19 at 8:37 pm to PEPE
quote:
Very little is actually known of Wallace outside of the fact he was a Scottish rebel who led a very shocking upset victory over the English in that one battle of Sterling Bridge and that he was eventually caught, tortured, and killed.
Outside of that everything else in the movie is completely made up.
I know that, which is why the portrayal of Robert has always bugged me. We know very little about almost everyone and everything that happened in the movie, so the inaccuracies are easy to overlook. The one character we do know a decent amount about is Robert, and yet he is portrayed contrary to all historical accounts of the man
Posted on 11/3/19 at 8:40 pm to Tiger1242
Was he really portrayed as a pussy? I think that he was portrayed (fairly or unfairly) as a fledgling king who was still loyal to his corrupt father and then, through his friendship with Wallace, learned how to be a warrior.
Not saying that that is how it went down hundreds of years ago, but that’s how I read the story they were telling.
Not saying that that is how it went down hundreds of years ago, but that’s how I read the story they were telling.
Posted on 11/3/19 at 8:43 pm to Tiger1242
Because the film was written by descendants of the Wallace clan and they wanted to make their ancestor a hero.
Posted on 11/3/19 at 9:36 pm to teke184
quote:
Because the film was written by descendants of the Wallace clan and they wanted to make their ancestor a hero.
It was written by Randall Wallace, a screenwriter and director, who never heard of William Wallace till he vacationed in Edinburgh and noticed the Wallace monument and the name.
From wiki, “ He gained recognition and commercial success by penning the screenplay for Braveheart (1995), which was inspired by a trip to Scotland to learn more about his Scottish roots. While there, he discovered the legend of the medieval Scottish patriot William Wallace; he is not, however, related to William Wallace in any way.”
Posted on 11/3/19 at 9:44 pm to Philzilla2k
The princess would have been about 5 at the time, so Wallace fricking her is a tad odd...Also, history remembers Edward the Longshanks much more favorably.
Posted on 11/3/19 at 10:13 pm to Tiger1242
Because he's a white male... 
Posted on 11/4/19 at 12:23 am to Tiger1242
He did lead a charge on the English at the end of the movie
Posted on 11/4/19 at 12:25 am to tiger114
quote:
Was he really portrayed as a pussy? I think that he was portrayed (fairly or unfairly) as a fledgling king who was still loyal to his corrupt father and then, through his friendship with Wallace, learned how to be a warrior.
Not saying that that is how it went down hundreds of years ago, but that’s how I read the story they were telling.
This
Posted on 11/4/19 at 5:04 am to teke184
quote:
Because the film was written by descendants of the Wallace clan and they wanted to make their ancestor a hero.
How can anyone accurately trace their lineage to William Wallace?
Posted on 11/4/19 at 6:32 am to Tiger1242
At any rate all those dudes would spin in their graves if they got a look at modern Scots.
and the movie really should have had a bridge at Sterling Bridge, since that had a lot to do with why they won.
and the movie really should have had a bridge at Sterling Bridge, since that had a lot to do with why they won.
Posted on 11/4/19 at 7:22 am to Tiger1242
quote:
So why in Braveheart is he a weak puppet until the very end of the movie? Doesn’t seem historically accurate
There is more myth than reality that survives about the entire Scottish affair.
Robert is a very polarizing figure, too. Wallace was martyred, so he makes a better protagonist in fictionalized accounts. The film even riffs on the mythology of Wallace by the character himself.
This post was edited on 11/4/19 at 7:23 am
Posted on 11/4/19 at 7:24 am to BigDawg0420
quote:
He did lead a charge on the English at the end of the movie
That's Bannockburn - the most famous battle in Scottish history - more so than Stirling Bridge. Or, it was before that movie.
(ETA: And those battles were fought like 3 or 4 miles apart, separated by 17 years.)
This post was edited on 11/4/19 at 7:28 am
Posted on 11/4/19 at 8:26 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Robert is a very polarizing figure, too.
You don't realize just how young the USA is until you realize you can go visit the grave of Robert the Bruce, who died in 1329, in Dunfermline, Scotland.
Posted on 11/4/19 at 8:28 am to Tiger1242
Happens all the time. Gangs Of New York was full of shite too.
Posted on 11/4/19 at 8:53 am to GetCocky11
quote:
You don't realize just how young the USA is until you realize you can go visit the grave of Robert the Bruce, who died in 1329, in Dunfermline, Scotland.
Or, as big as the USA is compared to Europe.
Stirling to London is about 400 to 425 miles.
About the same distance as San Antonio to Shreveport.
Posted on 11/4/19 at 9:47 am to Tiger1242
He found redemption through Murron's handkerchief, and William Wallace's blood.
ETA: I had a sinus infection a couple of weeks ago, waited too long to go to the doctor, and found myself looking like Longshanks on his deathbed.
ETA: I had a sinus infection a couple of weeks ago, waited too long to go to the doctor, and found myself looking like Longshanks on his deathbed.
This post was edited on 11/4/19 at 9:57 am
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News