Way to go re-writing history!

Rating: 5/10 (16 April 2012)

Had i wrote the review back in 95, I would have gave it 8/10. Because as a movie I really enjoyed it. However, that was back in 95 when I was fairly ignorant and just wanted to be entertained. Now, a little older and wiser the main issue I have with this movie is; it is a work of fiction masquerading as fact. You can't search William Wallace on the internet without it making reference to Mel Gibson's character. The movie is littered with blatant one sided inaccuracies; However I'm not going to list them here; many of the reviews have, so read some of them because I don't want to add spoilers. I realize a lot will be thinking I need to lighten up a little and just enjoy it as a movie... but Hollywood, it is NOT your history to be re-writing. How would an American audience react if the British made a movie about Vietnam, or the American Civil war, or the Indian Wars, and then depict all the American inaccurately as lying, murdering, rapists cowards. There wasn't a single honourable Englishman amongst them. As far as I'm concerned this was a missed opportunity to tell the story of William Wallace accurately while still making a great movie. William Wallace is a national hero to some in Scotland so to retell his story inaccurately is an insult to the ancestors of both sides.
Freeeeeeeeeeddddooooommmmmmmm!!!!!!!!! (Laughable).
Having just re-watched this and having vivid memories of The Patriot (same movie, only the accents differ). As a movie. A piece of fiction I would rate an 8/10. Because of the above it's a 5.