A great film - But lousy research

Rating: 7/10 (14 December 2005)

I love this film; don't get me wrong - it's great! I'm a medieval freak, and so I enjoy the battles and the milieu and all that. And I like the Scottish people and their humour. However, I am very disappointed that so many historical factual errors have been made. Of course, you cannot get it all right - and some things have to be adjusted to please audiences and keep a red thread and in order to make a great film. BUT: There are several things that could have been done historically correct. For instance, the Battle of Stirling. Why not include the bridge as it was essential to the outcome of the battle? What's the point of the intimate relationship between the future Princess of Wales and Wallace? Seeing as she was just a little girl at the time it doesn't make much sense to invent this relationship. And the sacking of York - what's the purpose of inventing this? Not being in control of Scotland would be serious enough for Edward to send the army north. Besides, a rebel army such as this would not be able to lay siege to a walled town like York at this time.
My main point is: If film makers think that the story or themes are most important then they should leave historical figures alone and invent their own. Of course, they may include historic events and persons, but they should not form the core of a fictional venture.