Could have been better...

Rating: 8/10 (30 June 2000)

As a huge fan of braveheart, I was looking forward to this movie for quite a while. The acting was top notch. I was very impressed by the acting that some of the kids pulled off, in particular Trevor Morgan (Nathan Martin). Despite the acting, the move as a whole was merely pretty good, and doesn't even come close to the braveheart level. First off, there are about 5 different subplots that really make the movie into a mess. The movie is at its best when it focuses on the main plot, and that of course is Mel Gibson seeking revenge. My major gripe, however, was with the end of the movie. ***Spoiler alert***
Rodat had a great ending on his hands had he only ended the movie five minutes sooner. The scene on the battlefield showing Mel Gibson about to die at the hands of the man who killed his two sons would have been great had the man killed Mel Gibson. It would have fit together with the movie as a whole a lot better. Even though Mel Gibson didn't get to kill him, it doesn't matter because the rebels have won. It would have underscored Mel Gibson's change of values. He no longer puts his desires above his "principles" as he calls them, but rather his principles above all else. Unfortunately, Rodat goes out of his way to make a feel good ending that doesn't fit with the movie as a whole. ***End spoiler alert***.
Overall, it's a pretty good movie, and had Rodat changed a few things this movie could have been at Braveheart level. Unfortunately, Rodat sacrifices quality in order to make sure that the audience leaves with a smile on their face.