What part of the movie Braveheart were accurate?
470512
Very, very little. There was a William Wallace and he *did* fight for Scotland's freedeom. However, there's not much after that in the film that is historically accurate. William Wallace never had an affair with Isabelle. The Battle of Sterling Bridge was filmed without a bridge. Robert the Bruce's father wasn't a leper... etc. etc.\n\nFor a complete list, follow the below link.
375026
While the movie is lovely to look at, the inaccuracies in kimono and hairstyles lost points with me. If you hadn't read the book you missed out on some of the plot lines. I was surprise at how well some of my favorite scene where portrayed in the film, the only problem is so much was left out. Read the book, then enjoy the movie.
829706
In the book... Faramir.  Hands down. He's an outlaw, but on the side of good.  He wears green! That part where he comes out of the forest and meets the hobbits is one of my favourite parts.\n\nAlso, Eowyn. She's so damn cool in the book, disappointed in love, she goes out to fight for good and her family honour. I was quite disappointed by her portrayal in the film, she was too sulky and not shining enough!  \n\nOtherwise... Treebeard!   And I have to say it always disappoints me (although I understand it) that they don't have Tom Bombadil in the films...\n\nIn the films... hmmm harder, because Peter Jackson doesn't concentrate on character so much as epic story and effect.  That's not necessarily a criticism.  I have to say I liked Legolas, even though Orlando Bloom isn't a great actor in my book.\nGandalf was cool, but a little bit lame when he became Gandalf the White.\n\nBut Boromir wins, because Sean Bean was awesome, and that's the best screen death ever. EVER I say. :D
207617
I wondered the same thing.\n\nMy friend read the book and told me that he dies in an accident as his wife says in the movie. \n\nI think the movie leads you to believe otherwise though.
78956
King Arthur was fictitious.
335429
While the story is fictional, the depiction of World War 2 in the movie is considered the best ever.  It is the most accurate depiction of what really happened, unlike what video games depict.
1113113
Great film  ! ! ! \n\nthe virgins in the tower ... and Sir lancelot's being saved aganst his will  !!!! looooooool !!!!\nThe rabbit and it's throat attacks\nthe knight at the bridge and his flesh wounds ! ! !\n\nIt's just too funny !!!!\n\nBut make sure you see 'The Life Of Brian' , It's even better    §;^)
515534
It's Culloden...\n\nBattle of Culloden\n\n\n\nBonnie Prince Charlie\nIt was the greatest ever moment in the history of the Jacobite movement. Bonnie Prince Charlie and his army had victoriously marched down through England, and were poised to strike at London itself.\nThen, at the very moment of their triumph, the Young Pretender and his forces decided to turn back and retreat to Scotland. \nIt was a decision which eventually turned out to be a disaster, because it led to their bloody and inglorious defeat at Culloden - the last military battle ever to be fought on British soil. \n\nWith the capital in panic at the thought of a Jacobite advance, the prince was determined to press on to try and secure the British throne for his father, the exiled would be James VIII. However, his chief lieutenants knew that victory would be no easy matter. As the prince's forces had marched south, they had not secured territory behind them.\nTwo of the king's most formidable military commanders, General George Wade and the Duke of Cumberland, were in pursuit and London itself had a large militia of loyalist troops ready to take the prince on. The sensible thing to do, it seemed, was to pull back. Charles sullenly agreed and, on December 6, 1745, the retreat started.\n\nOn his way north, the Scots fought off an attack at Clifton, in the Lake District and left 400 men to garrison the castle in Carlisle.\nOn Christmas day, Charles reached Glasgow and found he had huge problems picking up support for his cause. The city was strongly pro-government, and hundreds of its men were fighting on the Hanoverian side against him. Reluctantly - and probably more to get rid of him than anything - Glaswegians did provide Charles with provisions to refit his army, which left 10 days later. By now, Edinburgh had been reclaimed for the king by General Henry Hawley and the Jacobites knew that a showdown was in prospect. Reinforced by the arrival of a further 4000 troops, they finally came face to face with Hawley's forces at Falkirk.\nThe battle was a disaster for the Hanoverians. They lost ten times as many men as the prince - 400 to 40 - with most of the government forces fleeing the field and leaving behind their artillery and baggage.\nVictory at Falkirk, combined with the fact that still more troops and supplies were arriving from France and elsewhere, bolstered the Jacobite army. With government forces continuing to press against him and with the clan chiefs insisting on returning to the Highlands, however, the only way Charles could realistically go was north. He tried and failed to seize Stirling Castle before arriving in Inverness and taking the town on February 18. Fort Augustus succumbed in March, though Fort William held out. By now, there was another problem: the able Duke of Cumberland was in pursuit of the Jacobite forces along with an army of 9000 men. A seasoned and intelligent military strategist - and son of the King - Cumberland would not make the sort of tactical mistake which had allowed the Jacobites to win the battles of Prestonpans and Falkirk.\nBy April 14, Cumberland was in Nairn, while the prince's army was only 10 miles west at Drummossie. Charles's Quartermaster General, John William O'Sullivan, decided that the best approach was to try and catch the Hanoverian forces by surprise. The Pretender's troops, by then tired out and hungry, marched to Nairn, only to find Cumberland's forces awake - they were celebrating their leaders 25th birthday. The Highlanders were then forced to trudge back to Drummossie, where they arrived, exhausted and demoralised, just after dawn.\nUnknown to them, however, word had reached Cumberland that the enemy forces had tried to pounce on him. Knowing full well how tired and hungry the Jacobites were, he decided to attack them when they were at their weakest.\nThe two sides finally faced each other at Drummossie Moor, better known as Culloden, in a howling, freezing gale, o
1115309
It is said to be real.....but reenacted
942693
Not real. The right to the Hobbit are in the works right now. Rumor has it that Peter Jackson will be doing it.
526854
*sigh* Its not all lies.  The history is about 50% true, 40% theory-assumption, and 10% just plain wrong.  The book was very one sided, but more exciting.  I felt the movie was much clearer about what was true and what was theory, therefore being more fair to Christianity.
757924
Braveheart getting his head chopped off.
36247
One women's death causes the movement which in the end frees a country.  Talk about commitment.\n\nMaybe I don't know much about romance but,\n\nMy vote goes to Braveheart \nOne of the best movies ever made
145046
I assume you are referring to the most recent King Arthur movie, starring Keira Knightley as Guenevere.  This particular King Arthur movie is based on one of the first historic accounts of Arthur by Geoffrey of Monmouth.  Monmouth's account describes King Arthur as a Roman-Briton soldier that helps the remaining Britons to fight against invaders. So, for the most part, give or take a few overly indulged details and extra scenes, the movie is surprising accurate.
816813
You should watch "Monty Python and the Holy Grail".  It is a very accurate portrayal of the good and bad things that knights did.
208539
With all due respect...your commentary on the film sounds like it came right off the back of the DVD case.\nHistory had a knife plunged into its back in the film "Pearl Harbor."\nThe only historically accurate bits of the film were the time and place of the attack.  American fighter pilots did not engage the Japanese directly over Pearl Harbor or Ford Island that morning.  Japanese attackers initially flew higher than they did in the film.  Messman Doris Miller did not act in the manner in which he was portrayed in the film.  During Col. Doolittle's raid on Japan, no voices of US pilots were heard on US territory; the crews of the planes used CW (Morse Code) to communicate over long distances.  Doolittle's Raiders flew MUCH higher than shown in the film; all bombers did, in order to allow their bombs to arm themselves on the way down and to avoid damage from their own bombs.\nIf you are inspired by the story of Pearl Harbor, get off your backside and GO THERE; see the true story of courage against a determined enemy, and hear it from those who were there that day.  If you'd like to see a film that tells the TRUE story of the attack on Pearl Harbor, see "Tora, Tora, Tora."\nShame on Disney for pretending that they are telling anything close to the truth about the attack on Pearl Harbor.  The true story of the American fight against Japanese imperialism is inspiring enough without having to add several layers of BS to it.
1061326
well mel needs to actually read the bible for there was alot of falsehood in the movie. but the depiction of Jesus's beating was very true according to romans law. however when the soldiers came to capture Jesus in scripture there should have been a great multitude as the bible says. for instance. in matthew,mark and luke it says a great multitude.\nMt 26:47 And while he yet spake, lo, Judas, one of the twelve, came, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and elders of the people. \nAND IF MEL STUDIED JUST A LITTLE HE WOULD HAVE SEEN IN JOHN 18:3 TELL US THE NUMBER OF MEN THAT CAME TO CAPTURE JESUS:\nJoh 18:3 Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. \nIN THE ROMAN ARMY A BAND OF MEN IS 600 SOLDIERS NOT COUNTING ALL THE OFFICERS, CHIEF PRIESTS AND THE PHARISEES. WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN AROUND 700 PEOPLE THERE TO CAPTURE JESUS NOT JUST A FEW LIKE IN THE MOVIE.\nNOW WHEN THEY ASK HIM ARE YOU JESUS OF NAZARETH AND JESUS SAID ((( I AM HE ))) YOU WOULD HAVE HAD CLOSE TO 1000 MEN FALL BACKARDS TO THE GROUND.\nTHAT WOULD OF HAD A GREAT IMPACT IN THE MOVIE.