Still to this day one of favorite movies ever... As a part hawaiian kid growing up in Hawaii i had no idea about my Scottish heritage... this movie really made me proud to be Scottish, even if there are some historical inaccuracies... and Mel Gibson is still one of the best actors, haters gonna hate
I remember going to see braveheart in the cinema in Glasgow when it came out, and when it was over the entire theatre was applauding, incredibly moving and it is an incredible film.
Just saw it again for the first time in ages and it really is an impeccable film. Everything about it is on point. Absolutely everything. I'm sure it wasn't easy to make and Mel should be proud (I'm sure he is). He's a cool and kind of kooky guy too haha
oh God! he's beautiful! I mean look at this guy! I cant even focus on what he's talking about, just wondering how good looking he is in every way ... I guess I have a huge crush on Mel that's it!
The man’s a legend and an absolute gem of a filmmaker/actor. The personal battles he fought and the demons he defeated show how strong a character he is. He helped Robert Downey Jr. to win a battle of his own too. Hugging the cactus Mel. Cheers!
History repeats itself....you are darn right, Mr Gibson, it does. It would be really productive if mankind would actually learn from past mistakes and move on, but it doesn't happen unfortunately, experiences and mistakes do not get passed to the next generation :/
Ok cheers for that! :). I saw Welles' "Chimes at Midnight" over the weekend. The jump cutting style used for depicting the Battle of Shrewsbury is similar to Mr Gibson's editing style used for the battle scenes in Braveheart.
When i heard they were making a film about Wallace i got excited. So many films have been made about Robin Hood( a character many historians believe was based upon Wallace) but none about Scottish heroes. What a disappointment the film was. Total Hollywood hokum, just complete nonsense. It was an insult to Scotland and our history. For Randall Wallace to sit and proudly proclaim that he's a descendent of William Wallace and to then write the screenplay is disgraceful, considering other films he made were attempts at historical accuracy, yet he makes no effort whatsoever with this film. Had they marketed it as a fantasy film based on real characters, then fair enough, but to attempt to portray this is historical is frankly insulting. It's clear he made no attempt at researching the characters, he just grasped the names and ran with it. He made something which in his mind felt authentic, but in reality was worse than pantomime. I'm pleased we ended up with Outlaw King being released as it showed that historical drama can be made and can make a serious attempt at authenticity. I'd love for someone to come along who cares about Scottish history and make an accurate film based around Wallace and Moray, because this film should be thrown in the bin.
You're insane. It's a great movie and the basic plot is accurate. The point of the movie is to show that William Wallace, who was a real leader in the Wars for Scottish Independence, helped lead Scotland to getting that independence. The battles at Stirling, Falkirk and Bannockburn were real battles. Everything else is just thrown in for a cinematic effect. No one cares that kilts weren't worn until the 16th century or that there was no bridge in the battle at Stirling Bridge. The movie is historical fiction. It's a fictional tale based on actual historical events. It doesn't claim to be a documentary on the History Channel.
@@johnp82 1. It's not a great 'movie'. 2. WE care that Kilts weren't worn until the 16th century and that woad hadn't been worn for centuries. 3. WE care that there was no bridge at Stirling. It was an integral part of the Battle. 4. It wasn't marketed as 'historic fiction'. There was also zero mention of Andrew de Moray in the film. He was the the General of the Scottish army at Stirling Brig, not Wallace. He was the experienced warrior, not Wallace. One thing the film did get pretty smack on, is that Wallace was little more than a scrapper. He was a pluke on Longshanks arse and nothing more. He's held in worship because of how he died, make no mistake about it. He was a minor part of the Scottish uprising in reality. For every thing the film got right, it got half a dozen things wrong. It's an insult to Scotland.
@@scottw.3258 1. It's absolutely a great movie, objectively speaking. It's won awards, has a massive cult following, and has brought people to tears. It has great acting and cinematography. 2. "We" care that kilts weren't worn? Who's "we"? Scottish people or snobby historians? 3. Filming the battle at Stirling on an actual bridge didn't work logistically for some reason. But that doesn't take away from the fact that Stirling was a real battle that Scotland won. 4. It wasn't marketed as "historical fiction" but that's what it's widely regarded as. And it wasn't marketed as a documentary either. If it was a History Channel documentary, you'd have an argument. Moray was one of the generals at Stirling. Wallace was the other. You're saying Wallace wasn't an experienced warrior yet he led an army against the English and beat them? I guess he was just that good then. And if he was merely some peasant scrapper, why was he made a knight and Guardian of Scotland? Why are there statues of him erected by Scottish people in Scotland? Again, the gist of the film is to show how Scotland led an uprising against England and a ruthless king, and eventually gaining their independence, while portraying heroic acts by Scotsman and also showing how gruesome battles were. The movie does those things. The screenplay takes liberties to make the story more interesting. I don't see how that's an insult to Scotland. Having characters wear kilts and paint their face blue only makes the story more interesting by painting a more colorful picture and making them more "Scottish". If it completely rewrote history and showed Scotland losing the battles at Stirling and Bannockburn and NOT getting their independence while NOT depicting Scotsmen as brave warrirors, then I could see your point. Although I could see Scottish people and particularly descendants of Robert The Bruce getting mad for portraying him as a traitor. But still.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
This movie is like 25 years old but it is one of the best movies I have ever watched
Maria Toigonbaeva u are correct sir one of the greatest movies fucking ever
The Wind That Shakes the Barley is also very good....
@@scarlettjane5240 stfu
@@scarlettjane5240 in the name of the father another must watch
Amen brother
Brilliant, just brilliant. The movie, the Directing, the Battle scenes, the cinematography... it was brilliant, he was brilliant.
Historically completely inaccurate.
@@purefoldnz3070 so what? It's a Hollywood production not a History Channel documentary
@@voluntasspes6606 they could try to be a little bit accurate at least lol
@@purefoldnz3070 woulda coulda shoulda ;)
@@voluntasspes6606 historical movie should be historical? That's a shoulda lol
Just rewatched this film today. It’s still a masterpiece all these years later 👏🏻
Still to this day one of favorite movies ever... As a part hawaiian kid growing up in Hawaii i had no idea about my Scottish heritage... this movie really made me proud to be Scottish, even if there are some historical inaccuracies... and Mel Gibson is still one of the best actors, haters gonna hate
I cried at the end when he yelled freedooooooooooooom omg so sad
He actually said ffffffffffffuck vegans!!!!!!!!
I was too drunk to remember posting this but I stand by it none the less
Absolutely Classic film . A soul touching masterpiece and stunning soundtrack. 🏴
I remember going to see braveheart in the cinema in Glasgow when it came out, and when it was over the entire theatre was applauding, incredibly moving and it is an incredible film.
2 times at year I watch a Braveheart from childhood. So + - 60 or more times watched ❤
Say what you will but, Mel Gibson KNOWS how to make movies like "Braveheart" and "The Patriot."
Except Mel Gibson Did Not really direct The Patriot though
Use this as an "i just watched braveheart and came immediately here to see more" button
fr
Magnificent film. Got it finally on 4k.The colours are breathtaking
The best movie of all time
I like Mel is amazing director.
nicolas pierri one of the best all time. People seem to forget all of his work directing,
ScreenSlam Braveheart is his masterpiece fo sho homie.
Favorite directors are George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, Mel Gibson, Ron Howard and James Cameron. 🎥🎞🎬🍿❤️
@@Revolver1981 It was historically inaccurate
@@robertisham5279 No it wasn't. The main story is accurate of William Wallace fighting for Scottish independence. So explain how it's inaccurate?
Just saw it again for the first time in ages and it really is an impeccable film. Everything about it is on point. Absolutely everything. I'm sure it wasn't easy to make and Mel should be proud (I'm sure he is). He's a cool and kind of kooky guy too haha
That's one ever epic movie i have ever seen. 😍
omg i ove this film and mel watched this last night november 25th 2016
Mel Gibson is a cinematic genius.
WHAT A BEAUTIFUL WELL MADE MOVIE
My all time favorite! Truly, a masterpiece! ❤❤❤
700 years from now I hope someone like Mel Gibson makes a kick ass movie of my life they way he did of Wallace
Awesome guy and great actor
I have heard Mel is a great guy no bs. Whatever he said one night when he was drunk does not reflect who he is. Heard he is kind and courteous.
Mel is one of the best filmmakers of all time
AGREED
Adore when he speaks about Sophie ❤❤❤
I love mel gibson omg
Such a motivational movie
oh God! he's beautiful! I mean look at this guy! I cant even focus on what he's talking about, just wondering how good looking he is in every way ... I guess I have a huge crush on Mel that's it!
This is the best movie I ever watched in my life
The man’s a legend and an absolute gem of a filmmaker/actor. The personal battles he fought and the demons he defeated show how strong a character he is. He helped Robert Downey Jr. to win a battle of his own too. Hugging the cactus Mel. Cheers!
Mel always gives an Oscar worthy interview.
History repeats itself....you are darn right, Mr Gibson, it does. It would be really productive if mankind would actually learn from past mistakes and move on, but it doesn't happen unfortunately, experiences and mistakes do not get passed to the next generation :/
So right
i love mel gibson
I just watched Braveheart and I am in love with Mel Gibson of 25 years ago 🤣🤣🤣
Makes you proud to be Scottish when you watch this movie 🏴💪
This man is a genius!
Mel Gibson and Adam sander great actors my favourites
Mel Gibson is well fit 😆😆
Mel Gibson is such a beautiful creature!
I love Mel ❤️ Gibson 🇰🇪
My love!❤❤❤❤❤
Agree. Brilliant. Thats The Word.
Mel Gibson is a master of an artist and a legend of a man. Love you Mel!
Where does time go
Bill Syvertsen langoliers
Nowhere and everywhere.
He was handsome.
GOAT 🐐
Which director is Mr Gibson referring to when he talks about copying a director's editing style?
I think he may have been referring to actor director Orson Welles .
Ok cheers for that! :). I saw Welles' "Chimes at Midnight" over the weekend. The jump cutting style used for depicting the Battle of Shrewsbury is similar to Mr Gibson's editing style used for the battle scenes in Braveheart.
+Adam Glasgow That made me chuckle, thanks!!
Fun fact "Jason Patric" was the original choice for Braveheart William Wallace
That is James Farentino ☝️🙏🕊✝️
He was handsome AF.
What a male!
When i heard they were making a film about Wallace i got excited. So many films have been made about Robin Hood( a character many historians believe was based upon Wallace) but none about Scottish heroes.
What a disappointment the film was. Total Hollywood hokum, just complete nonsense. It was an insult to Scotland and our history. For Randall Wallace to sit and proudly proclaim that he's a descendent of William Wallace and to then write the screenplay is disgraceful, considering other films he made were attempts at historical accuracy, yet he makes no effort whatsoever with this film.
Had they marketed it as a fantasy film based on real characters, then fair enough, but to attempt to portray this is historical is frankly insulting. It's clear he made no attempt at researching the characters, he just grasped the names and ran with it. He made something which in his mind felt authentic, but in reality was worse than pantomime.
I'm pleased we ended up with Outlaw King being released as it showed that historical drama can be made and can make a serious attempt at authenticity. I'd love for someone to come along who cares about Scottish history and make an accurate film based around Wallace and Moray, because this film should be thrown in the bin.
You're insane. It's a great movie and the basic plot is accurate. The point of the movie is to show that William Wallace, who was a real leader in the Wars for Scottish Independence, helped lead Scotland to getting that independence. The battles at Stirling, Falkirk and Bannockburn were real battles. Everything else is just thrown in for a cinematic effect. No one cares that kilts weren't worn until the 16th century or that there was no bridge in the battle at Stirling Bridge. The movie is historical fiction. It's a fictional tale based on actual historical events. It doesn't claim to be a documentary on the History Channel.
@@johnp82 You call me insane and then post that load of shite?
@@scottw.3258 you actually read my comment and call it a load of shite? Then yes, you are indeed insane. Tell me one thing I said that's incorrect.
@@johnp82
1. It's not a great 'movie'.
2. WE care that Kilts weren't worn until the 16th century and that woad hadn't been worn for centuries.
3. WE care that there was no bridge at Stirling. It was an integral part of the Battle.
4. It wasn't marketed as 'historic fiction'.
There was also zero mention of Andrew de Moray in the film. He was the the General of the Scottish army at Stirling Brig, not Wallace. He was the experienced warrior, not Wallace. One thing the film did get pretty smack on, is that Wallace was little more than a scrapper. He was a pluke on Longshanks arse and nothing more. He's held in worship because of how he died, make no mistake about it. He was a minor part of the Scottish uprising in reality.
For every thing the film got right, it got half a dozen things wrong. It's an insult to Scotland.
@@scottw.3258 1. It's absolutely a great movie, objectively speaking. It's won awards, has a massive cult following, and has brought people to tears. It has great acting and cinematography.
2. "We" care that kilts weren't worn? Who's "we"? Scottish people or snobby historians?
3. Filming the battle at Stirling on an actual bridge didn't work logistically for some reason. But that doesn't take away from the fact that Stirling was a real battle that Scotland won.
4. It wasn't marketed as "historical fiction" but that's what it's widely regarded as. And it wasn't marketed as a documentary either. If it was a History Channel documentary, you'd have an argument.
Moray was one of the generals at Stirling. Wallace was the other. You're saying Wallace wasn't an experienced warrior yet he led an army against the English and beat them? I guess he was just that good then. And if he was merely some peasant scrapper, why was he made a knight and Guardian of Scotland? Why are there statues of him erected by Scottish people in Scotland?
Again, the gist of the film is to show how Scotland led an uprising against England and a ruthless king, and eventually gaining their independence, while portraying heroic acts by Scotsman and also showing how gruesome battles were. The movie does those things. The screenplay takes liberties to make the story more interesting. I don't see how that's an insult to Scotland. Having characters wear kilts and paint their face blue only makes the story more interesting by painting a more colorful picture and making them more "Scottish".
If it completely rewrote history and showed Scotland losing the battles at Stirling and Bannockburn and NOT getting their independence while NOT depicting Scotsmen as brave warrirors, then I could see your point. Although I could see Scottish people and particularly descendants of Robert The Bruce getting mad for portraying him as a traitor. But still.
That piece of hair hanging down is bothering me