Braveheart - Rating: 4.75 out of 6
This gushing, wildly romantic, idealistic and reportedly woefully inaccurate Hollywood blockbuster makes wonderful cinema!
The opening scenes are among the film's best, with lyricism right at the very start: cameras panning over the Scottish mountains, the subtitle "Scotland, 1280", and a folky voice asking us to "let me tell you of William Wallace....". This lyricism soon paves the way for full-blown manipulative sentimentality whether we are shown the gruesome scene of the hanging bodies or where his future wife gives the young Wallace a flower at the funeral (a plot contrivance which works wonders at pulling at the heartstrings!) Now several, probably most, professional reviewers would turn up their noses at this, calling it sugary, chick-flickish and cheap, but the common misconception amongst film reviewers is that they think such manipulation almost by definition makes a film "bad", and therefore to be avoided. It can do, but not necessarily, as film is entitled to be as much about pure escapism as anything else, even when portraying apparently historical events (dramatic licence is fine if it is effected well). In this film, the romance of the scenery, the people and the love affairs are milked for all they're worth by the soundtrack, by slow motion and other devices; it all works and thus improves the film, but not enough - again almost by definition - for it to be a classic. Legends of the Fall is a very similar film in many ways, not least in this regard.
Such epics do not as a rule require great scripts or acting: the former is of good standard, nothing more, and the only outstanding performance is that given by Patrick McGoohan as Edward I, theatrically stunning yet cinematically realistic. His opening ("Prima Nocta") scene, especially, is fantastically good. But McGoohan aside the film works on plot and its epic quality, constantly pulling at our heartstrings. By "plot" I also mean the numerous subplots: Wallace's far-fetched but oh-so-romantic love affair with the princess, the Scottish nobles -v- Scottish commoners, the Bruce's position in that situation and manipulation by his father, and of course Stephen the mad Irishman, the last necessary as otherwise only Big Hamish would have been a mate of any note!
That's not to gloss over the quality of the individual scenes, even those not involving McGoohan! The unexpected death of Wallace's wife and subsequent revenge attack by the Scots are very well-handled, having an unusual (for such scenes) naturalistic / organic / improvisationalist quality. The two big violent battlescenes are very watchable, because cleverly there is always some plot lever to keep the viewer interested in each one, e.g. the use of Scottish spears to surprise the charging English cavalry. And note should be mentioned of several nice touches, for example the new wife lovingly whispering to her husband just before she is taken away for Prima Nocta and Wallace begging for forgiveness from his wife's parents. Could his commoner wife really have had such flawless skin and teeth in 1280? Most probably not, but who cares!
Taking the film for what it is, I find it difficult to find any significant flaws. So why give this 4.75 when the Shawshank Redemption gets 5.25? Because of what I said earlier: when all's said and done this film relies on sugary manipulation for its greatness, and although that is perfectly fine if it produces a thoroughly entertaining film, it means instant disqualification from being truly great. That's why Shawshank is a classic and this isn't.
