You mean he didn’t consume the English with bolts of lightening from his arse?!

William-wallace-sword

William Wallace was a monster, admits Gibson

Well, sure. We all know these big hollywood histories are dramatized. Maybe Mr. Gibson goes too far though.

Gibson, who also directed the 13th-century epic, spoke out in an interview to mark 15 years since its release. He said: “Wallace was a monster. He always smelt of smoke; he was always burning people’s villages down. He was like what the Vikings called ‘a berserker’.

“He wasn’t as nice as the character we saw up there on the screen. We romanticised him a bit. We shifted the balance because someone’s got to be the good guy against the bad guy; that’s the way stories are told.”

Dr. Fiona Watson, a Wallace biographer and former University of Stirling academic, said that Gibson’s new position was fascinating. “After 15 years, Mel Gibson’s giving us the other version of the myth, the knuckles dragging across the floor one, which is equally untrue,” she said.

“The real man surely lies in between. After all, Wallace went to the Continent on diplomatic missions after the debacle at Falkirk (the 1298 battle), which Wallace lost. I don’t know of many berserkers who did that.”

2 thoughts on “You mean he didn’t consume the English with bolts of lightening from his arse?!

  1. The actual history versus the Hollywood need for a short, interesting story arc!!!
    But Mr. Gibson, etc. reawakened interest in W. Wallace. I even heard (on a History Channel program) that because everyone was scrutinizing the existing bits of Wallace data, evidence, historians were able to correct a minor flaw in their knowledge & learned a bit more of W. Wallace.
    Maybe it’s time for the more historially accurate film version of Wm. Wallace to be written???

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.