If the Scots are so proud why couldn't they find a Scotsman to play William Wallace!?

Question

In a previous question about Andrew Murray a lot was made of the pride of being Scottish - I have no problem with that.

In some articles he has been compared to William Wallace.

But are they are proud of William Wallace being played by an Australian (Mel Gibson in Braveheart)?

Or did all the fiery Scots fail the audition?

Answer 1

007 was too old.

Answer 2

Beacause the Scottish had nothing to do with a film made with Hollywood money. If it were a British / Scottish film then I am sure they would have chosen many Authentic actors.

Sounds like you have a problem with Scottish people and their national pride.

Answer 3

who cares? its only a film.

Answer 4

Dont think we had a say in that , Im sure it was Hollywood who cast Gibson not the Scottish people

Answer 5

Because it was a Holywood film!

. . . and no Briton, whether Scottish, English, or Welsh, should want to take part had they been told it would be a propagandist lying film.

The film was a fairy tale released just before the devolution elections.

In real life the Scottish were NOT fighting the English....

A minority of Scottish rebels were fighting the British (The British troops being 70% Scots in that battle)!!!

Blue/grey face paint was worn by the Picts (a tribe from Northumberland, England) in battle against the romans. Not by Mel Wally Wallace Gibson or whoever.

My Grandfather was an 'Argyle and Sutherland Highlander' and fought for Britain.  He would have turned in his grave had he seen such a bullsh*t film which insults intelligent Scots.

Thank God for King James of Scotland who became the first King of both Scotland and England.  Don't believe the trendy hype.

Answer 6

i dont think our people had a say in it..... obv.

Answer 7

They did not fail the audition they just missed the audition as they were too busy drinking Tennents and eating haggis.

Answer 8

The film was a creation of Mel Gibson. As a small man he suffers from "chip on the shoulder syndrome" and decided to take a very old legend and write what he thought he could play (with his limited acting ability) that would make him look good.

Many historians have slated the production as "fantasy" he replied in exactly the same way as he replied to the historian with two PHDs who criticised his movie Apocalypto.

Most of the fighting scenes were filmed in Ireland with the Irish Army as extras and Mel's "accent" ... well ... I roared for hours. "They can take away your life mate, but the pommes will never take your freedom" Noirce !!! (Nice)

Basically - Scotland has very little to do with the making of the film so leave my Scottish mates alone. Nuff said.

xxFJ

Answer 9

As far as I'm aware it wasn't up the the "Scottish people" to find an actor for the film. I certainly wasn't involved in the audition process.

Answer 10

If the Scots were in charge of casting, I'm sure they would have found a good scottish actor to play him.

Ewan was just a little to skinny for the part I guess.

Answer 11

Rab C Nesbitt was already booked for another production.

Answer 12

Mel cast his self as Wallace we didn't.

Answer 13

Because Billy Connolly is a comedian, and a struggling actor.

Answer 14

Mel Gibson had the idea to make the film. He produced it and directed it. When he sold the idea to Paramount, they said they would only pay for the film if he starred in it too.

He did, however, use many scotsman in the film, including many decendants of William Wallace.

If a Scotsman were a big time star who wanted to tell the story, they probably would have cast a scot in the role. The Hollywood system in the US did not go that way.

Answer 15

No one in Scotland was as good-looking as Mel Gibson

Answer 16

The film is pure fiction, not much is even known about the life of William Wallace. It's hardly an historically accurate film, so they may as well have an Australian playing Wallace, as it's all complete fantasy anyway.

Indeed the Scottish film critic Angus Wolfe Murray described Braveheart  as being -

" absolutely awful. Historically terrible and inaccurate, and the worst kind of nationalistic rubbish".

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41...

In the recently released book ' The Invention of Scotland: Myth and History, Hugh Trevor-Roper takes three aspects of Scottishness - the origins of the nation, the antiquity of Scottish literature and, most entertainingly, the reasons for wearing tartan - and demolishes them one by one," declared Simon Heffer in the Daily Telegraph, reviewing The Invention of Scotland: Myth and History. "He points out that an Englishman essentially invented the kilt, something too horrible for the Scots to confront ... While it would be wrong to conclude that the whole Scottish image and culture is based on lies, Trevor-Roper, in this vastly entertaining and highly intelligent book, does lead us some considerable way in that direction." "This witty, ironic and elegantly written book will delight any reader with an open mind," said Adam Sisman in the Sunday Telegraph. "This is not a book about Scotland, but about the persistence of myth."

http://www.visitdunkeld.com/bagpipe-hist...

http://medievalhistory.suite101.com/arti...

Answer 17

Scots didn't get to chose who starred in the film!

Answer 18

The film had nothing to do with the real William Wallace (who was a mild-mannered, peace-loving diplomat who eventually went a bit off the rails.  More a victim of circumstances than rabble-rousing hero/villain) and everything to do with Mel Gibson's endless portrayal of the English as the most evil race on Earth (see also "Gallipoli", "The Patriot", "Mutiny On The Bounty" for other depictions of English people as unrecognisable monsters).  One theory for this obsession is that he's using the English as a cover for the people he really hates - the Jews.  Personally, I reckon he's just a f*ckwit.  Anyhow, the Scots can't be blamed for the c^nt.