Robert the Bruce

Scottish history is vigorously disputed territory and the story of Robert the Bruce its most prominent narrative. The story of the spider is deeply embedded in the Scottish psyche and the Bruce's struggles to overcome English domination with the victory at Bannockburn are the stuff of legend.

This film will disappoint those who crave battle scenes as much as those who demand historical accuracy; it depicts the complex psychology of the times with subtle dialogue and the close examination of intimate relationships between fictional characters, rather than chart the course of events. It is intense and engaging, and uses acting not action to tell the story, which concerns only that bit of the legend immediately after the spider and before banishment of the English, when the Bruce is struggling with demons and the rest of the characters dealing with issues of betrayal, resentment and loss.

The release of this film comes at a crucial moment in Scottish history. It is already despised and written off by opponents of Scottish independence as propaganda, criticised for its alleged historical inaccuracy and sentimentality. The director is after all a prominent supporter of Scottish independence and felt that his film would help the cause. In this context, it has already strayed into Scotland's most disputed territory. Viewed with an open mind, it is nevertheless a fascinating portrayal of how actual people in an actual situation might behave and relate to each other.

The acting is pretty good, although one or two accents did not quite make the grade, and there was some mumbling. Impressive work in the children's roles and very good camera work to bring horses deep inside the drama.

Go see it!

I had the privilege of seeing this in Edinburgh at a small screening, film was introduced by the main star and director. This is clearly a labour of love and small budget dealing with The Bruce on the run and giving up on himself. Being hunted by other Scots who are after some coin, he has to hide out through winter. Filmed mostly in Montana with a bit of Scotland at the end, seems a bit of a shame but this sort of thing happens a lot. The film itself is a slow burner and a bit of a come down on the back Brave Heart, this is a beaten King giving up and hiding out, wounded he is taken in by a family who've lost their Husband/father to the battles with the English army. Some mixed feelings towards him but they come to terms in the end he is a good King and wants what's best for Scotland.

Bits of the film reminded me of old westerns like High Noon or 3:10 to Yuma, there's a showdown coming and the odds are against you but you have to fight regardless. It was good to see Angus back in the role of Bruce seems fitting and if they ever do a Bannockburn movie I'd want him back in the role.

First thing to say is with Braveheart still casting a long shadow over this period in Scotland's history and the more recent Outlaw King proving an entertaining if flawed take on The Bruce, the writers of this had a decision to make.

Clearly the decision to focus on Robert the Bruce's months in hiding was as much a financial decision as any artistic one. With the filming taking place in Montana, a largely unknown non Scottish cast and a novice director the budget constraints were more than apparent on screen.

This is not necessarily a barrier to making a watchable film but the idea that his months in hiding would make for an entertaining two hours was naive at best.

What we see is a fairly well worn tale of wounded hero taken in by noble peasant family until fit to return to his feet.

The young cast all perform well as does the mother Morag despite the limitations of the script but one speech in particular from the daughter is so maudlin it nearly ruins her entire performance.

Along with the stock medieval goons and villains pursuing The Bruce for the bounty on his head, the wonky sometimes laughable accents and a liberty taking retelling of The Bruce's altercation with John Comyn, the film casts The Bruce as a Taciturn almost mute figure when he is on screen.

This is meant to convey inner turmoil obviously but it unfortunately turns the film into a giant slog. Two hours feel like three and when do get some action at the end it is like sn Oasis in the desert. Even though it is a fairly standard battle sequence.

There are dozens of 10/10 reviews for this film here. And while I can't pretend to know exactly why they chose to score it this highly I can take a pretty good guess.

Unlike my fellow Yes voters I have to be honest. This just wasn't very good and was fatally flawed from the get go with the decision to include no real moments of spectacle.

If you're after a film about The Bruce then Outlaw King is still the best one out there. Just watch that.

Robert the Bruce is obviously one of the most important historical figures in Scotland's history. This film, without spending a Hollywood mega budget, makes a decent fist of trying to show how Bruce realises that to be successful in his quest for the throne, he has to begin to understand what those who are not the nobility need.

The fact that there are no references to the Dutch house of Orange or the takeover of the British crown by the Hanoverians seems to have irked certain sectarian groups in Scotland enough to get them to bring their poison onto a film review site!

😂😂😂😂😂

Good and accurate. but... Robert The Bruce in 1306 had 32 years old... so maybe the choice of Angus MacFayden wasn't a good one... looking at him it seems that 25 years from the death of William Wallace has passed and not only 1 :-) :-) :-)