Continuity mistake: Near the beginning when the boy is waiting for the men to return and he has the bucket of water, you hear the water slosh but the scrawny boy runs so effortlessly with it and you never hear it slosh again. Then when he is at the fence with his back to them, you see the bottom of the bucket is wet, but there's no water in it. (00:09:30)

Continuity mistake: When the spy was trying to kill Wallace, he was seen swinging his sword forward. The shot cut to Stephen throwing his knife. When the shot cut back to the spy being hit by Stephen's knife, he was pulling back his sword to get ready for a forward swing. What? Did he miss on his first attempt and had to try again?

Audio problem: When the Scots are applying a battering ram to the city gates, you can plainly hear someone shout "Stop, drop and roll", after the English set fire to the battering ram. (01:29:35)

Factual error: The title of the Duke of York did not yet exist in the 13th century - it was instituted only later and was normally used only by a younger son of the King.

Continuity mistake: When Philip is thrown out the window by King Edward we see him flipping over in the air so that he will hit the ground on his back. But when the camera changes to the window view we see that Philip is lying on his front.

Revealing mistake: Something very strange happens at the battle of Stirling. An arrow can be seen near William Wallace's right shoulder even before the English archers start shooting. Now where did that come from? It's there for about a second, so look closely. (01:20:45)

Factual error: In the movie the Scots sack the English city of York. Actually they sacked the city of Carlisle.

Continuity mistake: Watch the group of English soldiers that ride out to present the King's terms at Stirling. After Wallace insults them, they turn around and begin to leave. The sounds of their horses riding off are very audible. After Wallace's talk with the three nobles, their group breaks up and begins to ride back. A panoramic shot of the field is shown and the English representatives have just started to leave.

Continuity mistake: In the battle scene where they flanked their forces and and were going to use the long wooden spears on England's knights, they already had the spears out when it showed England's horses coming closer. Just look around them. It only shows for a second when it is zooming in pretty fast.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Of course they were out. It would have been pointless to still have them covered when the charge was under way and the cavalry were so close.

Continuity mistake: Near the end of the battle of Stirling (the first big one), an English officer on a horse comes at Wallace. Wallace swings his sword at the feet of the horse, knocking it and the officer down. As the officer falls his sword goes from one hand to the other several times.

Other mistake: At the end of the movie when Wallace is being executed and the crowd starts chanting "Mercy," one girl towards the front left looks directly at the camera with her eyes twice in two different shots.


Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Yes, it was done on purpose. It is the same child he locked eyes with prior to being hanged and while he is being disembowelled.

Other mistake: After the fight at Falkirk where Robert The Bruce is walking through the field, there is a woman walking checking the bodies. All these people clearly are supposed to be dead. The woman lifts the head of a man and then puts it down. After she lets go of the head, the boy picks up his head and looks to his side.

Continuity mistake: In the scene where Wallace surrenders to the local magistrate, after Wallace has struck the English soldier that was holding the reigns of the horse, a second soldier attacks the horse with a spear. The spearhead is seen as the soldier starts the attack, after the cut the spearhead is gone, before it strikes the horse. The un-headed spear then hits the harness of the horse where it sticks as the horse rears, and the harness moves from the front of the horse's neck between the legs of the horse to the side, somehow passing through the raised legs of the horse. (00:49:20)

Revealing mistake: When his wife gets attacked, Wallace jumps over a roof and you can clearly see him wearing modern black briefs.

Continuity mistake: When Wallace is saved by Steven, right after he meets him, watch Steven as he is about to throw the small sword. When he comes out of the brush and starts running, he gets past the two trees in front of him, then it cuts to Wallace aiming his bow at him, then it cuts back to Steven and he is back behind the trees.

Continuity mistake: At the wedding scene near the beginning of the film, Wallace challenges Hamish to throw a large rock at him. He throws the rock, and in slow motion the rock is clearly on Wallace's left side; he even leans a little to his right as the rock starts to pass by on his left. But in the next angle the rock is very clearly on his right. (00:21:10)

Continuity mistake: At the end of the movie the executioner bends down to bind William's feet. The scene shows the rope starting around his feet and then a second later William is yanked into the air with a complicated noose-like knot holding his lower body to the ground. How did they make that knot so fast?

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The scene was obviously clipped to save time. His lower body isn't held to the ground, it's pulled outwards by a couple of horses. The executioners hold ropes attached to his wrists.

Other mistake: Near the end of the battle of Sterling after Wallace nearly hits one of his allies on the horse, look on the right side of the shot. An English man wearing metal armor is fighting some Scots. He doesn't make much effort, barely swinging his sword. The Scots fighting him also don't put up much of a challenge either.

manthabeat Premium member

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Because they're exhausted.

Continuity mistake: When Wallace pounds an English soldier with a large mallet, in the village where his wife was killed, watch the third hit. Wallace hits the soldier in the hip and then in the back. On the third hit, the mallet comes down at least an inch or two from the soldiers head, missing. The soldier jumps as if he was hit.

Factual error: Some more errors about Princess Isabella: at the height of William Wallace's rebellion Edward I sends her as an ambassador to negotiate with Wallace (and spy on the Scots) instead she falls in love with Wallace. Princess Isabella was born in 1292: Wallace's rebellion was at its height during 1297-8, so she could have been no more than 6 at the time. (Somebody else has already observed that she was only 13 at the time of Wallace's execution.) Isabella's first language would (obviously) have been French, a 13th century Scotsman would speak either a heavily accented Scottish version of English, or Scots Gaelic, but Isabella has no communication difficulties in Scotland. The Wallace-Isabella affair is also absurd, since it is implausible that, at the height of a war, an unaccompanied young woman, let alone a princess engaged to the heir to the throne of England, would be sent into the heart of a war zone as an envoy and a spy.

Rob Halliday

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Her age has already been marked as an error. As someone well travelled, Wallace knew several languages and as an educated princess, Isabella would have likely known several (and this could all simply be a translation convention). And the king admits that he knew of the danger, and hoped that if Wallace or his men killed her, her father the King of France would help him defeat the Scottish rebellion.

Greg Dwyer

I concede most of your points, and, as you observe, if Isabella and Wallace can converse, this is 'translation convention'. Another error in the film that has already been marked: while the historical Wallace was a minor nobleman, Braveheart shows him as a common man, with no aristocratic or upper class traits, so the Isabella-Wallace romance forms a stock element of many romantic stories, a princess or prince defying social convention to fall in love with a lower class man or woman, entertaining as a story, but implausible in reality. And I think we agree that Isabella was only 6 at the time of Wallace's rebellion, so, in reality, she would have been far too young to have been involved in events.

Rob Halliday

First, both historical inaccuracies and things that you consider unlikely are not mistakes. Second, history is riddled with accounts of nobles having affairs with commoners and slaves.

Greg Dwyer

English Officer: I hope you've washed your arse today - it's about to be kissed by a king.

More quotes from Braveheart

Trivia: Perhaps you're wondering what William Wallace shouts after delivering his speech just prior to the Battle of Stirling. It's "Alba gu brath," which means "Scotland forever."

More trivia for Braveheart

Chosen answer: Just like he said, it would dull his wits and not leave him fully lucid the next day when he had to face the torture.


He wanted his full awareness so he didn't accidentally yell for mercy.

Answer: Because it's a reference to what his Father's last words to him were at the beginning of the film before he was killed, 'I know you can fight but it's our wits that makes us men'. That's why Wallace says to the Princess, 'It will dull my wits and I must have them always'.

More questions & answers from Braveheart

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.