Have you heard of this movie?

[macwilkin]

The purpose of the movies, at least from a Hollywood perspective, is to make money by entertaining people. Nowhere, in the Hollywood Producers credo, can I find a reference to the necessity of being historically or politically accurate. Hollywood is nothing more than a celluloid sausage factory-- grind 'em out, sell 'm everywhere, and if someone gets heartburn, well it's no big deal. It's not like they died or anything.

So yeah, Braveheart had about as much historical accuracy as a Michael Moore "documentary" has factual accuracy. Unlike Ken Burns (The Civil War), Mel Gibson didn't set out to document Scotland's war for independence, and neither did Braveheart's writer, Randy Wallace. Instead they successfully collaborated (or should that be conspired?) to create an entertaining (which it was) film with enough easy-to-follow action that even the mouth breathing, gum chewing, seventeen year olds in the audience wouldn't start texting one another.

Like the good doctor from Vienna said, "Sometime a cigar is just a cigar." And like Max Schlemming said to me on the back lot at Universal more than forty years ago, "A movie is just a movie kid. Just a movie."

That may be, Scott -- but from a history teacher's perspective, we're the ones holding the mop and bucket to clean up Hollywood's mess. I suppose that's job security in a way.

Hollywood can turn out entertaining movies with a fair degree of accuracy, though.

T.