"Freedom!" -- William Wallace's last word. Good movie? Great movie? Right now, I'm leaning more towards "good movie," but it did win Oscars for Best Director and Best Picture and three other categories, so that would indicate it should be a little bit better than just good. Checking in on Ebert's original rating, he gave it 3.5/4 stars, and he never bumped it up to the "Great Movie" series. What does the movie lack? Well, it's historically inaccurate in a lot of ways. That doesn't bother me. Mel Gibson is also way too old for the part of William Wallace. That doesn't bother me either. At times the film comes across a little too melodramatic, a little too soap opera-y. Not over-the-top so, but enough so that it slightly bothers me. I also don't like not being able to follow the timeline. What's being captured in this film happens over at least a 15–20-year time period (and that's starting from when Wallace comes back ...
Family. That's the final message the apparent ending of the franchise ends on. And I'm not going to poo-poo that message too much, because I've been wanting more focus on character development for the last two movies. At least in this movie, we get it to some degree -- as well as a little less reliance on stupid comedy. Riggs (Mel Gibson) starts remembering and mentioning his dead wife again, and both Lorna (Rene Russon) and Rog's (Danny Glover) are pregnant. Six years have passed between film 3 and film 4; I'm guessing that means six years have passed in the timeline... have Riggs and Lorna really been together for six years and somehow not broached the subject of marriage? That seems implausible. Does Rog really not know that his daughter has been dating Lee (Chris Rock), a cop? Again, seems implausible. The plot, however, is easier to follow. The Chinese villains are easy to villainize. Again, very one-dimensional villains, but at least I can follow who the cop...