So Wallace just gives York up?
I mean if he really did invade York in real life I would understand why that subplot was included but he didn’t. So why have him invade York only to give is up about 5 minutes later?
shareDoes the film mention Wallace giving up York, I don’t recall that?
In the context of the film, the sacking of York was simply meant to cement Wallace being a thorn in Edward’s side that he could no longer ignore.
Well he just leaves and York is never mentioned again.
shareDoesn’t he leave York because the princess’ escort warns him of the ambush being setup by Edward?
shareYes but my point is since that didn’t happen in real life and it doesn’t have any real impact on the plot why have it in there to begin with?
shareFor the same reason of Wallace hooking up with the princess and knocking her up, artistic license, as well as dramatically conveying the momentum of Wallace’s rebellion.
shareWallace hooking up with the Princess had something to do with the plot, despite being historically inaccurate. The sacking of York didn’t.
shareAs I said, it dramatically conveyed the momentum of Wallace’s rebellion. Right before the Prince opened the basket, the King admonished him for his incompetence,
“…our entire northern army is annihilated, and you have done nothing.”
Which is immediately followed up with “Wallace has sacked York!”
Leading to, “If he can sack York, he can invade our England.”
This is the first time King Edward shows anxiety/fear regarding the Scottish uprising, within the context of the film’s narrative.
Interesting
share