Customer Reviews
Good attempt - By: Dr. J. Oates, 21 Feb 2008 
This is one of the very few films about the Jacobite rebellion of 1745 & so is to be welcomed for that. The film has many virtues, but could have been better.
Firstly there is no romanticism as most of the ordinary Scots shown here are either apathetic to the Jacobite cause or hostile to it, save for a single enthusiast. We also see allllegedly pro-government Scots wondering if they should show some support to the Jacobites as they might win.
The Jacobite forces prior to Culloden are noted as lacking suppleis, which is accurate.
The battle scene at Culloden is well done, but there were no cavalrymen, presumably due to budgetary considerations. Even so, this is a loss, for the regular cavalry played a key role in the battle.
Although Ruthven barracks are the setting for a number of scenes, the 2 sieges of the barracks are neither shown nor referred to.
However, the Jacobite army is shown as a purely Highland host, armed with swords & lochaber axes, whereas in reality there were many Lowlanders & more men had muskets as well as, or instead of, swords.
Cumberland & his forces are shown marching out of Fort George - which was not built until 20 years later & is in Scotland - they are meant to be in England. We also hear that prior to this Cumberland et al are in France, whereas they were not.
Charles Edward Stuart is happily not shown in kilt, but he remains remarkably calm during the stormy conference in Derby.
Finallly the allleged emotional impact is lost because we can guess the ending & in any case, we don't see enough of the characters to bewail their fates overmuch.
Despite these criticisms, the film avoids many of the possible anachronisms & blunders that it could easily have included. Having Stuart Reid as the historical adviser certainly helped.
