Be careful what you wish for, the war of 1812 has had a lot of setbacks for Americans and it was largely decided on the great lakes, to the point when one side might have won on land, but if they did not dominate the lake in question they would have to retreat. Ultimately the War ended with the US never achieving any of its main objectives, beyond making the UK to actually acknowledge its right to exist. Not saying that you could not make a good story of it, but either more liberties would have to be taken, or you would have to sell US audience a story about a relatively underwhelming war that was largely fought by Carpenters on great lakes and ended with no change of border
@@michalsoukup1021 Getting the UK to admit you exist is a pretty big victory. The end of impressment really was a victory even if other objectives were unmet.
@@michalsoukup1021 Mostly. However, recognition of the United States was done by the Jay Treaty of 1794. It was superseded only to a minor degree by the Treaty of Ghent in 1815. Fact was, Britain was fighting a far larger war against Napoleonic France; the War of 1812 was an afterthought largely irrelevant to the global war which Britain was fighting in Europe. But your main contention is entirely correct: War of 1812 was one long failure by the United States to achieve its aim of conquering British North America. And as you rightly point out, it was a deadlock determined by control or lack thereof of the Great Lakes. There was no meaningful road system capable of supplying armies of any size. All military supply had to be transported by ship. This is precisely why Britain built such an extensive system of canals (Trent and Rideau) starting in the 1820s.
@BloodMajor Say what you will, but I'm an American and would be honored to fight alongside Sharpe and his crew. I've served alongside the British (thoug it was a great many years ago), and found them to be like family. I'm grateful that most Brits seem to see it that way, and hope it is that way still. God bless us all.
I completely agree. The book is one of my favorites, especially where he meets Teresa for the first time and choice he had to make to save the gold (wont mention any spoilers for others, but lets just say the baker's oven scene was immense!) I don't see how they couldn't have kept a single aspect of the book. There's changing it a bit and then there's changing it to the point of there being NOTHING left..at least in Sharpe's Sword they at least had Leroux, the sword and Sharpe injured
Potentially, they did follow the book but they had a dispute with the original cast (not the main cast - people they hired for the first one) so the writers made something radically different to avoid paying the cast for the first version!
Only seen 5 minutes but had to pause and ask "Why is Sharpe not doing this thug in right there on the spot?" I mean, has he not learned from his mistakes with Hakeswill? His and Harper's softness and bungling cost Theresa her life. (among others)
@@taoliu3949 Um, are you serious? Do you hand over your lunch money to weak guys you can easily beat? 😂 Sharpe was WITH HIS COMPANY. And them VS this scruffy bunch is not even a match. Besides as ranking officer he could have punched or even shot their "leader" on the spot and I bet none of those mutts would even bark. Especially not when looking down the paddy's 7 barrels. Sharpe should have put these rats straight right there and then. And on principal...being where he's from...he should never have let them walk off with the loot his boys just risked their lives for. They got CLOWNED. This script is sissyfied and makes Sharpe look like a punk. (I bet this landed the Ned Stark role)
@@braveconcepts Um, there were a lot more red coats than there are green coats. Even if they could beat them, he would still sustain losses which are much more needed to fight the war. It's not about who win who loses, it's about cost vs benefits. You pick and choose your battles. Why antagonize a situation you don't have to. They were gonna be caught eventually, they were stuck in a foreign country across the sea and didnt speak the local language and the Peninsula was full of British Army units and their Provosts. If they hide, they'd have to hide in the mountains, good luck living that life for god knows how long.
@KingOfNormans Don't know what you mean by "another thing" but there is only the bayonet lug on the Bess, and while it is coincidentally in the same location on the barrel, as what would be considered a sight, the line infantryman did not sight or "aim" the musket... he "presented" it. Training did not include aiming, just volley firing. The musket was not accurate enough to even warrant having a sight. I spent years as an armourer at a historic site. I am speaking from experience.
@666nonbeliever I have to admit though one of my favorite commanders in the War of 1812 was Lieutenant Colonel Winfield Scott,The guy was a giant and probably one of the toughest commanders on either side,he got captured by the British at least once and after he saw what happened to Irish-American soldiers captured by the British he petitioned Senate to take punitive actions against captured enemy soldiers
It confused the heck out of me but I think it's because they already introduced Theresa in Rifle's (TV version) - why the heck they didn't just follow the same formula with another female partisan though is anyone's guess! (Maybe a rights thing?) EDIT: Apparently, according to Rifleman Harris, there was some disagreement with the first version of the episode with the cast so they have to make a new episode so they didn't have to pay the cast for the first one - the likelihood was the first version of the episode followed the book (which would have been awesome just to see El Catolico in action) and this one had to be radically different to avoid paying the people from the first version.
@@rubix4195 It think it's also worth keeping in mind the budget required to simulate the destruction of the powder magazine at Almeida. This almost feels like a bottle episode of Sharpe in comparison.
@11Cheesewaffles Yeah, it was a pretty new thing. They still weren't really trained to use them, it was just there as a guide really. :P Most soldiers only got 4-5 rounds to practice with every year anyways. x3 Not a lot of effort was put into aiming for the musketeers. The pure idea of training riflemen to aim and hit targets was very new, and a lot of older Generals looked down on it as being "un-warlike"
is there a sergeant in the army who does NOT hat sharpe? or is not dad ugly and dumb? anyway, thanks a million for uploading that program! i absolutely loved it back in the 90s!
The Sharpe movies are mostly awesome, but this episode is a weak one. (And yeah I did watch to the end.) The Aztec/Guerilla thing is just totally silly.
it is actually im not sure about the sieges however the village is most likely the same, they would make another fake village or use another one(they will have to get the population to help them etc.. too much hassel) btw pardon my language, english is not my first language
the Baker had rifling, just two though, the enfield and American Springfield prior to the civil war got multiple rifling, percussion primier and dual sights and some even telescopic sights!
instead of insulting the police he should've IMMEDIATELY reported the south Essex deserters. would've sent him off in the other direction away from the guy they are going to hang.
@markmason1000 thier was talk of one on the real life of James FitzGibbon. He rose through the ranks and was made an officer. he led 50 soldiers in guerrilla-style raids American forces and thoughts same man took 462 prisoners at the battle of beaver dams.
Rom the beginning, the American military was always small or restricted in size be caused our founding fathers were leary of a large standing army due to the monarchy abuse of authority. Still why didn't Sharpe recruit and pick more chosen men for the rifles , expert marksmen.
@mohpa1126 Hey we were good shots years on the frontier would do that .We had a whole corp of them back in 1812.they were probably the best part of our army next to the U.S light artillery.and come on you're really telling me you don't want to watch U.S rifles face off against native americans or Canadian Voitgers ?
This whole story would have been more natural if it had taken place in Mexico or the American Southwest. Either with an American army unit during the Mexican-American War or in some Alternate Universe where the British were fighting the Spanish alongside of the Mexicans.
@RollandB The war started on April 25, 1846 when Mexican cavalry attacked a group of U.S. soldiers in the disputed zone under the command of General Zachary Taylor, killing about a dozen. They then laid siege to an American fort along the Rio Grande. Don't start nothing, won't be nothing..
@RollandB it was taken in the Texican Revolution. A joint American/Mexican colonist endeavor. MEXICO certainly could no longer claim it. I guarantee you if Mexico was to attack the US Army today and besiege Fort Sam Houstn they'd start a war. War's, once started, have a way of getting out of hand. They don't follow scripts. Once in a war you can't cry about the other side being a bully.
@RollandB you keep ignoring my point. The no one in that territory, "Gringo" or Mexican want to be a part of Mexico anymore. They had already fought one war of Independence. If you keep trying to force others to be a part of your country BY FORCE OF ARMS and military action then stop saying YOU are being bullied.
Watched this for the first time over a decade ago. Glad to see it's still up!
Good thing they have me to save the day
hey sharpe what’s up
That they are Richard, That they are
Oh hey there George
Why did you cheat on Teresa
Ahh, Dick. Remember the time we fought together in Trafalgar, when I helped you to get Australian standart? Good times.
His Rifles...special forces of the 1800's haha
I really wish we had a series about the exploits of the U.S Rifle Regiment during the war of 1812 like the Sharpe series
Be careful what you wish for, the war of 1812 has had a lot of setbacks for Americans and it was largely decided on the great lakes, to the point when one side might have won on land, but if they did not dominate the lake in question they would have to retreat. Ultimately the War ended with the US never achieving any of its main objectives, beyond making the UK to actually acknowledge its right to exist. Not saying that you could not make a good story of it, but either more liberties would have to be taken, or you would have to sell US audience a story about a relatively underwhelming war that was largely fought by Carpenters on great lakes and ended with no change of border
@@michalsoukup1021 Getting the UK to admit you exist is a pretty big victory. The end of impressment really was a victory even if other objectives were unmet.
A series about Fergusons Rifles in the Revolution would be a bit short and sad.
@@michalsoukup1021 Mostly. However, recognition of the United States was done by the Jay Treaty of 1794. It was superseded only to a minor degree by the Treaty of Ghent in 1815. Fact was, Britain was fighting a far larger war against Napoleonic France; the War of 1812 was an afterthought largely irrelevant to the global war which Britain was fighting in Europe. But your main contention is entirely correct: War of 1812 was one long failure by the United States to achieve its aim of conquering British North America. And as you rightly point out, it was a deadlock determined by control or lack thereof of the Great Lakes. There was no meaningful road system capable of supplying armies of any size. All military supply had to be transported by ship. This is precisely why Britain built such an extensive system of canals (Trent and Rideau) starting in the 1820s.
@BloodMajor
Say what you will, but I'm an American and would be honored to fight alongside Sharpe and his crew. I've served alongside the British (thoug it was a great many years ago), and found them to be like family. I'm grateful that most Brits seem to see it that way, and hope it is that way still. God bless us all.
I completely agree. The book is one of my favorites, especially where he meets Teresa for the first time and choice he had to make to save the gold (wont mention any spoilers for others, but lets just say the baker's oven scene was immense!) I don't see how they couldn't have kept a single aspect of the book. There's changing it a bit and then there's changing it to the point of there being NOTHING left..at least in Sharpe's Sword they at least had Leroux, the sword and Sharpe injured
Potentially, they did follow the book but they had a dispute with the original cast (not the main cast - people they hired for the first one) so the writers made something radically different to avoid paying the cast for the first version!
And each time they go into a church, a convent or a chapel, the door looks EXACTLY the same :)
It's Sergeant Biggerstaff's long lost brother!
TheNapoleose it’s the same actor xd
Or come back with some plastic surgery :)
Only seen 5 minutes but had to pause and ask "Why is Sharpe not doing this thug in right there on the spot?" I mean, has he not learned from his mistakes with Hakeswill? His and Harper's softness and bungling cost Theresa her life. (among others)
Um, because Sharpe was outnumbered. Killing the Sgt on the spot would put his life in danger, if it wasn't already.
@@taoliu3949 Um, are you serious? Do you hand over your lunch money to weak guys you can easily beat? 😂
Sharpe was WITH HIS COMPANY. And them VS this scruffy bunch is not even a match. Besides as ranking officer he could have punched or even shot their "leader" on the spot and I bet none of those mutts would even bark. Especially not when looking down the paddy's 7 barrels.
Sharpe should have put these rats straight right there and then. And on principal...being where he's from...he should never have let them walk off with the loot his boys just risked their lives for. They got CLOWNED.
This script is sissyfied and makes Sharpe look like a punk. (I bet this landed the Ned Stark role)
@@braveconcepts Um, there were a lot more red coats than there are green coats. Even if they could beat them, he would still sustain losses which are much more needed to fight the war. It's not about who win who loses, it's about cost vs benefits. You pick and choose your battles. Why antagonize a situation you don't have to. They were gonna be caught eventually, they were stuck in a foreign country across the sea and didnt speak the local language and the Peninsula was full of British Army units and their Provosts. If they hide, they'd have to hide in the mountains, good luck living that life for god knows how long.
I wish this was back on TV :(
@KingOfNormans Don't know what you mean by "another thing" but there is only the bayonet lug on the Bess, and while it is coincidentally in the same location on the barrel, as what would be considered a sight, the line infantryman did not sight or "aim" the musket... he "presented" it. Training did not include aiming, just volley firing. The musket was not accurate enough to even warrant having a sight.
I spent years as an armourer at a historic site. I am speaking from experience.
Stripping RANK ... NOW THATS SOLDERING 💯
Great work sean. Great work
wish they had continued the series
harper seems to save his bullets till sumone is about to shoot one of the chossen men ha
@666nonbeliever I have to admit though one of my favorite commanders in the War of 1812 was Lieutenant Colonel Winfield Scott,The guy was a giant and probably one of the toughest commanders on either side,he got captured by the British at least once and after he saw what happened to Irish-American soldiers captured by the British he petitioned Senate to take punitive actions against captured enemy soldiers
Oh crap, I just started rereading the book, now what... reading the book at the same time would be new...
@donorleone
He has. Sgt. Rodd in this one, and Sgt. Bickerstaff in "Sharpe's Challenge"
@KingOfNormans The "Front Sight" on the musket was actually the bayonette lug.
Ah, the worst episode of Sharpe ever...
It confused the heck out of me but I think it's because they already introduced Theresa in Rifle's (TV version) - why the heck they didn't just follow the same formula with another female partisan though is anyone's guess! (Maybe a rights thing?)
EDIT: Apparently, according to Rifleman Harris, there was some disagreement with the first version of the episode with the cast so they have to make a new episode so they didn't have to pay the cast for the first one - the likelihood was the first version of the episode followed the book (which would have been awesome just to see El Catolico in action) and this one had to be radically different to avoid paying the people from the first version.
@@rubix4195 It think it's also worth keeping in mind the budget required to simulate the destruction of the powder magazine at Almeida. This almost feels like a bottle episode of Sharpe in comparison.
This was the worst of the Sharpe episodes imo, but it still had great moments.
@11Cheesewaffles Yeah, it was a pretty new thing. They still weren't really trained to use them, it was just there as a guide really. :P Most soldiers only got 4-5 rounds to practice with every year anyways. x3 Not a lot of effort was put into aiming for the musketeers. The pure idea of training riflemen to aim and hit targets was very new, and a lot of older Generals looked down on it as being "un-warlike"
Raymond SHarpe 8 years 8 days 8 hours ago....
is there a sergeant in the army who does NOT hat sharpe? or is not dad ugly and dumb?
anyway, thanks a million for uploading that program! i absolutely loved it back in the
90s!
Course the Scouser don't like the police 😂
i know right i was hping to see the the fight where sharpe rescues kersey and the blowing up of the fort
The Sharpe movies are mostly awesome, but this episode is a weak one. (And yeah I did watch to the end.) The Aztec/Guerilla thing is just totally silly.
The talk about a galleon ship washing up in the mainland mountains of Spain gave a WTF moment.
it is actually im not sure about the sieges however the village is most likely the same, they would make another fake village or use another one(they will have to get the population to help them etc.. too much hassel)
btw pardon my language, english is not my first language
Can you tell me where I can buy the entire set like you have here? I’d appreciate any help you can provide me with. Thanks, Nick.
you could look on amazon or something to see if there is a dvd series of it or just look about
Got mine from Amazon.
Blu-Ray, too.
@11Cheesewaffles Actually, they did. Muskets just got front sights, while rifles got front and back. :-)
the Baker had rifling, just two though, the enfield and American Springfield prior to the civil war got multiple rifling, percussion primier and dual sights and some even telescopic sights!
@BigBadBill2323 makes absolute sense even if you didnt work as a armourer
instead of insulting the police he should've IMMEDIATELY reported the south Essex deserters. would've sent him off in the other direction away from the guy they are going to hang.
No, I believe he shot some sort of a charge placed in the ground.
I guess rifles don't die
Thank You Very very
@markmason1000
thier was talk of one on the real life of James FitzGibbon. He rose through the ranks and was made an officer. he led 50 soldiers in guerrilla-style raids American forces and thoughts same man took 462 prisoners at the battle of beaver dams.
PAL vs PAL2? Ouch, happened to me before.
Which one is waterloo?
@BloodMajor Agreed.
Rom the beginning, the American military was always small or restricted in size be caused our founding fathers were leary of a large standing army due to the monarchy abuse of authority. Still why didn't Sharpe recruit and pick more chosen men for the rifles , expert marksmen.
I wonder if the English sergeants of the time were all as bad a portrayed.
@shubs247 i know yea hahaha surely they were aware !!!!
@11Cheesewaffles Well, not optical sights of course, just ordinary ironsights XD
@mohpa1126 Hey we were good shots years on the frontier would do that .We had a whole corp of them back in 1812.they were probably the best part of our army next to the U.S light artillery.and come on you're really telling me you don't want to watch U.S rifles face off against native americans or Canadian Voitgers ?
@BigBadBill2323 Nope, that was another thing :-)
I bought the whole DVD set but it doesn't play on any machine I own.. I got fucked
Is it a region thing?
Your American?
A classic show. Not much this good made any more. All bloody zombie crap
This whole story would have been more natural if it had taken place in Mexico or the American Southwest. Either with an American army unit during the Mexican-American War or in some Alternate Universe where the British were fighting the Spanish alongside of the Mexicans.
Not everything has to do with America!
@RollandB The war started on April 25, 1846 when Mexican cavalry attacked a group of U.S. soldiers in the disputed zone under the command of General Zachary Taylor, killing about a dozen. They then laid siege to an American fort along the Rio Grande. Don't start nothing, won't be nothing..
@RollandB those are the actual events. I see you believe what you need to believe too.
@RollandB it was taken in the Texican Revolution. A joint American/Mexican colonist endeavor. MEXICO certainly could no longer claim it. I guarantee you if Mexico was to attack the US Army today and besiege Fort Sam Houstn they'd start a war. War's, once started, have a way of getting out of hand. They don't follow scripts. Once in a war you can't cry about the other side being a bully.
@RollandB you keep ignoring my point. The no one in that territory, "Gringo" or Mexican want to be a part of Mexico anymore. They had already fought one war of Independence. If you keep trying to force others to be a part of your country BY FORCE OF ARMS and military action then stop saying YOU are being bullied.