"Im Romanian we know a few things about impalement" is legit the best comment I have ever heard someone say in a movie where that is a thing...thats legit!
It seems stupid, but armies fought in groups because the Smoothbored musket only had an effective range of 50 to 70 yards, so they grouped together, moved close and fired. Also... infantry needed to protect themselves from cavalry and grouped together they could do this.
it help to consider muskets more like spears that can fire a few shots at shortrange. Infantry were deployed like spearman. Like you mentioned, the range and accuracy of muskets is nowhere near firearms of modern warfare
Armies in millennia past had fought on line, it isn't too often someone takes a chance to upset the balance of attrition. Military commanders traditions include using the most basic tactics.
No worries. Natural beauty has no need for makeup anyway. 😊 This is literally one of my top favorite movies. Many critics called it out for misrepresenting the British army. However, it does not implicate the soldiers themselves; it only highlights the brutal ruthlessness of a single officer. In fact, it does show Cornwallace's initial disapproval of his actions, and the soldier's hesitation to carry out his orders. More importantly though, it shows the importance of American citizen's right to raise arms against tyranny when necessary. Without that ability, there would be no US!
Loved your reaction! " I'm Romanian, I know a few things about impalement!" This is the best damn comment during a reaction I've ever heard!! Loved it!!!
Great Movie and Historical Fiction. Mel's role is largely based on Francis Marion AKA The Swamp Fox. A officer that did tie up brittish forces in the south with hit and runs plus ambushes.
During the Revolutionary war era, toy soldiers were made of lead and painted. So....yes, he is melting them down to make bullets from the toys. From make-believe war using toy soldiers, to real war, using toy soldiers as ammunition.
We didn’t CALL the American troops ‘blue coats,’ but they did tend to wear blue. When the Marquis Lafayette traveled to the US at his own expense and arrived in Washington’s camp he was horrified to discover that all the uniforms he’d had made were no good because they were red. Not wanting his men to see him as a target, he quickly swapped red for blue.
This was the Revolutionary War. Not the civil war. The French and Indian war was before this war. England and France was fighting for America land. Natives split alliance with both. The last of the Mohicans is a good movie about that war.
It was very much a civil war or rather an uncivil war in large parts of the South. There were malicious on both sides and plenty of war crimes. No churches were burned, but plenty of houses were burned with people in them
@@ronmaximilian6953 Yes...and that was the benign part of the action. When the Iroquois and the Cherokee were involved, they did things to prisoners that made the brutality in The Patriot look like something out of a Disney movie.
The idea behind marching in lines was keeping the enemy back with a wall of men and intimidating them, and since there were no radios it was easier for commanders to give orders with the troops close together
It wasn't much about intimidation. Cavalry is much better at that. The latter is true and also it is in order to concentrate as many firearms as possible in a small area. The more muskets you can deploy together, the more damage you will do. Muskets weren't that accurate, so spreading out wasn't effective. That changed when the guns got better.
Incorrect. 1. There are no radios. Officers have to relay orders via shouting, flags, drums and bugles. The troops had to be formed up so close together to actually see and hear their orders. 2. Muskets are inaccurate and slow to reload. Trying to hit anything past about 80 metres was extremely difficult. Hundreds of men formed into msssive lines and firing at the same time maximized the chances of hitting a target. A literal wall of lead. The slow rate of fire is compensated for by having the first rank (line) of men step to the side to allow the second to fire or get handed loaded muskets to fire from the rear lines while they sent their own back to be reloaded. 3. Scattered infantry are easy targets for horsemen. Troops formed up into line formations can unleash devastating volleys of musket fire at charging cavalry. If enemy cavalry tried to outflank the line then the men would form square. The four-sided formation allowed the men to defend against cavalry charges from all directions and most of the time prevented actual charges from forming, as horses aren't dumb and will not charge directly into a wall of men and bayonets. Only extremely aggressive horses and suicidal riders would charge down infantry squares. All armies of this era also had specialists known as skirmishers. They used cover, spread out in loose formations and specifically targeted officers. They were equipped with rifles which had greater accuracy and range than smoothbore muskets but but were a lot more expensive to manufacture and maintain and took much longer to load. That's why only the skirmishers used them. They were elite troops and relied more on accuracy than rate of fire. The idea of the Americans being the first to use this type of warfare with rifles is a propaganda myth. The British had light infantry skirmishers and used them extensively during the war of independence. What you see was the best way to fight. The generals weren't stupid and it was not seen as the "gentleman's" way of fighting. Officers were expected to act as gentlemen by following the rules of war. That's it. There is some truth around the intimidation factor. Grenadiers were the tallest and strongest soldiers and would be given more elaborate uniforms with tall caps to further increase their already intimidating appearance.
The Patriot is such a great movie! Another great war movie, though quite long (4 hours, I think) is "Gettysburg." It's about the most famous battle that took place during the American Civil War.
15:56 Fun Fact, back then, they played music in battle to communicate... certain songs meant certain battle commands, and other songs were to alert what was happening in the grounds to the battalions further back so that they know what's happening in the front lines.
40:15 "I wonder what is the reason for shooting cannon shots there?" They rolled those cannons to the battlefield in the middle of the night. The cannoneers are firing test shots to determine range and angles to make sure that they are most likely to hit the real targets once the battle begins.
Tavington is based on Banastre Tarleton who was infamous for shooting surrendering American soldiers in a small "battle." In a later battle the American returned the favor of offering "Tarleton's quarter"
As to your no-make-up look, most women would kill to be able, with make-up, to look like you do without. Benjamin Martin is much like a man named Francis Marion, an American guerilla fighter from South Carolina during the American Revolutionary War. Tavington is much like a British soldier named Banastre "the butcher" Tarleton. I thought your comment about Tavington, "We need to fix this dude ASAP" was hilarious. It's interesting to know that you're an older sister. I haven't heard you mention that before.
Susan, the youngest, not talking and then crying out for her papa slays me every time. Every time. It's a fantastic movie, and while it surely took many liberties (ha!) with historical accuracy, it nevertheless is in the right spirit! America was very fortunate to have some intelligent and noble people in their early history, or it wouldn't have gone this way at all.
The reason the british fired cannons on the battlefield before a charge was to get an exact measure of impact of the canon ball. Otherwise, their first shots would be a best guess of where it would impact.
As a history buff, it's funny to see people's reaction to this movie and this scene specifically (even though it's inaccurate) especially when they say "why are they walking straight at each other" and "why don't they shoot." It's called linear warfare people. Best way to fight battles in the 18th century
when people first think of line formations, and see movies where the battles arent recreated well or something, it can seem ridiculous, like toy soldiers just standing there suiciding each other.. but it was much more strategic and dynamic in various ways than that.. probably the best way to understand is to watch a bunch of those animated historic battles on youtube, and of course hear historic stories of battles, to understand things were much more sensable and dynamic than you might think.. afterall, in modern warfare, you still have lines of battle, and they dont just stand there like pinheads shooting back n forth either.. they are strategic and move about, always were
It’s like the famous quote ,Evil Triumphs When Good Men Do Nothing, which is why good men stood up during the American Revolution, the Civil War,and the Indian wars ,WW2, and still stand up today
The Battle of Cowpens (the last battle) was known for the Continental army performing a fake retreat, which lured the British into a position where they got surrounded, at least I was told that in history class
The final battle here is very much based on Cowpens. Lot of dramatic license of course! But the Americans did trick the Brits, won the battle, and basically chased Cornwallis all the way to Yorktown. Washington pulled a great disappearing act up north and joined the Southern continentals, while the French actually won a naval battle against the English in the Bahamas and cut off Cornwallis's retreat. It was like pulling a triple play in baseball...every single inning! And please go with the no makeup look all the time. You don't need it at all.
Actually, in those days, the British army was called "Regulars", as in regular army, as opposed to militia or mercenaries (the Hessians). The term redcoat was assigned some time later and stuck.
Where I live, in the Hudson Valley of NY, I am surrounded by sites of the Revolution, including Washington's Headquarters, homes dating back to the 1770's, the last campground of the Continental Army, with battlefields nearby. A house across my backyard is where The Marquis de Lafayette (the French advisor to Washington) once lived. It's all pretty familiar to me.
I'm from Allentown, Pennsylvania, where they hid the Liberty Bell! Valley Forge is 40 miles away, Washington's Crossing of the Deleware is less than 30.
To explain the way in which they're fighting: 1. There are no radios. Officers have to relay orders via shouting, flags, drums and bugles. The troops had to be formed up so close together to actually see and hear their orders. 2. Muskets are inaccurate and slow to reload. Trying to hit anything past about 80 metres was extremely difficult. Hundreds of men formed into msssive lines and firing at the same time maximized the chances of hitting a target. A literal wall of lead. The slow rate of fire is compensated for by having the first rank (line) of men step to the side to allow the second to fire or get handed loaded muskets to fire from the rear lines while they sent their own back to be reloaded. 3. Scattered infantry are easy targets for horsemen. Troops formed up into line formations can unleash devastating volleys of musket fire at charging cavalry. If enemy cavalry tried to outflank the line then the men would form square. The four-sided formation allowed the men to defend against cavalry charges from all directions and most of the time prevented actual charges from forming, as horses aren't dumb and will not charge directly into a wall of men and bayonets. Only extremely aggressive horses and suicidal riders would charge down infantry squares. All armies of this era also had specialists known as skirmishers. They used cover, spread out in loose formations and specifically targeted officers. They were equipped with rifles which had greater accuracy and range than smoothbore muskets but but were a lot more expensive to manufacture and maintain and took much longer to load. That's why only the skirmishers used them. They were elite troops and relied more on accuracy than rate of fire. The idea of the Americans being the first to use this type of warfare with rifles is a propaganda myth. The British had light infantry skirmishers and used them extensively during the war of independence. What you see was the best way to fight. The generals weren't stupid and it was not seen as the "gentleman's" way of fighting. Officers were expected to act as gentlemen by following the rules of war. That's it.
No, no churches w people inside were burned alive Biscuit. TARLETON ( the real person) slaughtered prisoners and burned livestock in barns to death. The British were angry about this movie depicting their soldiers as Nazis
In all the movies I have seen about the American War of Independence they show the French as the great allies to defeat the English. The reality is that Spain was the great ally. Charles III helped the citizens of the thirteen Colonies with money, weapons, munition, blankets and clothing, and finally with direct military aid. As George Washington himself recognized, without Spain's help her triumph would not have been possible, and I will never know the reason why she is always ignored. Even today there are numerous cities where their shields and flags have a strong symbolism inherited from Spain (San Diego, Alabama, Texas, Montana, Los Angeles, California...). Spain was essential for her independence but she is the great forgotten one, I don't know why.
The French involvement in the American Revolution was the reason why America fought in World War One. This is why, when American troops arrived in France in WWI their battle cry was “ Lafayette we are here”. We returned the favor.
That look on the faces of Benjamin's sons after he goes crazy with his tomahawk, even Gabriel who has seen the horrors of war, just tells you how how that there's a reason why Ben keeps things private & they've never seen their father truly driven by rage
As an historian, student of history since I was a kid…I wince over the inaccuracies, but…it’s a good movie. A bit over the top, but I like the storyline. From what I’ve read, the costuming & sets are quite accurate. Glad you picked this, I think you’ll like it. (Btw, you are lovely, no makeup needed or you’ll have suitors lined up at your front door 😅)
The reason armies fought like last, all lined up side to side, is that the rifles (muskets) in that day were not very accurate. Hence the saying “can’t hit the broad side of a barn”
The militia largely used their house weapons, which were rifles or rather rifled muskets to be exact. The British brown bess and the French equivalent primary gun were smooth or muskets. These were easier and cheaper to produce and could mount bayonets.
I know you said you may be too early for "Slave movies", but I would recommend the movie "Glory" which tells of an all black regiment which fought in the US Civil war. If you liked this movie, I think you might enjoy that one!
Enjoy your reactions from both channels...Thanks! The character of Col. Benjamin Martin was based off of a real person named Brigadier General Francis Marion (circa 1732 - February 27, 1795), also known as the "Swamp Fox," was an American military officer, planter, and politician who served during the French and Indian War and the Revolutionary War. Francis Marion was a man of his times: he owned slaves, and he fought in a brutal campaign against the Cherokee Indians. While not noble by today's standards, Marion's experience in the French and Indian War prepared him for more admirable service. He specialized in what is today known as intelligence, special operations, irregular infantry, and/or guerrilla warfare. His legacy and memorial are found in the names of various places both military and civilian throughout the United States. Colonel Banastre Tarleton was also a real person from history; he was sent to capture or kill Marion in November 1780. After pursuing Marion's troops for over twenty-six miles through a swamp, Tarleton supposedly said "as for this old fox, the Devil himself could not catch him." Based on this tale, Marion's supporters began to call him "the Swamp Fox." There was a brief television series called swamp fox in circa 1960. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Marion#:~:text=Colonel%20Banastre%20Tarleton%20was%20sent,him%20%22the%20Swamp%20Fox%22.
Biscuit, please don't stress over make up, it's your inner beauty and your personality that makes me keep coming back to your channel, seriously, you have the biggest, most compassionate and empathetic heart, and you're so strong and brave, there is nothing more beautiful than a strong, brave woman 🙂💪
This movie was a pretty accurate representation of the American Revolution except that General Cornwallis never would have let any of his soldiers under any circumstances behave the way he let the villain in this act
The general idea of this is accurate. This was based on the American Revolutionary War against Britain. Benjamin Martin is not a real person, however he is mainly based on Francis Marion, also known as "Swamp Fox". They lined up in lines because that was how people fought back in the day. And part of the reason the Colonies could fight back because they used tactics that the British weren't used to, which was the hiding and sneak attacks, called guerrilla warfare. The backstory and life of Benjamin Martin was mostly fictional.
For a historical context these battles in the Carolinas where happening at the same time that Goerge Washington was fighting in New Jersey and New York
During those times, (and for a thousand years before), drums were used to issue orders to troops. It was much faster than trying to do it by voice over large battlefields. In contrast, the flutes could do the same, and not be confused with the drums.
He learned guerrilla warfare from my Native Cherokee ancestors who were awesome fighters which is why my ancestors stayed in the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee after the Indian Removal Act of 1830
Others may have mentioned here but “man and wife” was the way they said it on a regular basis till probably sometime in the 1980’s when it became “husband and wife”.
When you heard the character Cornwallis speak of how it was dishonorable to shoot officers, in the days of the Infantry light fighters there was a decorum to fighting those battles, including that if there was a "draw", meaning that both sides lost the same amount of men, each side was given time for them to get the wounded and dead off the field of battle. The officers were to conduct themselves as gentlemen, follow the rules of engagement, and honor their opponents when it came to these open-field battles. It may seem strange, but there was honor that was to be kept amongst yourself and your opponent during battle. Think of the Band of Brothers and the General who was upset about surrendering to a Non-Commissioned Officer of the United States Army, and it took surrendering to a Commissioned Officer, the Lieutenant, for the General to be satisfied. There is a decorum that proper Armies are to show each other during battle, it's when you fight the guerrilla militias who claim to be an established Army that they dishonor these rules of war by using civilians as shields and hospitals and buildings of worship as strategic fighting locations.
The earlier firing of the artillery is them registering their weapons. They're doing estimations and correcting from the impacts of their rounds, so that when the enemy comes into range, their fie will be effective.
Oh and Biss for your comment about "Did we see how great the french farmers resolved the issue" I agree in part with your sentiment. It was inspiring how stoic and brave the farmers have been. This being said the issue isn't resolved, it's bigger than the French it's world wide, which means the issue has only been kicked down the road for a little time. That issue is far from over. Every country in the Western world is finding themselves in the exact same predicament.
There would have been more French, if this movie wasn't from the perspective of the "militia." One of the biggest reasons we won the war, was because of the guerrilla warfare tactics that the militia used. Which, this movie showed, as opposed to standing in a field and shooting at each other. We also had better rifles, though we were outnumbered until the French arrived.
39:47 "If I die, I will die well dressed" makes me think of a scene from "A Woman in Berlin." A major in the Soviet Red Army was talking about a female soldier in his command. She had made through the war without ever being wounded, and she had a premonition that odds were catching up with her and that she would be killed soon. She endured and sacrificed like everyone else and never asked for anything extra for herself, but she now requested a replacement for part of her uniform because the old one had become worn out, and she didn't want to die in a ratty looking uniform. She was killed in action soon after. The major reflected poignantly on her and his other female soldiers and said "They drink and curse like men, but they all worry they won't be pretty when they die."
The way the armies marched up almost to each others’ faces before firing with music being played on the field and artillery and cavalry support abound, it’s a tall-tell sign of Napoleonic strategy and organization. Because of the limitations on weapon technology and an established, ‘standardized’ style of warfare, it seems foolish to conduct combat in this manner, but it was considered an appropriate and ‘civilized’ form of combat, which is why the tactics Benjamin used were so effective and alarming to this larger, more experienced Royal army. Never doubt a foe that has home-field advantage and feels backed into a corner with nothing left to lose, but with all the motivation to fight until the very end.
16:10 "Why is there music?" It's actually how they commanded armies before mobile radios were invented. It's significantly easier to hear and understand the pitch and cadence of a flute, trumpet, or drum (or a lot of other instruments, for wars in other parts of the world) than it is to hear and understand a shouted order from a person who may be tens or even hundreds of meters away. As for grouping up the men tightly and facing off in lines so close to one another, while it seems incredibly stupid to us nowadays, it was partly due to the technical limitations of what the weapons of the era were capable of (smoothbore rifles were notoriously inaccurate, had a very short effective range -- less than 100 meters -- and took a really long time to reload, so you needed a LOT of them firing at the same time to have a decent chance at inflicting any real damage on the enemy) and partly due to strategic concerns (specifically calvary charges, you needed either a LOT of rifles firing at once or a wall of bayonets to stop a calvary charge from annihilating your army).
If you watch a "slavery movie" I'd start with Amistad. It is well forgotten for no reason. I watched it in the theater and it has gripped me to this day.
The commander of the dragoons was very much based on The Butcher, a British officer known for brutality but nothing equal to in the movie. There is no record of him or any officer burning an entire village of people in a church. It takes I believe 5 minutes to reload a musket. His weapon is a Native American Tomahawk, a relic of his service in the French & Indian War.
The Brown Bess musket used at the time could be fired at 3-4 shots per minute. A rifle at the time would take far longer to reload; perhaps 1 shot per minute.
Loved your reaction. This is a fun movie. It was inspired by the American Revolution. That's about as close to reality as it got. The rest is largely fiction (especially the stuff about the militias; they were infamous in both armies for being unreliable.) Just watch the movie which is intentionally sentimental and ignore the extremely loose connections to history. Your line about impalement was You Tube gold.👍
Dragoons at this time period were cavalry units, soldiers who rode horses and fought on horseback or on foot. Earlier in history, dragoons had been mounted infantry who rode on horses and fought on foot. Colonel William Tavington (Jason Isaacs) is loosely based on Lt. Colonel Banastre Tarleton, a British dragoon commander. In real life, he wasn't as evil as Tavington, but "Tarleton's Quarter" was the term American troops applied to the killing of surrendered soldiers by Tarleton's men (i.e., no quarter given). As others have said, the nature of the weapons of the time heavily influenced tactics. Black powder firearms generate a lot of smoke when fired. Firing in formation with distinctively colored uniforms helped to reduce the chances of friendly fire. Music helped soldiers march in time to stay in formation. Music could also be used to communicate orders more rapidly than by messenger.
These tactics of your soldiers standing shoulder to shoulder and shooting still made sense during the War of Independence, but 80 years later, during the American Civil War they were very outdated. Smoothbore flintlock muskets were close range weapons, but rifled percussion cap rifles were completely another. The first cartridge loading repeaters also came available during the Civil War so it was suicidal to stand out in the open. The Minutemen adopted the tactics of the American Indians who used the terrain to their advantage. They would hide until the enemy got close, then attack and hide behind trees and big rocks.
6:34 "This was the time that people still wrote in cursive." 25 years ago people still wrote in cursive. If I'm writing more than a few sentences, I still write in cursive. It's easier (less stress) on the hand, and quicker.
Yes the Americans were the blue coats but they started out in the British army before the revolution to distinguish British army fromthe colonial army but both were technically British
As to the Line Battle style that was common at the time. Basically, it was about coordination and control. The soldiers would be trained to form up in a line, which to do so effectively requires an open field and when face to face (which often did eventually happen) the side that could keep their formation and discipline, and also re-load their weapons faster, would often by the victor, at least locally.. It is a movie oversimplification that both armies would simply form up in straight lines and march at each other, there were a variety of maneuvers and such that would happen to attempt to put the bulk of one's soldiers, or your best soldiers, against the enemies worst/fewest soldiers, and prevent the enemy from doing the same. Cannon was used at a distance to wound and disrupt these formations, and could be used at close range (loaded with small pellets, basically, instead of big cannonballs) to cause huge casualties and Cavalry would be used to ride around the side of the enemy army and attack them from the side or rear, or exploit weak points in the enemy lines and chase down fleeing troops. It is true, however, that this style of warfare was overall more suited to the vast farms and fields and road networks, etc. of Western Europe. The much vaster and denser forests of the 13 Colonies, with fewer roads and open fields (at least in the middle and southern colonies) did make such tactics harder, and why the colonials did have some success with what we would call 'guerilla' tactics (hit and run, isolate small groups, capture supplies, etc.) and why the British did, I believe, start countering with roving cavalry squadrons. Amusingly, the entire reason that the British ended up having to rely on colonial soldiers in the early 'French and Indian War' as we here in the US tend to call it (which was really just the North American theater of the 7 Years War in Europe) was because the French and their Native American allies proved that Line Battle tactics were a bad idea in a dense forest. And proving that people simply don't learn things, Napolean would have the learn the same lesson for himself 30 years later in his disastrous Invasion of Russia.
30:30 "They are setting these beautiful houses on fire like idiots." "Look at this beautiful house. How dare they?" No, not idiots. They dare because every time they burn a house, the neighbors think "OK, I don't want my house burned too so I won't help the rebels. I will do whatever I must to keep my family and home safe." It works. It scares SOME people into staying out of the war, or even helping the British.
As a fellow, female, non-makeup wearer in similar circumstances, you are WAY to pretty to ever think you need to wear makeup, for any situation! (This applies to ALL women.)
Dragoons are light cavalry units, they were very common during this time period in the Europeans armies. Such as the Hussars, They were often described as bold and harsh, and very prideful figures. Americans during the Independence were called, too, the minutemen, because they could mobilize into battle during the minute. Battle were being held in line formation and short range, cause the rifle you see are musket. And they had a poor accuracy even in short range, so to have a good amount of casualties done. They did this formation and fired volleys to be sure to reach the target.
I continental Warfare of the 1700s, troops would line up on a field of battle in rank and file and trade shoots at each other. In the colonies, Americans learned to fight Guerilla style warfare from the natives. It made all the difference. being able to use the terrain to your advantage is the difference between winning and losing.
Probably been said already, but the fighting techniques came from ancient Greek and Roman tactics. For three or four thousand years, men lined up in rows and walked toward each other. It really didn't change until WW1, when machine guns finally convinced Generals it was time to let their men duck.
A You-Tube channel called Reel History reviewed this movie for historical accuracy. The burning of the church did not happen, and the movie has lots of inaccuracies.
"Im Romanian we know a few things about impalement" is legit the best comment I have ever heard someone say in a movie where that is a thing...thats legit!
That line had me rolling!
Biss definitely employed a comedy writer for that one-liner.
She Busted my Gut with that line! .... Beyond Priceless!
Yeah and if I say that I get banned for sexual harassme… I’ve said too much already
That was bad enough to keep myself from laughing too hard.
But when "Our Ax Flew to Jesus" slid in out of nowhere, I died.😂
This movie is the perfect embodiment of, “Never take everything away from a man and leave him alive. You create the worst enemy imaginable.”
“Choke on your blood, I approve!” 😝 That was hilarious!
It seems stupid, but armies fought in groups because the Smoothbored musket only had an effective range of 50 to 70 yards, so they grouped together, moved close and fired. Also... infantry needed to protect themselves from cavalry and grouped together they could do this.
it help to consider muskets more like spears that can fire a few shots at shortrange. Infantry were deployed like spearman. Like you mentioned, the range and accuracy of muskets is nowhere near firearms of modern warfare
Armies in millennia past had fought on line, it isn't too often someone takes a chance to upset the balance of attrition. Military commanders traditions include using the most basic tactics.
Also, they had to be standing up to reload.
Wars weren't won by those who were right. They were won by who was left.
The British brown Bess had a longer range than 50 m. It could hit targets over 100 m although you weren't really aiming at that distance.
No worries. Natural beauty has no need for makeup anyway. 😊 This is literally one of my top favorite movies. Many critics called it out for misrepresenting the British army. However, it does not implicate the soldiers themselves; it only highlights the brutal ruthlessness of a single officer. In fact, it does show Cornwallace's initial disapproval of his actions, and the soldier's hesitation to carry out his orders. More importantly though, it shows the importance of American citizen's right to raise arms against tyranny when necessary. Without that ability, there would be no US!
"I'm Romanian, we know a few things about implements." - Bisscute. Think you win the comments Bisscute. 😂 Vlad the Impaler.
I visited Romania, back in the early 90's. Took a tour of Castle Bran. Perhaps my favorite port visit!
"I'm Romanian, we know a few things about impalements..."
Underrated comment 😂💀
I'm Still Chuckling! ... After Cleaning up my Coffee ....
Are you talking about Vlad?
@@slimsslantonshite1755 Obviously. That’s why so many people in the comment section are talking about their reactions.
Loved your reaction!
" I'm Romanian, I know a few things about impalement!" This is the best damn comment during a reaction I've ever heard!! Loved it!!!
You did recognize Heath Ledger the actor that played Gabriel. He also played the Joker in the Dark Knight
Please react to
• *Lethal Weapon* (1987)
_starring _*_Mel Gibson_*
"Papa!... " Cuts right to the soul.
Great Movie and Historical Fiction. Mel's role is largely based on Francis Marion AKA The Swamp Fox. A officer that did tie up brittish forces in the south with hit and runs plus ambushes.
Benjamin Martin is a composite of Francis Marion, Nathanael Greene, Daniel Morgan, and others.
During the Revolutionary war era, toy soldiers were made of lead and painted. So....yes, he is melting them down to make bullets from the toys. From make-believe war using toy soldiers, to real war, using toy soldiers as ammunition.
We didn’t CALL the American troops ‘blue coats,’ but they did tend to wear blue. When the Marquis Lafayette traveled to the US at his own expense and arrived in Washington’s camp he was horrified to discover that all the uniforms he’d had made were no good because they were red.
Not wanting his men to see him as a target, he quickly swapped red for blue.
This was the Revolutionary War. Not the civil war. The French and Indian war was before this war. England and France was fighting for America land. Natives split alliance with both. The last of the Mohicans is a good movie about that war.
An Excellent Film!
Yeah .. she was getting them confused. Not really unexpected from someone not from here.
@@tsmartin true but it is kind of confusing cause each war in that time period was so close together.
It was very much a civil war or rather an uncivil war in large parts of the South. There were malicious on both sides and plenty of war crimes. No churches were burned, but plenty of houses were burned with people in them
@@ronmaximilian6953 Yes...and that was the benign part of the action. When the Iroquois and the Cherokee were involved, they did things to prisoners that made the brutality in The Patriot look like something out of a Disney movie.
The Americans are the Continental Army 🇺🇸....(blue coats) I am a proud American 🇺🇸
"I'm honoured to have you with us, honoured"
Always makes me tear up a little.
@19:03 “If you can bark, you can retrieve the bone.” That’s an original expression. I love it.
The idea behind marching in lines was keeping the enemy back with a wall of men and intimidating them, and since there were no radios it was easier for commanders to give orders with the troops close together
It wasn't much about intimidation. Cavalry is much better at that. The latter is true and also it is in order to concentrate as many firearms as possible in a small area. The more muskets you can deploy together, the more damage you will do. Muskets weren't that accurate, so spreading out wasn't effective. That changed when the guns got better.
Incorrect.
1. There are no radios. Officers have to relay orders via shouting, flags, drums and bugles. The troops had to be formed up so close together to actually see and hear their orders.
2. Muskets are inaccurate and slow to reload. Trying to hit anything past about 80 metres was extremely difficult. Hundreds of men formed into msssive lines and firing at the same time maximized the chances of hitting a target. A literal wall of lead. The slow rate of fire is compensated for by having the first rank (line) of men step to the side to allow the second to fire or get handed loaded muskets to fire from the rear lines while they sent their own back to be reloaded.
3. Scattered infantry are easy targets for horsemen. Troops formed up into line formations can unleash devastating volleys of musket fire at charging cavalry. If enemy cavalry tried to outflank the line then the men would form square. The four-sided formation allowed the men to defend against cavalry charges from all directions and most of the time prevented actual charges from forming, as horses aren't dumb and will not charge directly into a wall of men and bayonets. Only extremely aggressive horses and suicidal riders would charge down infantry squares.
All armies of this era also had specialists known as skirmishers. They used cover, spread out in loose formations and specifically targeted officers. They were equipped with rifles which had greater accuracy and range than smoothbore muskets but but were a lot more expensive to manufacture and maintain and took much longer to load. That's why only the skirmishers used them. They were elite troops and relied more on accuracy than rate of fire.
The idea of the Americans being the first to use this type of warfare with rifles is a propaganda myth. The British had light infantry skirmishers and used them extensively during the war of independence.
What you see was the best way to fight. The generals weren't stupid and it was not seen as the "gentleman's" way of fighting. Officers were expected to act as gentlemen by following the rules of war. That's it.
There is some truth around the intimidation factor. Grenadiers were the tallest and strongest soldiers and would be given more elaborate uniforms with tall caps to further increase their already intimidating appearance.
I am always amazed at how folks will view period movies ... like this one ... through modern ... 21st century eyes.
The Patriot is such a great movie! Another great war movie, though quite long (4 hours, I think) is "Gettysburg." It's about the most famous battle that took place during the American Civil War.
"Choke on your blood", I love Biss. LOL
hahaha, i was invested in the movie
15:56 Fun Fact, back then, they played music in battle to communicate... certain songs meant certain battle commands, and other songs were to alert what was happening in the grounds to the battalions further back so that they know what's happening in the front lines.
"I'm Romanian, we know a things about impalement" LOL, OK Vlad....Great reaction!!!!
"I expected this because of the way he fell and because he's a slimy weasel."
I'm in tears.
40:15 "I wonder what is the reason for shooting cannon shots there?"
They rolled those cannons to the battlefield in the middle of the night.
The cannoneers are firing test shots to determine range and angles to make sure that they are most likely to hit the real targets once the battle begins.
"If you can bark, you can retrieve the bone" .... I love it! Well said Biss..
Tavington is based on Banastre Tarleton who was infamous for shooting surrendering American soldiers in a small "battle." In a later battle the American returned the favor of offering "Tarleton's quarter"
As to your no-make-up look, most women would kill to be able, with make-up, to look like you do without.
Benjamin Martin is much like a man named Francis Marion, an American guerilla fighter from South Carolina during the American Revolutionary War. Tavington is much like a British soldier named Banastre "the butcher" Tarleton.
I thought your comment about Tavington, "We need to fix this dude ASAP" was hilarious.
It's interesting to know that you're an older sister. I haven't heard you mention that before.
Swamp Fox
@@timmooney7528 Indeed.
Don't forget Roger's Rangers.
Susan, the youngest, not talking and then crying out for her papa slays me every time. Every time. It's a fantastic movie, and while it surely took many liberties (ha!) with historical accuracy, it nevertheless is in the right spirit! America was very fortunate to have some intelligent and noble people in their early history, or it wouldn't have gone this way at all.
The reason the british fired cannons on the battlefield before a charge was to get an exact measure of impact of the canon ball. Otherwise, their first shots would be a best guess of where it would impact.
As a history buff, it's funny to see people's reaction to this movie and this scene specifically (even though it's inaccurate) especially when they say "why are they walking straight at each other" and "why don't they shoot." It's called linear warfare people. Best way to fight battles in the 18th century
when people first think of line formations, and see movies where the battles arent recreated well or something, it can seem ridiculous, like toy soldiers just standing there suiciding each other.. but it was much more strategic and dynamic in various ways than that.. probably the best way to understand is to watch a bunch of those animated historic battles on youtube, and of course hear historic stories of battles, to understand things were much more sensable and dynamic than you might think.. afterall, in modern warfare, you still have lines of battle, and they dont just stand there like pinheads shooting back n forth either.. they are strategic and move about, always were
The fighting style lining up across from each other and shooting each other that’s how war was fought
It’s like the famous quote ,Evil Triumphs When Good Men Do Nothing, which is why good men stood up during the American Revolution, the Civil War,and the Indian wars ,WW2, and still stand up today
The Battle of Cowpens (the last battle) was known for the Continental army performing a fake retreat, which lured the British into a position where they got surrounded, at least I was told that in history class
The final battle here is very much based on Cowpens. Lot of dramatic license of course! But the Americans did trick the Brits, won the battle, and basically chased Cornwallis all the way to Yorktown. Washington pulled a great disappearing act up north and joined the Southern continentals, while the French actually won a naval battle against the English in the Bahamas and cut off Cornwallis's retreat. It was like pulling a triple play in baseball...every single inning!
And please go with the no makeup look all the time. You don't need it at all.
Great reaction as usual. My favorite line, "I'm Romanian, we know a few things about impalement"
Actually, in those days, the British army was called "Regulars", as in regular army, as opposed to militia or mercenaries (the Hessians).
The term redcoat was assigned some time later and stuck.
Where I live, in the Hudson Valley of NY, I am surrounded by sites of the Revolution, including Washington's Headquarters, homes dating back to the 1770's, the last campground of the Continental Army, with battlefields nearby. A house across my backyard is where The Marquis de Lafayette (the French advisor to Washington) once lived. It's all pretty familiar to me.
I'm from Allentown, Pennsylvania, where they hid the Liberty Bell! Valley Forge is 40 miles away, Washington's Crossing of the Deleware is less than 30.
My first wife was from Rock Tavern, the Hudson Valley is beautiful.
42:59 · "Choke on your blood. Yeah, I approve." · Lines like that are why I love your reactions.
To explain the way in which they're fighting:
1. There are no radios. Officers have to relay orders via shouting, flags, drums and bugles. The troops had to be formed up so close together to actually see and hear their orders.
2. Muskets are inaccurate and slow to reload. Trying to hit anything past about 80 metres was extremely difficult. Hundreds of men formed into msssive lines and firing at the same time maximized the chances of hitting a target. A literal wall of lead. The slow rate of fire is compensated for by having the first rank (line) of men step to the side to allow the second to fire or get handed loaded muskets to fire from the rear lines while they sent their own back to be reloaded.
3. Scattered infantry are easy targets for horsemen. Troops formed up into line formations can unleash devastating volleys of musket fire at charging cavalry. If enemy cavalry tried to outflank the line then the men would form square. The four-sided formation allowed the men to defend against cavalry charges from all directions and most of the time prevented actual charges from forming, as horses aren't dumb and will not charge directly into a wall of men and bayonets. Only extremely aggressive horses and suicidal riders would charge down infantry squares.
All armies of this era also had specialists known as skirmishers. They used cover, spread out in loose formations and specifically targeted officers. They were equipped with rifles which had greater accuracy and range than smoothbore muskets but but were a lot more expensive to manufacture and maintain and took much longer to load. That's why only the skirmishers used them. They were elite troops and relied more on accuracy than rate of fire.
The idea of the Americans being the first to use this type of warfare with rifles is a propaganda myth. The British had light infantry skirmishers and used them extensively during the war of independence.
What you see was the best way to fight. The generals weren't stupid and it was not seen as the "gentleman's" way of fighting. Officers were expected to act as gentlemen by following the rules of war. That's it.
No, no churches w people inside were burned alive Biscuit. TARLETON ( the real person) slaughtered prisoners and burned livestock in barns to death. The British were angry about this movie depicting their soldiers as Nazis
I found your comment, "can you imagine the dogs' poop?" to be very funny!
In all the movies I have seen about the American War of Independence they show the French as the great allies to defeat the English. The reality is that Spain was the great ally. Charles III helped the citizens of the thirteen Colonies with money, weapons, munition, blankets and clothing, and finally with direct military aid. As George Washington himself recognized, without Spain's help her triumph would not have been possible, and I will never know the reason why she is always ignored. Even today there are numerous cities where their shields and flags have a strong symbolism inherited from Spain (San Diego, Alabama, Texas, Montana, Los Angeles, California...). Spain was essential for her independence but she is the great forgotten one, I don't know why.
The French involvement in the American Revolution was the reason why America fought in World War One. This is why, when American troops arrived in France in WWI their battle cry was “ Lafayette we are here”. We returned the favor.
That look on the faces of Benjamin's sons after he goes crazy with his tomahawk, even Gabriel who has seen the horrors of war, just tells you how how that there's a reason why Ben keeps things private & they've never seen their father truly driven by rage
"You have done nothing for which you should be ashamed."
"I have done nothing. And for that I am ashamed."
Hi Biss. Music was used for command and control of the army in the field.
As an historian, student of history since I was a kid…I wince over the inaccuracies, but…it’s a good movie. A bit over the top, but I like the storyline. From what I’ve read, the costuming & sets are quite accurate. Glad you picked this, I think you’ll like it. (Btw, you are lovely, no makeup needed or you’ll have suitors lined up at your front door 😅)
"I am rumanian, we know a few things about impalements" - Damn, I laughed so hard :D
The reason armies fought like last, all lined up side to side, is that the rifles (muskets) in that day were not very accurate. Hence the saying “can’t hit the broad side of a barn”
The militia largely used their house weapons, which were rifles or rather rifled muskets to be exact. The British brown bess and the French equivalent primary gun were smooth or muskets. These were easier and cheaper to produce and could mount bayonets.
I know you said you may be too early for "Slave movies", but I would recommend the movie "Glory" which tells of an all black regiment which fought in the US Civil war. If you liked this movie, I think you might enjoy that one!
Enjoy your reactions from both channels...Thanks!
The character of Col. Benjamin Martin was based off of a real person named Brigadier General Francis Marion (circa 1732 - February 27, 1795), also known as the "Swamp Fox," was an American military officer, planter, and politician who served during the French and Indian War and the Revolutionary War. Francis Marion was a man of his times: he owned slaves, and he fought in a brutal campaign against the Cherokee Indians. While not noble by today's standards, Marion's experience in the French and Indian War prepared him for more admirable service. He specialized in what is today known as intelligence, special operations, irregular infantry, and/or guerrilla warfare. His legacy and memorial are found in the names of various places both military and civilian throughout the United States.
Colonel Banastre Tarleton was also a real person from history; he was sent to capture or kill Marion in November 1780. After pursuing Marion's troops for over twenty-six miles through a swamp, Tarleton supposedly said "as for this old fox, the Devil himself could not catch him." Based on this tale, Marion's supporters began to call him "the Swamp Fox."
There was a brief television series called swamp fox in circa 1960.
Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Marion#:~:text=Colonel%20Banastre%20Tarleton%20was%20sent,him%20%22the%20Swamp%20Fox%22.
Also there is music to boost soldiers morale and to even send commands across the battlefield and within camps
Nice one, Bisscute! I enjoyed rewatching this with you. Thanks for sharing it with us. 🙂
Biscuit, please don't stress over make up, it's your inner beauty and your personality that makes me keep coming back to your channel, seriously, you have the biggest, most compassionate and empathetic heart, and you're so strong and brave, there is nothing more beautiful than a strong, brave woman 🙂💪
This movie was a pretty accurate representation of the American Revolution except that General Cornwallis never would have let any of his soldiers under any circumstances behave the way he let the villain in this act
The general idea of this is accurate. This was based on the American Revolutionary War against Britain. Benjamin Martin is not a real person, however he is mainly based on Francis Marion, also known as "Swamp Fox". They lined up in lines because that was how people fought back in the day. And part of the reason the Colonies could fight back because they used tactics that the British weren't used to, which was the hiding and sneak attacks, called guerrilla warfare. The backstory and life of Benjamin Martin was mostly fictional.
For a historical context these battles in the Carolinas where happening at the same time that Goerge Washington was fighting in New Jersey and New York
During those times, (and for a thousand years before), drums were used to issue orders to troops. It was much faster than trying to do it by voice over large battlefields. In contrast, the flutes could do the same, and not be confused with the drums.
He learned guerrilla warfare from my Native Cherokee ancestors who were awesome fighters which is why my ancestors stayed in the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee after the Indian Removal Act of 1830
"I'm Romanian, we know a few things about impalement", WOW !! This reaction got dark fast
Why is there ALWAYS someone cutting onions right next to me, when I watch the little girl begging her father to stay? 😑😭💯
Others may have mentioned here but “man and wife” was the way they said it on a regular basis till probably sometime in the 1980’s when it became “husband and wife”.
"Our axe flew to Jesus." I'm using that haha.
"i'm romanian, i know some things about impalements", maybe the best line i hear in this crazy year.
Hahaha glad you liked that
When you heard the character Cornwallis speak of how it was dishonorable to shoot officers, in the days of the Infantry light fighters there was a decorum to fighting those battles, including that if there was a "draw", meaning that both sides lost the same amount of men, each side was given time for them to get the wounded and dead off the field of battle. The officers were to conduct themselves as gentlemen, follow the rules of engagement, and honor their opponents when it came to these open-field battles. It may seem strange, but there was honor that was to be kept amongst yourself and your opponent during battle. Think of the Band of Brothers and the General who was upset about surrendering to a Non-Commissioned Officer of the United States Army, and it took surrendering to a Commissioned Officer, the Lieutenant, for the General to be satisfied. There is a decorum that proper Armies are to show each other during battle, it's when you fight the guerrilla militias who claim to be an established Army that they dishonor these rules of war by using civilians as shields and hospitals and buildings of worship as strategic fighting locations.
The earlier firing of the artillery is them registering their weapons. They're doing estimations and correcting from the impacts of their rounds, so that when the enemy comes into range, their fie will be effective.
Oh and Biss for your comment about "Did we see how great the french farmers resolved the issue"
I agree in part with your sentiment. It was inspiring how stoic and brave the farmers have been. This being said the issue isn't resolved, it's bigger than the French it's world wide, which means the issue has only been kicked down the road for a little time. That issue is far from over. Every country in the Western world is finding themselves in the exact same predicament.
Vlad the Impaler would be very proud of your shoutout!!!
There would have been more French, if this movie wasn't from the perspective of the "militia." One of the biggest reasons we won the war, was because of the guerrilla warfare tactics that the militia used. Which, this movie showed, as opposed to standing in a field and shooting at each other. We also had better rifles, though we were outnumbered until the French arrived.
39:47 "If I die, I will die well dressed" makes me think of a scene from "A Woman in Berlin." A major in the Soviet Red Army was talking about a female soldier in his command. She had made through the war without ever being wounded, and she had a premonition that odds were catching up with her and that she would be killed soon. She endured and sacrificed like everyone else and never asked for anything extra for herself, but she now requested a replacement for part of her uniform because the old one had become worn out, and she didn't want to die in a ratty looking uniform. She was killed in action soon after. The major reflected poignantly on her and his other female soldiers and said "They drink and curse like men, but they all worry they won't be pretty when they die."
Gabriel is Heath Ledger, who was also The Joker in The Dark Night. You may also have seen him in a movie called A Knight's Tale.
The way the armies marched up almost to each others’ faces before firing with music being played on the field and artillery and cavalry support abound, it’s a tall-tell sign of Napoleonic strategy and organization.
Because of the limitations on weapon technology and an established, ‘standardized’ style of warfare, it seems foolish to conduct combat in this manner, but it was considered an appropriate and ‘civilized’ form of combat, which is why the tactics Benjamin used were so effective and alarming to this larger, more experienced Royal army.
Never doubt a foe that has home-field advantage and feels backed into a corner with nothing left to lose, but with all the motivation to fight until the very end.
16:10 "Why is there music?" It's actually how they commanded armies before mobile radios were invented. It's significantly easier to hear and understand the pitch and cadence of a flute, trumpet, or drum (or a lot of other instruments, for wars in other parts of the world) than it is to hear and understand a shouted order from a person who may be tens or even hundreds of meters away.
As for grouping up the men tightly and facing off in lines so close to one another, while it seems incredibly stupid to us nowadays, it was partly due to the technical limitations of what the weapons of the era were capable of (smoothbore rifles were notoriously inaccurate, had a very short effective range -- less than 100 meters -- and took a really long time to reload, so you needed a LOT of them firing at the same time to have a decent chance at inflicting any real damage on the enemy) and partly due to strategic concerns (specifically calvary charges, you needed either a LOT of rifles firing at once or a wall of bayonets to stop a calvary charge from annihilating your army).
If you watch a "slavery movie" I'd start with Amistad. It is well forgotten for no reason. I watched it in the theater and it has gripped me to this day.
12 years a Slave is also great and a true story, too.
The commander of the dragoons was very much based on The Butcher, a British officer known for brutality but nothing equal to in the movie. There is no record of him or any officer burning an entire village of people in a church.
It takes I believe 5 minutes to reload a musket.
His weapon is a Native American Tomahawk, a relic of his service in the French & Indian War.
The Brown Bess musket used at the time could be fired at 3-4 shots per minute. A rifle at the time would take far longer to reload; perhaps 1 shot per minute.
Loved your reaction. This is a fun movie. It was inspired by the American Revolution. That's about as close to reality as it got. The rest is largely fiction (especially the stuff about the militias; they were infamous in both armies for being unreliable.) Just watch the movie which is intentionally sentimental and ignore the extremely loose connections to history. Your line about impalement was You Tube gold.👍
Im Cherokee, from my moms side, and Apache/ Navajo from my dads..
Dragoons at this time period were cavalry units, soldiers who rode horses and fought on horseback or on foot. Earlier in history, dragoons had been mounted infantry who rode on horses and fought on foot.
Colonel William Tavington (Jason Isaacs) is loosely based on Lt. Colonel Banastre Tarleton, a British dragoon commander. In real life, he wasn't as evil as Tavington, but "Tarleton's Quarter" was the term American troops applied to the killing of surrendered soldiers by Tarleton's men (i.e., no quarter given).
As others have said, the nature of the weapons of the time heavily influenced tactics. Black powder firearms generate a lot of smoke when fired. Firing in formation with distinctively colored uniforms helped to reduce the chances of friendly fire. Music helped soldiers march in time to stay in formation. Music could also be used to communicate orders more rapidly than by messenger.
These tactics of your soldiers standing shoulder to shoulder and shooting still made sense during the War of Independence, but 80 years later, during the American Civil War they were very outdated. Smoothbore flintlock muskets were close range weapons, but rifled percussion cap rifles were completely another. The first cartridge loading repeaters also came available during the Civil War so it was suicidal to stand out in the open. The Minutemen adopted the tactics of the American Indians who used the terrain to their advantage. They would hide until the enemy got close, then attack and hide behind trees and big rocks.
6:34 "This was the time that people still wrote in cursive."
25 years ago people still wrote in cursive. If I'm writing more than a few sentences, I still write in cursive. It's easier (less stress) on the hand, and quicker.
Well the line was more for the younger generations , iPad gen and very fast internet gen ❤️ not us . I write cursive as well
In your welcoming it sounded like you said "hello my name is bisquick" , with your accent :)
I now have my nickname for you .
Very nice reaction 👍
"...when people used to write in cursive."
This was hilarious to me because my entire family and most of my friends write in cursive.
Yes the Americans were the blue coats but they started out in the British army before the revolution to distinguish British army fromthe colonial army but both were technically British
As to the Line Battle style that was common at the time. Basically, it was about coordination and control. The soldiers would be trained to form up in a line, which to do so effectively requires an open field and when face to face (which often did eventually happen) the side that could keep their formation and discipline, and also re-load their weapons faster, would often by the victor, at least locally.. It is a movie oversimplification that both armies would simply form up in straight lines and march at each other, there were a variety of maneuvers and such that would happen to attempt to put the bulk of one's soldiers, or your best soldiers, against the enemies worst/fewest soldiers, and prevent the enemy from doing the same. Cannon was used at a distance to wound and disrupt these formations, and could be used at close range (loaded with small pellets, basically, instead of big cannonballs) to cause huge casualties and Cavalry would be used to ride around the side of the enemy army and attack them from the side or rear, or exploit weak points in the enemy lines and chase down fleeing troops.
It is true, however, that this style of warfare was overall more suited to the vast farms and fields and road networks, etc. of Western Europe. The much vaster and denser forests of the 13 Colonies, with fewer roads and open fields (at least in the middle and southern colonies) did make such tactics harder, and why the colonials did have some success with what we would call 'guerilla' tactics (hit and run, isolate small groups, capture supplies, etc.) and why the British did, I believe, start countering with roving cavalry squadrons. Amusingly, the entire reason that the British ended up having to rely on colonial soldiers in the early 'French and Indian War' as we here in the US tend to call it (which was really just the North American theater of the 7 Years War in Europe) was because the French and their Native American allies proved that Line Battle tactics were a bad idea in a dense forest. And proving that people simply don't learn things, Napolean would have the learn the same lesson for himself 30 years later in his disastrous Invasion of Russia.
30:30 "They are setting these beautiful houses on fire like idiots."
"Look at this beautiful house. How dare they?"
No, not idiots.
They dare because every time they burn a house, the neighbors think "OK, I don't want my house burned too so I won't help the rebels. I will do whatever I must to keep my family and home safe."
It works.
It scares SOME people into staying out of the war, or even helping the British.
As a fellow, female, non-makeup wearer in similar circumstances, you are WAY to pretty to ever think you need to wear makeup, for any situation! (This applies to ALL women.)
"If you can bark, you can retrieve the bone"...
That's a great saying!!! Is it common in Romania?
The British Dragoon Colonel, also played Lucius Malcolm father of Drago Malfoy of the Harry Potter movies.
Lololol. Impaling is a Romanian specialty for sure. The whole world remembers Vlad
Dragoons are light cavalry units, they were very common during this time period in the Europeans armies.
Such as the Hussars, They were often described as bold and harsh, and very prideful figures.
Americans during the Independence were called, too, the minutemen, because they could mobilize into battle during the minute.
Battle were being held in line formation and short range, cause the rifle you see are musket.
And they had a poor accuracy even in short range, so to have a good amount of casualties done.
They did this formation and fired volleys to be sure to reach the target.
Always love to watch your reactions keep them coming
Firing cannon breaks up the enemy's formation and yes, it intimidates the enemy. It is enough to scare the enemy.
I continental Warfare of the 1700s, troops would line up on a field of battle in rank and file and trade shoots at each other. In the colonies, Americans learned to fight Guerilla style warfare from the natives. It made all the difference. being able to use the terrain to your advantage is the difference between winning and losing.
Probably been said already, but the fighting techniques came from ancient Greek and Roman tactics. For three or four thousand years, men lined up in rows and walked toward each other.
It really didn't change until WW1, when machine guns finally convinced Generals it was time to let their men duck.
Is Biss related to Vlad? "I'm Romanian, and we know a few things about impalement". I wouldn't cross her. Good reaction, Biss.
“…..His axe flew to Jesus.” 😂😂😂
great job. that was a rough one. how about a comedy soon? I did really like that. :-) loved the impaled comment.
A You-Tube channel called Reel History reviewed this movie for historical accuracy. The burning of the church did not happen, and the movie has lots of inaccuracies.