An interesting film. One could say that it's lack of focus makes it more historically accurate. Life isn't neat and tidy, so yes, the movie was "all over the place," but so is life. Unfortunately, it makes it not as gripping that so many sub-themes riddle the film and scuttle a coherent plot, but it did a good job introducing a piece of history that was regionally important. Eastern European history is often neglected in western schools, where history is already neglected almost completely. Personally, I had never heard of Jan Zizka and his innovative tactics that stymied the professional aristocratic landed gentry that made up the warrior class at the time. If you one wants a more digestible period piece that's (as much as possible) factually accurate, Scott's "The Duelists" and "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" are probably your best bets. "Breaker Morant" and "Coming Out of the Ice" also make for good viewing.
Film and other creative mediums being utterly subjective, one may do whatever one wants. And interesting has a definition in the dictionary, so it's descriptive enough. And your need to be pedantic with others is pathetic. But do keep trying to impress others. You need what you need, so go for it. @@davepowell7168
The problem with history in the English-speaking world is that most students will be monoglots, so any history that is not recorded in or translated to English is inaccessable to them. While the same is often true of the non-English-speaking world, the use of English on the internet means that having it as a second language is not uncommon, especially amongst those who have the time for an interest in history. This results in events with an English record having much broader reach than any that don't.
I really don't understand, in so many depictions of advancing forces such as this -- didn't they employ forward scouts? Didn't they send flanking troops to secure the high ground -- like that big cliff on the right from which an enemy might rain down who-knows-what on them as they march along without knowing what's directly above them? It just seems as if there are basic sensible rules that any army would use, if at all possible, in advancing through enemy territory, or unknown territory if your aim is to keep from getting your ass kicked -- and while, yes, of course, there are examples of incompetent generals who blunder their armies blindly into slaughter -- mostly armies weren't led by incompetent generals (or the equivalent).
Indeed. Silly battle scenes like this aren't clever and only serve to break immersion in the story. Considering how much would have been spent on these few minutes it's a terrible waste of resources and effort.
But leaders in those days were not trained in staff colleges. What they did train was single combat, not unit tactics. Tuchman in her book "A Distant Mirror", writing about this era, remarked that for people who spent their lives training for war, knights were surprisingly bad at it.
@@PxThucydides You make a very interesting point but I think it very much depends on the underlying military culture. regarding medieval knighthood and chivalry -- absolutely true -- on the other hand, going back much earlier, to Greek and Roman times, military order and discipline was highly valued. I wish I remembered the source of this anecdote, but I recall a highly placed soldier who broke the ordered line in order to seek out personal combat - and ended up executed for his troubles. So, again -- depending on the culture -- sometimes there was emphasis on training, discipline and the "arts of war" -- and sometimes emphasis on personal glory.
The attacking force should have read some Sun Tzu. It makes sense in that leaders can be too focused or not be able to maneuver troops quickly to react, so plans just unfurl.
@@deadlinejunky551 the enemies must have been on a deadline! You'd think they'd just wait for the smoke to clear... and not perpetually send guys into an obvious trap.
@@David0lyle Not really. They were largely abandoned for superior technology: the bow. Slings, while simple to make, require a lot more training and experience to use effectively. An archer could become proficient in a smaller amount of time. On top of that, slings didn't pack enough power to do anything against armor in the 1400s.
Not knowing the language being spoken, the movie or the reason for the battle I found the clip interesting. But I Had to laugh when at around 5:30 it sounded like one of the leaders got off his horse and shouted "my taco" . My first thought was...was all this over a taco?
From this clip I could definitely hear Polish and most probably Russian, but this could be some variation like Ukrainian. Poles where the smart fighters this time, not like most of the recent history... (I'm a Pole)
Very common tactic of the period, because the guys making the charge could not report the failure. And the people at home gave the blame to anything but the charge...
Are we supposed to guess what movie this is from? Or maybe this is only for people who have seen this movie? Looks like an interesting film I will never see because you give no clue what it is. Nice. Definitely not subscribing.
You mean Zizka? Not exactly. He did couple marvelous defensive battles and I believe he didn't lost a one. But take on mind the start of the revolution caught him in a quite older age (he fought as grown man at Green Wald) so he passed away after another battle injoury in mid of the revolution period.
funnie. Husite tactics but without gunpowder. Its not really works. And this smoke should interfere with the defenders more, as it lasts for a long time and prevents breathing, otherwise it is unclear how it works. Well, it's just idiotic to send cavalry into such thick smoke. Caltrops have been known for a long time and under such smoke they could be poured very quickly and unnoticeably.
Lol, sometimes you have to be easily seen by your men, to inspire & keep them fighting against outnumbering enemy, or whatever the odds. But, yes, pretty silly. Conversely, do you take comfort to move quicker & more easily see the battlefield, over safety with helmet. Always a toss up.
Why does Hollywood (film industry in general) constantly show archers firing in an arc?? It’s been proven that they fired directly at their foes!! Launching in an arc takes away the two MOST important strengths of the bow and arrow, accuracy and stopping power!!
But then you can't do such nonsensical battle scenes. Like catching arrows with moving wooden planks 30m away and then let the bowmen just stop . 😂😂 There was firing in an arc . It had its place but certainly not in a situation like this.
They were firing both ways obviously - at long distances by arc, at short directly. Long distance shooting (clout archery) was a competition when archers tried to land their arrows closest to the flag close to the limit of the bow range (
As an archer I laugh every time I see men drawing back supposed war bows, holding it there, and yet still able to deliver devastating accuracy. Not thinking, even with trained archers, you are gonna hold back a war bow for any real length of time and still shoot well but we do need that dramatic shot…
This is the dumbest battle ever. One side is clearly ambushing and using smoke to hide their preparations while the other does everything wrong and plays into the ambushers hands again and again and again. And smoke obscures the commander and his cavalry but not the ambushers from being excellent marksmen at shooting the cavalry in the smoke. That was as far as I got 🙄
I don't think there is very much historical accuracy in this clip. My guess as to why a battle is un believably taking place in a narrow gorge is to cut down on expenses and the wages of extras.
![Top 10 [EPIC] World War I (1914-1918) massive battles movie scenes (WW1)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AK7OO97eU3Q/mqdefault.jpg)
![Top 10 [EPIC] World War I (1914-1918) massive battles movie scenes (WW1)](/img/tr.png)
This battle was the inspiration for Home Alone.
"Had enough -- or are you thirsty for more?"
I love how they smudged the battlefield to cleanse the area of negative energy before fighting began.
Making room for all the new haunters?
An interesting film. One could say that it's lack of focus makes it more historically accurate. Life isn't neat and tidy, so yes, the movie was "all over the place," but so is life. Unfortunately, it makes it not as gripping that so many sub-themes riddle the film and scuttle a coherent plot, but it did a good job introducing a piece of history that was regionally important. Eastern European history is often neglected in western schools, where history is already neglected almost completely. Personally, I had never heard of Jan Zizka and his innovative tactics that stymied the professional aristocratic landed gentry that made up the warrior class at the time. If you one wants a more digestible period piece that's (as much as possible) factually accurate, Scott's "The Duelists" and "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" are probably your best bets. "Breaker Morant" and "Coming Out of the Ice" also make for good viewing.
Film and other creative mediums being utterly subjective, one may do whatever one wants. And interesting has a definition in the dictionary, so it's descriptive enough. And your need to be pedantic with others is pathetic. But do keep trying to impress others. You need what you need, so go for it. @@davepowell7168
"Master and Commander" is criminally under rated and an excellent historically arcuate depiction of naval battle at the time.
The problem with history in the English-speaking world is that most students will be monoglots, so any history that is not recorded in or translated to English is inaccessable to them. While the same is often true of the non-English-speaking world, the use of English on the internet means that having it as a second language is not uncommon, especially amongst those who have the time for an interest in history. This results in events with an English record having much broader reach than any that don't.
What the hell are you even on about? This movie is total disaster and utter crap.
Well put. I love The Knight of Hope on U-Tube.
I really don't understand, in so many depictions of advancing forces such as this -- didn't they employ forward scouts? Didn't they send flanking troops to secure the high ground -- like that big cliff on the right from which an enemy might rain down who-knows-what on them as they march along without knowing what's directly above them?
It just seems as if there are basic sensible rules that any army would use, if at all possible, in advancing through enemy territory, or unknown territory if your aim is to keep from getting your ass kicked -- and while, yes, of course, there are examples of incompetent generals who blunder their armies blindly into slaughter -- mostly armies weren't led by incompetent generals (or the equivalent).
Indeed. Silly battle scenes like this aren't clever and only serve to break immersion in the story. Considering how much would have been spent on these few minutes it's a terrible waste of resources and effort.
yeah, it's ridiculous.
But leaders in those days were not trained in staff colleges. What they did train was single combat, not unit tactics. Tuchman in her book "A Distant Mirror", writing about this era, remarked that for people who spent their lives training for war, knights were surprisingly bad at it.
@@PxThucydides You make a very interesting point but I think it very much depends on the underlying military culture. regarding medieval knighthood and chivalry -- absolutely true -- on the other hand, going back much earlier, to Greek and Roman times, military order and discipline was highly valued.
I wish I remembered the source of this anecdote, but I recall a highly placed soldier who broke the ordered line in order to seek out personal combat - and ended up executed for his troubles.
So, again -- depending on the culture -- sometimes there was emphasis on training, discipline and the "arts of war" -- and sometimes emphasis on personal glory.
The attacking force should have read some Sun Tzu. It makes sense in that leaders can be too focused or not be able to maneuver troops quickly to react, so plans just unfurl.
Who knew that two bails of hay would make a smoke screen that lasts hours and completely covers a football feilds worth of land!😂
and doesn't water your eyes or make you cough! a miracle.
@@deadlinejunky551 the enemies must have been on a deadline! You'd think they'd just wait for the smoke to clear... and not perpetually send guys into an obvious trap.
2:06
A well-disguised Wilhelm scream.
Guys, "Medieval" _is_ the name of the movie (in English)
Thank you 👍
Nice to see slings being used in the battlefield, very underrated weapon
Not if you play a Plague Tale games
Not glamorous but utilitarian and probably a good deal more abundantly used than we really know.
@@David0lyle Not really. They were largely abandoned for superior technology: the bow. Slings, while simple to make, require a lot more training and experience to use effectively. An archer could become proficient in a smaller amount of time. On top of that, slings didn't pack enough power to do anything against armor in the 1400s.
Underrated? A fantasy weapon at best.
@@JZsBFF well documented Roman legionnaires’ weapon, I guess they wouldn’t use them if they weren’t effective..
What fricking movie geeeesh how hard would it be
Not knowing the language being spoken, the movie or the reason for the battle I found the clip interesting. But I Had to laugh when at around 5:30 it sounded like one of the leaders got off his horse and shouted "my taco" . My first thought was...was all this over a taco?
Must have been one of those legit Taco stand ones, considering how hard they fought, lol
I'll fight you over a good taco. There are worse reasons to go to war I guess.
It is "v ataku". It means Charge! in english. I dont know why this video is in russian language. Except song, song is in Czech language.
From this clip I could definitely hear Polish and most probably Russian, but this could be some variation like Ukrainian. Poles where the smart fighters this time, not like most of the recent history... (I'm a Pole)
Language is russian; tv show is czech, about hussites
Ein mittelalterlicher Reißverschluss am Kleid - toll...
😂😂😂 Sie sind ja sehr scharfsinnig 👍
Missed title
Hollywood fight scene.
Not what the title suggests.
Sending cavalry against against a well secured defensive position whilst allowing themselves to be flanked. Pure hubris.
Very common tactic of the period, because the guys making the charge could not report the failure.
And the people at home gave the blame to anything but the charge...
PORTRAIT OF YOUTH REMASTERED (C)2006
And yet again here we have some kind of PLATE armor that does not protect from anything, lol.
Blindly March into a slinging blade of death ????
Oh you mean when I drive to work in Chicago every morning 😊
What is the movie?
Are we supposed to guess what movie this is from? Or maybe this is only for people who have seen this movie? Looks like an interesting film I will never see because you give no clue what it is. Nice. Definitely not subscribing.
The film is literally called 'Medieval' hahahha.
Lots of tactics and technology with this band.
After this battle, did they conquer the known world?
You mean Zizka? Not exactly. He did couple marvelous defensive battles and I believe he didn't lost a one.
But take on mind the start of the revolution caught him in a quite older age (he fought as grown man at Green Wald) so he passed away after another battle injoury in mid of the revolution period.
Nope, but the died of boils; that's close enough.
What film is it?.It would be nice to know
Such a good movie. Surprised that Owen Wilson did so well in his role
Anything with OW is unwatchable
I love Jan Ziszka, but this movie didn't do him justice.
The fogs of war...
What is the name of this movie? it's so familiar!
funnie. Husite tactics but without gunpowder. Its not really works. And this smoke should interfere with the defenders more, as it lasts for a long time and prevents breathing, otherwise it is unclear how it works. Well, it's just idiotic to send cavalry into such thick smoke. Caltrops have been known for a long time and under such smoke they could be poured very quickly and unnoticeably.
Oh yes, very medieval.
Attacking against a well thought out and prepared defense is not smart. You have to have ten times the defenders or more to win.
Good film. One thing though: why do our heroes never wear helmets in these films?
Lol, sometimes you have to be easily seen by your men, to inspire & keep them fighting against outnumbering enemy, or whatever the odds. But, yes, pretty silly. Conversely, do you take comfort to move quicker & more easily see the battlefield, over safety with helmet. Always a toss up.
Because, unlike bikers, they wouldn´t be fined by the police!
Plz, i want the name of film
Glad I live in 21st century USA were my intense battles are usually over deciding burger, steak or BBQ.
Emm, err, pardon me for asking, but which bloody film is it?????
What a movie, interstellar?
Why does Hollywood (film industry in general) constantly show archers firing in an arc?? It’s been proven that they fired directly at their foes!! Launching in an arc takes away the two MOST important strengths of the bow and arrow, accuracy and stopping power!!
But then you can't do such nonsensical battle scenes. Like catching arrows with moving wooden planks 30m away and then let the bowmen just stop . 😂😂
There was firing in an arc . It had its place but certainly not in a situation like this.
They were firing both ways obviously - at long distances by arc, at short directly. Long distance shooting (clout archery) was a competition when archers tried to land their arrows closest to the flag close to the limit of the bow range (
It's not like you'd order a blind cavalry charge into a barricade either
@@lzl4226👍
As an archer I laugh every time I see men drawing back supposed war bows, holding it there, and yet still able to deliver devastating accuracy. Not thinking, even with trained archers, you are gonna hold back a war bow for any real length of time and still shoot well but we do need that dramatic shot…
I understood one word, arbeleta, must mean crossbowmen
It's russian video rip boy. They don't use anything close to the Czech.
Why wear armour? One light slap with the flat side of the sword and you are... dead. Always the same mistake.
Such a good movie, like how it explains in its own way how he lost his eye
This movie was a disappointment. It didn't have much of a soul and was all over the place. Ben Foster is always excellent though.
It feels like there was like a 7 hour cut that made sense and then was cut down.
What is the name of this movie?
@@dennisdeal3323Medieval
Yep coulda been something good!
ATTACKUUUUUUUUU😂
This is the dumbest battle ever. One side is clearly ambushing and using smoke to hide their preparations while the other does everything wrong and plays into the ambushers hands again and again and again. And smoke obscures the commander and his cavalry but not the ambushers from being excellent marksmen at shooting the cavalry in the smoke. That was as far as I got 🙄
Hate movies that make the "good" side take little or no losses...it's a waste of time to watch.
I don't think there is very much historical accuracy in this clip. My guess as to why a battle is un believably taking place in a narrow gorge is to cut down on expenses and the wages of extras.
The whole movie is nothing but joke.
Why send cavalry to attack a fortified position?
Hussites?
*FUCKIN BATTLE WAGON*
Yes, Hussites. Under the command of Jan Zizka.
So beautiful scene
Why bother wearing armour? It doesn’t seem to work
Unterschätze nie deinen Gegner. Er ist mindestens so gut wie du.
Como se llama la película? Me gustaría verla completa. Saludos desde Corrientes,Argentina
El título es MEDIEVAL (jan Sizka).
OMG. A tohle stálo tolik peněz???
Bohužel ano.
It seems s like a kraut vs kraut battle
Polish
Czech mate
that's a shit XD
awesome movie, close to the life of a true european hero
Remind me again how bad women had it?
Living with those morons?
Condolences the bereaved and disaffected by stupidity
This scene is so disjointed
Not a good movie