For all the history and armor nerds in the audience.... Armor, including Chainmail, was not just a fashion choice that provided no protection or practical benefit, as is so often the case in movies. Armor was worn because it was incredibly effective at stopping all forms of damage. A person in armor has a MASSIVE advantage over an unarmored person. The idea that arrows easily pierce Chainmail armor is not accurate. We know it is not accurate both from historical accounts and from modern testing as well. It is virtually impossible to cut through chainmail armor with a sword, but many people believe that arrows and spears go right through. Not the case. The first point here is kind of a "common sense should tell you..." points. Chainmail armor was used for over 1000 years. Not just used, it was the staple armor type, used in basically every culture that had metal armor. It was used by the ancient Persians and Romans, all the way up to the age of plate armor. The bow, was also used that entire time. If the bow easily defeated chainmail armor, and arrows just went right through it, either everyone would have just used nothing but bows, or people would have stopped using chainmail armor. What we actually find in the historical accounts, going all the way back to ancient armies, and holding true all the way up into the medieval period is that bows were effective against the light troops that wore little to no armor (mostly the peasants and lower class troops) but had little effect on the troops that wore chainmail armor, such as elite cavalry, and noble troops. Perhaps ironically, one of the most famous medieval accounts of chainmail armor defeating arrows was from King Richard's Crusade. Saladin's personal chronicler recorded that during Richard's march from Acre to Jaffa, the Muslim's harassed Richard's troops by constantly riding in close and shooting arrows at them, trying to get them to attack in disorder. Instead the infantry (not even the knights, but the common infantry) of Richard's army just marched along ignoring the arrows. The chronicler recorded this... "...and every foot-soldier wore a vest of thick felt and a coat of mail so dense and strong that our arrows made no impression on them... I saw some with from one to ten arrows sticking in them, and still advancing at their ordinary pace without leaving the ranks." Another crusade incident involved King Louis VII of France in the 2nd Crusade, when he was cornered on a rock, trying to escape the Muslim troops, they shot arrows at him, but couldn't get through his armor. Modern tests, with period accurate chainmail and padding have shown that chainmail armor can even stand up to the vaunted English Longbow and bodkin points. Regarding swords, there is one account from the Crusades again, in which a Frankish soldier was bested in combat by a Muslim, and disarmed. As a last resort, the Frankish soldier curled up in a ball on the ground protecting his face and stomach, and the Muslim soldier hacked at him with his sword until he got tired and gave up, but couldn't get through the chainmail armor. (in that case it was described as "doubled mail" but we don't know exactly what that means today).
How come they always finnish their dialouge before they die? Reminds me of deadpool in deadpool 2 where he still have a lot of time and yet he is still dying. 😂
It is,Russell Crowe portrayed Longbowmen perfectly. They were independent contractors with unbreakable strength to draw their bows.Well trained and armed to defend themselves in close combat.
Well, the chain armor, was actually very very good vs bows...not so good vs crossbows, but very very good vs bow Why else do you think it was used for more than 1000 years?
@@leeshackelford7517 chain was not good vs arrows lmao It was used because it was good against slashing weapons. The defense against arrows was the shield, not chain.
@@TheNerdForAllSeasons Depends on the arrowhead. Bodkins can go through, but it still stops broadheads (although, you'll probably have a nasty bruise).
@@TheNerdForAllSeasons I mean, the terminology is a tad vague, and coloured by modern usages, but not all arrows invariably penetrated chainmail. In fact, there's a rather amusing tale from the First Crusade where Frankish knights were shot at by Turkish horse archers, who subsequently fled in terror as the Franks continued to ride and fight with arrows sticking out of them. Said arrows having passed through the knights' outer layers but been stopped by their mail and gambesons. Leaf-shaped arrowheads were not uncommon in warfare (a quick google image search shows many examples. Hell, the shape commonly referred to as an 'arrow' flares out quite sharply when contrasted to the typical shape of a bodkin).
@@cbublitz1 RichTurd was not "retaking" lands. The Anglo-Normans were STEALING land from the French. But we taught them a lesson in the Hundred Years War, something the weak, cowardly, entitled Anglos will never get over. Going on about Agincourt and Crecy, but incapable of understanding the difference between winning a couple of insignificant battles, and winning a war. England really needs to grow up. You nearly succeeded in 1649, and the 11 years after that, but then you screwed it up. Just as you did in 2016.
This takes place in france, yes. The ambush is by the french, the ambushed soldiers are taking the king's crown back to england after he was killed in battle
@@dzonbrodi514 The point? Oh, ye of little brain, is that Dobin was an illegal immigrant, being an Anglo-Saxon. And working for the other illegal immigrants, the Normans. So, the mercenary was either working for the Normans, and killing on their orders, or he was assisting the many attempts of the Anglo-Normans to occupy more French land. It is always better to reflect before placing finger to keyboard. Always consider CONTEXT. You will be a much better, more at peace, little bunny wabbit. 🐶🐕🐕🐕🐕🐕🐕🐕
For all the history and armor nerds in the audience.... Armor, including Chainmail, was not just a fashion choice that provided no protection or practical benefit, as is so often the case in movies. Armor was worn because it was incredibly effective at stopping all forms of damage. A person in armor has a MASSIVE advantage over an unarmored person.
The idea that arrows easily pierce Chainmail armor is not accurate. We know it is not accurate both from historical accounts and from modern testing as well.
It is virtually impossible to cut through chainmail armor with a sword, but many people believe that arrows and spears go right through. Not the case.
The first point here is kind of a "common sense should tell you..." points. Chainmail armor was used for over 1000 years. Not just used, it was the staple armor type, used in basically every culture that had metal armor. It was used by the ancient Persians and Romans, all the way up to the age of plate armor.
The bow, was also used that entire time.
If the bow easily defeated chainmail armor, and arrows just went right through it, either everyone would have just used nothing but bows, or people would have stopped using chainmail armor.
What we actually find in the historical accounts, going all the way back to ancient armies, and holding true all the way up into the medieval period is that bows were effective against the light troops that wore little to no armor (mostly the peasants and lower class troops) but had little effect on the troops that wore chainmail armor, such as elite cavalry, and noble troops.
Perhaps ironically, one of the most famous medieval accounts of chainmail armor defeating arrows was from King Richard's Crusade. Saladin's personal chronicler recorded that during Richard's march from Acre to Jaffa, the Muslim's harassed Richard's troops by constantly riding in close and shooting arrows at them, trying to get them to attack in disorder. Instead the infantry (not even the knights, but the common infantry) of Richard's army just marched along ignoring the arrows. The chronicler recorded this...
"...and every foot-soldier wore a vest of thick felt and a coat of mail so dense and strong that our arrows made no impression on them... I saw some with from one to ten arrows sticking in them, and still advancing at their ordinary pace without leaving the ranks."
Another crusade incident involved King Louis VII of France in the 2nd Crusade, when he was cornered on a rock, trying to escape the Muslim troops, they shot arrows at him, but couldn't get through his armor.
Modern tests, with period accurate chainmail and padding have shown that chainmail armor can even stand up to the vaunted English Longbow and bodkin points.
Regarding swords, there is one account from the Crusades again, in which a Frankish soldier was bested in combat by a Muslim, and disarmed. As a last resort, the Frankish soldier curled up in a ball on the ground protecting his face and stomach, and the Muslim soldier hacked at him with his sword until he got tired and gave up, but couldn't get through the chainmail armor. (in that case it was described as "doubled mail" but we don't know exactly what that means today).
A good film, except for the ridiculous ending.
Definitely an underrated film , not many people know about it
Everybody likes a crappy ending.
Like Star Trek The Motion Picture?
The directors cut for this movie is one of my favorites, russell crowes accent going everywhere is not 😂
He threw an absolute strop when he got criticised for the accent and told the critic he had tin ears lol
Still not as bad as Kevin Costner’s…and we don’t know how they sounded anyway.
Absolutely correct. It was a bizarre mixture of Irish/Yorkshire/Australian accents and was just laughable.
@@dzonbrodi514 Thin-skinned Australian.
I know little of the love between father and son.
i love Russell Crowe ,Good film
How come they always finnish their dialouge before they die? Reminds me of deadpool in deadpool 2 where he still have a lot of time and yet he is still dying. 😂
Nobility is not a birthright, it is determined by one’s action. Robinhood Prince of Thieves
He should of said "The Kings dead? Then i'm the King for France"
They ambushed the soldiers
Shout out to the howling wolf from Destiny 2's Halloween seasonal events. 0:40
Never pick a fight with the English man, especially with a bow in his hand.
Being a legend and real facts obscure one can fabricate
A storyline!
Great film 👍🏻
It is,Russell Crowe portrayed Longbowmen perfectly. They were independent contractors with unbreakable strength to draw their bows.Well trained and armed to defend themselves in close combat.
Movie Name?
Robin Hood (Ridley Scott directed)
Power rangers
Как названия это кино
Robin Hood (Ridley Scott directed)
It’s very difficult to hold a bow at full draw.
❤❤😂😂🎉🎉😢😢
❤😂🎉😢😮
Well, the chain armor, was actually very very good vs bows...not so good vs crossbows, but very very good vs bow
Why else do you think it was used for more than 1000 years?
@@leeshackelford7517 chain was not good vs arrows lmao
It was used because it was good against slashing weapons.
The defense against arrows was the shield, not chain.
Chain armor was actually very good with slash damage and not so good with pierce damage.
@@TheNerdForAllSeasons Depends on the arrowhead. Bodkins can go through, but it still stops broadheads (although, you'll probably have a nasty bruise).
@@derkylos considering broadheads are hunting arrows, I'm pretty sure the distinction is moot in this case
@@TheNerdForAllSeasons I mean, the terminology is a tad vague, and coloured by modern usages, but not all arrows invariably penetrated chainmail.
In fact, there's a rather amusing tale from the First Crusade where Frankish knights were shot at by Turkish horse archers, who subsequently fled in terror as the Franks continued to ride and fight with arrows sticking out of them. Said arrows having passed through the knights' outer layers but been stopped by their mail and gambesons.
Leaf-shaped arrowheads were not uncommon in warfare (a quick google image search shows many examples. Hell, the shape commonly referred to as an 'arrow' flares out quite sharply when contrasted to the typical shape of a bodkin).
Did this take place in France? Or were these "French" soldiers really Normans?
france, richard was retaking holdings of england seized by france while he was crusading
@@cbublitz1 RichTurd was not "retaking" lands. The Anglo-Normans were STEALING land from the French. But we taught them a lesson in the Hundred Years War, something the weak, cowardly, entitled Anglos will never get over. Going on about Agincourt and Crecy, but incapable of understanding the difference between winning a couple of insignificant battles, and winning a war. England really needs to grow up. You nearly succeeded in 1649, and the 11 years after that, but then you screwed it up. Just as you did in 2016.
This takes place in france, yes. The ambush is by the french, the ambushed soldiers are taking the king's crown back to england after he was killed in battle
Normans are French, what's your point
@@dzonbrodi514 The point? Oh, ye of little brain, is that Dobin was an illegal immigrant, being an Anglo-Saxon. And working for the other illegal immigrants, the Normans. So, the mercenary was either working for the Normans, and killing on their orders, or he was assisting the many attempts of the Anglo-Normans to occupy more French land.
It is always better to reflect before placing finger to keyboard. Always consider CONTEXT. You will be a much better, more at peace, little bunny wabbit.
🐶🐕🐕🐕🐕🐕🐕🐕
❤❤😂😂🎉🎉😢😮😅
this and the castle siege(where the cook kills richard the lionheart) were the only 2 good scenes of the movie, what a shame
French soldiers???
Normans. They ruled England after Hastings 1066, and spoke a French dialect.
@@patriciogonzaga3101 This part took place in France after Richard's death at Chalus Castle.
Yeah, Richard the Lionheart died tryin to take a French castle.
@@patriciogonzaga3101😂😂😂
One arrow does not kill you😊
English longbows had draw weights of over 100 lbs shooting 800 grain arrows. One arrow could easily be fatal.
One arrow can absolutely kill a man lol
Wanna bet?
Not everyone who is out of a fight is dead. Locksley wasn't killed by the spear, but he wasn't in the fight, either.
You’ve heard of a human heart, I presume?