historically accurate battle scenes in cinema threadkino edition
>>9870198WTF is that real?
No wonder India is close to being a superpower with dudes like these in the military.
>>9870198Wtf? How could they film that?
>>9870198Nigra siege of al-Habbo 2006 BC colorized
pooloo SF special forces
>>9870626no anon that was BEFORE becoming a superpower, now they fight like THIS
i hate indians so much
This is a very good onehttps://youtu.be/pwnNka1tWG8
>>9871024>Aryan invasion against native abos
>>9871024How is this actually captivating and more interesting than most CGI clusterfuck fights
>>9870626doesn't end there, friendo
>>9870198fire arrows aside this one will always be the best imo, especially the shot of the legions advancing with the soundtrack in the back>HOLD THE LINE>STAY WITH MEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GcHaAVj1PIalso i've never seen those roman helmets anywhere else, any historical info on them?
>>9870198god i hate pajeets so fucking much
>>9870597it's cgi you fucking idiot
>>9871325closest i can see is ''imperial gallic A'' but the movie takes place around ''imperial italic H neidermormter/guttmann'', they look more like something out of the 17th century
>>9871348Yeah, I couldn't find any pics with the forehead bump so prominent(and so low)Looks like a mix between Roman helmets and this
>>9871376>pic related is apparently what they used in the movie, very similarit looks good in the movie but thats the only armor change i've noticed, that and it's disputed about how common the actual lorica segmentata plate was for the common soldier, i guess this would be more accurate to actual roman combat, including the whistle and men changing out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7MYlRzLqD0
>>9871407I already knew it was going to be HBO Rome just from the description you gave alone
>>9870198Indians couldn't be more childish
>>9871306I love them this shit is based
>>9871418Is that good?, i remember not noticing them switch out men the first watch but after reading that they did it occurred to me, nice detail if its true
>>9871429Wh*toids couldn't be more self-important
>>9871435it would be if it was intended as a comedy, but the reality is that pajeet heads are filled with clownshit like this 24/7
>>9871437HBO Rome nails it down almost perfectly.Too bad they had no budget.
>>9870198https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQrE8vOM0sshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5sM4DPoWQMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqcSY770aYA>>9871467no budget? i thought they built a 14 square mile set just to replicate the city during the late republic era
>>9871467At least they could afford true Roman bread.
>>9871553whats so special about the bread?
>>9871565TRUE ROMAN BREAD FOR TRUE ROMANSWas the motto of "the guild of millers" in HBO Romehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTxcTzCJZiE&ab_channel=LuciusVorenus
>>9871455You sound like you have a real chip on your shoulder. Who gives a fuck what other people think or like if it's not harming anyone it's alguds. Focus on yourself rather than just being a hater because honestly you sound miserable.
>>9871589How will ketofags ever recover, fuck time travelling to see battles or change history, i wanna time travel to have TRUE ROMAN BREAD
>>9871455>>9871603you'd be surprised how pop culture can influence the general populace, tons of people still think medieval armies were just knights in plate armor or that the spartans actually fought naked thanks to 300, atleast the vikings didnt have horns thing is globally accepted these days
>>9870198i love /tv/ crossposter
>>9870774wow... my god...
>>9870198which movie man??
>>9871316>Asking /his/poster why he hates an ethnic group
On long-haul flights I often speed-watch Indian action movies, they're amusingly mad.
>>9871024now this is fucking kino
>>9871024Say what you want about poos, but they have SVUL.
>>9871316Probably because of haplogroups.
>>9871024Wow, an actually good epic produced by bollywood. Even with the cheesy cgi it's somehow more endearing than anything hollywood has put out in 10 years
>>9870774Reminds me of the the only good scene in that shit Will Ferrell Sherlock movie.>"Alright, the bomb will explode in sixty seconds, with the airspeed velocity being--Oh bullocks, the Queen just blew up, good job Watson."
>>9871024holy fucking based
>>9871062more like dravidians against abbos
>>9871024makes battle of 5 army look like street brawl of 5 drunk men
>>9871522And then had budget problems for everything else.Just look at the "battle of Pharsalus"
>>9871522My grandfather fought in the U.S. Army in Europe during World War II and Saving Private Ryan scared the shit out of him.
Interesting movie about Irish peacekeepers vs. mining company mercs in Congo in the 60s:https://youtu.be/9RZrj-MK_1shttps://youtu.be/TGjdBfpLIiAInteresting because of the Cold War weapons, context being an African bush war, and a relatively small battle with few casualties. Less is sometimes more.
>>9871301anyone know what the Roman war dogs looked like? weren't they the ancestors of rottweilers?
>>9875672I'm rarted. Seems it was the cane corso. But I can't find any period depictions of them...no paintings, pottery, statues? All I find is a statue that was actually a copy of greek art depicting their war dog
>>9870198https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAcoekA2Zs8&t=99s&ab_channel=Gargatul0ththis one is good
>>9876240when the pikes engage we see a couple of guys dive under them and star stabbing guys in the enemy pike formation, was this an actual role, did it have a name
>>9871141 Because you're a contrarian faggot.
>>9872914>>9873004>>9877889i think it's because it's a clear labor of love, is it dumb, unrealistic CGI filled sure, but the actors, producers, directors etc clearly had fun making a movie glorifying their history/mythology
>>9877642Hey hey i may be a contrarian and a faggot but uh , uh . . . what was that third thing you said
>>9871024>dravidians are orcskek
>>9870198ah yes, the cataPOOlt
>>9871024Its interesting that the uploaded is Thai. Are Indian movies popular in South East Asia?
>>9870198...do you think indians ever watch this shit, and suddenly realize that there's a reason everyone shits on them?
>>9875145Siege of Jadotville?
>>9877633Rodeleros, in the Spanish armies
>>9871407We don't actually have any evidence for the whistle. Or even the rotation being that organized. And the men holding each other is almost definitely wrong, we DO know that men were given 3 to 6 feet in any direction to move around in so they could fight effectively.
>>9877633>>9879474No. Rodelleros were armed with shields- thus the name- and there are zero accounts of them dropping to their knees like that. In fact, there are almost no accounts of them having any utility at all, except for when they were able to attack pikes that were already badly disordered- IE, fighting in a trench. In open battle, pikes and cavalry could just roll right over them, which is why they didn't spread to other armies and quickly fell out of use with the spanish.
>>9870198WTF I love india now, please come to America!
>>9871024India BP (before poo) truly was the peak of humanity!
>>9875145read the wikipedia page on this. pretty lit.
>>9871024this scene is, like, legit fun to, like watch desu
>>9871024Hahaha, whoever made this had a lot of fun.
>>9870198>pajeet space program
>>9871301the helmets looked like they where scavenged and modified to kinda look like roman helmets from some other thing. more than likely spare props that where on sale from some random historical show or such. I don't know if you noticed but a lot of the segmentata that the guys are wearing don't have any back pieces. it's just few strips dangling on their chest and that's it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL-5uyp44WAAnything from Gettysburg and Gods and Generals is generally very accurate. There are one too many overweight reanactors and the real deal was probably slightly more gorey, but overall those films nailed how Civil War battles actually looked.
>>9880022>Gods and Generalshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG9fLiBhjMEI know I'm a brainlet but why did people just line up and shoot at each other in the Civil War? Why not try to take cover behind something
>>9880056Well, during the early years of the war it's because all the commanders had gotten their experience fighting in the Mexican-American war and they were trained in Jovian (IE Napoleonic) tactics. They were trained in the use of muskets that were inaccurate past 100 yards and cannon that were inaccurate past 500. When using firearms with such limited range there are a lot of good reasons to stick together and fire in open lines. Firstly, because smoothbore muskets were relatively inaccurate, 100 guys firing in a line at a target is more likely to actually hit something than 1 guy firing at a target. Secondly black powder firearms produce a LOT of smoke, and after 2 or 3 volleys its pretty much impossible to see anything, so if everyone is more or less together you know to just keep firing in the opposite direction. It also makes command and control a lot easier because humans have a natural tendency to move with the herd, and sergeants were placed in the rear of the line to prevent troops from running away without the order. In Jovian tactics, infantry charges are also king, because 99% of the time the enemy will either turn and run or simply surrender rather than get stabbed by an angry charging infantryman.But of course by the time of the Civil War you start getting rifled muskets that are deadly accurate out to 500 yards and cannons that can fire over a mile; but the tactics were still based on the old smooth bore tactics. It took until late in 1863 (really until Gettysburg) for the armies to start coming up with better ways to fight. By the mid-late war both sides were more heavily reliant on skirmish formations, which are lot looser than a normal line but are still control-able, and can hide behind rocks and other obstructions. You also had the advent of mounted infantry (tbf, this wasn't exactly new but more like rediscovered through trial and error).TBC
>>9880056this is going off of what another guy wrote but he said it was because the guns were very innacurate so in order to maximise targets hit they'd line up and shoot at other groups of lined up guys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQrE8vOM0ssThe inclusion of "Men of Harlech" is an embellishment but pretty accurate otherwisereal zulu warriors btw
>>9880094Both armies also adopted by the mid-late war a more open strategy in field combat where lines would engage for a few minutes/volleys, but then fall back, regroup, rest for a few minutes, and then advance and do it again. The veterans in particular where noted for immediately hitting the ground when shots were incoming, and many started purchasing repeating rifles to replace their muskets. Bayonet charges weren't even ATTEMPTED after Gettysburg because of how futile they were by that point. IIRC bayonets were responsible for like less than a percent of Civil war wounds and almost no deaths because they almost never actually reached their destination. The South in particular also started digging trenches and fortifications very early on, and majority of the mid-late war battles were not big open field battles like Gettysburg but trench battles or seiges and such. Petersburg in particular is like a mini-WWI complete with rail car artillery and counter trenches and everything. Even when they didn't have trenches Civil war battles were extremely dependent on terrain, troops were certainly smart enough to hide behind large rocks, fences, etc, when those things were available.Tl;dr, it took about a year and half or so for the tactics to match the equipment, which is pretty much normal in wars.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8geVz2-AoMghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5fbYJMEyes
>>9880131fucking based movie, people say it's racist which i've never understood, there is ONE demeaning comment on the zulus and it immediately gets rebuked, fun fact, the zulu warriors were paid in cattle because they had no use for money, my great great grandfather was a soldier like this and i like to imagine him calling me a pussy whenever i'm struggling with something
>>9880094>>9880112>>9880139 Thanks bros, that question has always bothered me kek
>>9871024I do like this idea for a scythed chariot, seems like it might work.
>>9880201When I tell other people (including actual historians i've talked with) that my favorite topic is 19th century warfare that is by far the most common question I get.It's not something that's really all that obvious unless you are interested in the time period/19th cen military history.
>>9880094>>9880139You know how WW2 movies/games love to use spy missions or commandos behind enemy lines sent to blow up ammo factories or steal documents and things like that, was there something similar like that during the civil war? i know there were apparently troops outfitted with green uniforms to blend into the grass better but thats it
>>9880212How true is the stereotype of the doctor cutting off legs for minor injuries, pic related
>>9880220Yes. Obviously both sides had non-uniformed saboteurs and spies, but what was more common were things like bushwhackers, which were basically non-military personnel who go out and blow up bridges and rail lines, infrastructure, etc; and then go home and blend in. Basically guerillas by the modern definition. Then there were also cavalry raids where what were basically mounted infantry would go deep behind enemy lines and and cut supply routes, blow shit up, etc, like paramilitary. The South in particular had loads of semi-military or non-military partisans and agents who would do all kinds of sabotage. Nathan Bedforest Forest, Quantrill's raiders, Mosbey, all the really famous Southern cavalry commanders went on raids and such. JEB Stuart probably lost Gettysburg for the South because he was off on a raid instead of you know, screening the army and scouting.Also uniforms in the Civil war (even green ones) were never really designed to "blend in." The problem with that is having odd colored uniforms tends to end with you getting shot by your own side either because of the smoke everywhere or just general confusion. See first Bull Run for an example. Both sides had sharpshooters, but they generally just wore the standard outfit. Probably the closest thing to "camoflage" in the Civil War was really just civilian clothing (which is what most of the Southerners fought in anyways) because you could leave a battle/skirmish/raid/whatever and just go back to being a "civilian." The Union also did all these things too, and there were pro-Union bushwhackers and such, just never in the numbers that the South had. The really big reason the Union was pretty lenient on the South during reconstruction was because they were terrified all those bushwhackers and raiders would basically continue a guerilla war after the surrenders of the big Southern armies.
>>9880254Oh i've read about those, isn't that how a lot of ''wild west'' gunmen like jesse james got their start
>>9880230>minorNo, generally amputation was performed when saving a limb would be too time costly to perform.So the thing with Civil War wounds was that 90% of what the average surgeon was getting were either gun shot wounds or shrapnel wounds, because basically any other wound was already a death sentence. The gunshot wounds in particular were a problem because if they hit a limb, they are almost guaranteed to shatter the bone. Now, a good surgeon could remove all the shards of bone and the bits of nasty filthy cloth and whatever and reasonably save the limb; but that surgeon has probably hundreds (possibly even thousands) of other guys waiting around with similar wounds who all need urgent medical attention. So the surgeon faces the choice of, for example, saving one guy's arm/leg or saving 10 guys lives. They are going to save the 10 guys lives (unless it's an officer because of course).So if you had a limb removed it wasn't a "minor" injury so much as "we could save your arm but we don't have time."Also, getting shot pretty much anywhere else was a death sentence, torso, gut shot, groin, or head shots, were basically beyond their medical science or they just didn't have the time. Obviously cannons didn't usually leave you alive, unless you got hit with grape shot which had a similar wound profile to a gun shot.The real fucked aspect of Civil War medicine is that they didn't understand anti-biotics or sterilization yet, so you had a 25% chance of dying of an infection after the amputation. Far more Civil War soldiers died of infections and sickness than from combat, like 9 for every 1 soldier killed on the field.>>9880260Yeah a handful. A lot of Southerners went West after the war to start a new life. Jesse James was in Quantrill's group IIRC.I don't think it was a huge portion of Wild West guys though. The violence of the West is blown waaaay out of proportion anyways. Chicago had more murders in 1876 than the entire West did over 60 odd years.
>>9880285fascinating, reminds me of the outlaw josey wales, it's a fictional movie where clint eastwood plays a southern farmer who's house and family are destroyed by sherman and so goes on a vendetta hunt against union bounty hunters
>>9880327Yeah that movie was directly inspired by Bill Anderson and Quantrill, Jesse James, etc.Obviously it sugar coats it a bit because the real Jesse James and Bushwhackers were generally not very nice people, but no one wants to watch a story about a bunch of ruthless cold guerilla fighters who had to resort to petty theft and banditry when their benefactors lost.It's worth noting actually that those guys were often "made" that way by similar circumstances to those in the film. Pro-Union bushwhackers in Missouri and Kansas were every bit as violent and savage as their Southern counterparts and a lot of innocent people died and forced their family member to pick sides and be equally savage. Missouri was some real dark shit in the overall picture of the Civil War, neighbors murdering each other in their beds and burning towns down and shit. There were no good guys in that theater of the war.
>No Master and Commander in the threadhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMJJwktFlvsThe full movie's also on youtube by the way, though it's got arabic subtitles and the audio's fucked, which is one of the big draws to it. Still a must watch movie.
>>9880459it's a great movie but the battle scenes while good aren't the high point for me, for me it's the simple bonding scenes of them eating or the two playing instruments, i usually only like historical movies if they have a decent amount of action but this one did a great job of putting the action second imo and character focused scenes first
>>9880459>young octavian leading a breach and wasting a frenchie with his only armkino
>>9879443No, they are too busy enjoying it and westerners are too distracted to count more than one error because they are also too busy enjoying the cheesiness and having a good time watching a movie which directly exposes itself as a work fiction, and has nothing more to show and enforce the contrary when being a movie. People don't think about their entertainment media that much, and when they do, those movies which pass up as the perfect form of guilty pleasure not representative of anything seriously related to an entire population and its history are the most memorable piece of it, reguardless of it being well directed or not.
>>9880094The big change that occured was that the weapons used in the civil war were very accurate and deadly compared to muskets. Battlefield casualties sustained due to musket fire were shockingly low compared to artillery and cavalry. One airly well supporter explanation is that most men simply did not enjoy killing other people, especially when they are that close and in exactly the same situation as yourself. It's easy to fire a cannon and hit something that looks like brightly colored toys, it's a different thing when you look a man in the eye. There are endless reports and letters about men only loading up gunpowder or missing on purpose. That slowly changed with modern firearms. The range they afforded meant the artillery effect started to trickle down to the infantry ranks. Still, even as late as world war 2, American and British officers complained about how their soldiers were hesitant to shoot to kill other men.