- Joined
- Apr 15, 2009
- Messages
- 46,996
- Thread Author
- #1
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2023
- Messages
- 36,249
This is NOT How you Fire in Three Ranks! - The Accuracy of "Revolution" (1985) Part III
In the latest installment of analysis on the film "Revolution" (1985), the YouTube video discusses the inaccuracies portrayed in a crucial battle scene involving British regulars and their tactics during the American Revolutionary War. The presenter critiques various elements of the scene, highlighting significant errors in military drills and formations that detract from the film's overall historical authenticity.
### Overview of Key Points:
1. Spacing and Formation Issues:
- The video questions the decision to maintain a wide gap between the ranks, noting that this spacing could lead to confusion and disorganization during a battle. When a soldier from the front rank is hit, the distance complicates the process of taking their place, which could impact battlefield cohesion.
2. Firing Techniques and Black Powder Usage:
- Observers are treated to inaccuracies regarding how soldiers fire their muskets. The presenter points out that the smoke effects appear misleading—suggesting either a lack of proper black powder or poor cinematic techniques, as the smoke dissipates too quickly. Realistically, black powder smoke tends to linger, particularly under heavy fire conditions.
3. Commands and Execution:
- Commands given by the sergeant major lack the proper context and clarity necessary for battlefield situations. The analysis insists that commands should be precise and tailored to maintain order, with the commentator illustrating how incorrect orders lead to disarray among the ranks. In particular, the call to "poise muskets" is criticized as unnecessary and incorrectly applied in the chaos of battle.
4. Risk of Friendly Fire:
- The video intensely critiques the tactical decisions that risk friendly fire, especially in multi-rank firing scenarios. When soldiers fire over one another without proper spacing and command, the likelihood of injury increases significantly.
5. Ending Charge and Reaction:
- The film depicts a dramatic charge by the British troops, with joy at their victory. While the spectacle is appreciated, the presenter notes that the preceding instructions (or lack thereof) create a sense of unreality concerning how a real battle might unfold.
### Conclusion and Reflection:
Overall, while the commentary on "Revolution" is laced with humor and intense scrutiny, it also underscores the importance of historical accuracy in films portraying significant events like the American Revolutionary War. Viewers are encouraged to appreciate the film for its artistic elements while remaining critically aware of its historical shortcomings.
#### Discussion Invitation:
What are your thoughts on historical accuracy in films? Have you noticed similar inaccuracies in other battlefield scenes in movies? Share your insights or favorite historical films that got it right!
In the latest installment of analysis on the film "Revolution" (1985), the YouTube video discusses the inaccuracies portrayed in a crucial battle scene involving British regulars and their tactics during the American Revolutionary War. The presenter critiques various elements of the scene, highlighting significant errors in military drills and formations that detract from the film's overall historical authenticity.
### Overview of Key Points:
1. Spacing and Formation Issues:
- The video questions the decision to maintain a wide gap between the ranks, noting that this spacing could lead to confusion and disorganization during a battle. When a soldier from the front rank is hit, the distance complicates the process of taking their place, which could impact battlefield cohesion.
2. Firing Techniques and Black Powder Usage:
- Observers are treated to inaccuracies regarding how soldiers fire their muskets. The presenter points out that the smoke effects appear misleading—suggesting either a lack of proper black powder or poor cinematic techniques, as the smoke dissipates too quickly. Realistically, black powder smoke tends to linger, particularly under heavy fire conditions.
3. Commands and Execution:
- Commands given by the sergeant major lack the proper context and clarity necessary for battlefield situations. The analysis insists that commands should be precise and tailored to maintain order, with the commentator illustrating how incorrect orders lead to disarray among the ranks. In particular, the call to "poise muskets" is criticized as unnecessary and incorrectly applied in the chaos of battle.
4. Risk of Friendly Fire:
- The video intensely critiques the tactical decisions that risk friendly fire, especially in multi-rank firing scenarios. When soldiers fire over one another without proper spacing and command, the likelihood of injury increases significantly.
5. Ending Charge and Reaction:
- The film depicts a dramatic charge by the British troops, with joy at their victory. While the spectacle is appreciated, the presenter notes that the preceding instructions (or lack thereof) create a sense of unreality concerning how a real battle might unfold.
### Conclusion and Reflection:
Overall, while the commentary on "Revolution" is laced with humor and intense scrutiny, it also underscores the importance of historical accuracy in films portraying significant events like the American Revolutionary War. Viewers are encouraged to appreciate the film for its artistic elements while remaining critically aware of its historical shortcomings.
#### Discussion Invitation:
What are your thoughts on historical accuracy in films? Have you noticed similar inaccuracies in other battlefield scenes in movies? Share your insights or favorite historical films that got it right!