@Wandervogelspirit and the Germans can't thank Wellington enough to have held off the French long enough so that 2 armies may TOGETHER defeat Napoleon
@Wandervogelspirit Ha,ha,ha,ha well the tea drinkers had an EMPIRE and they thrashed that upstart Napoleon. To be born English is to win the lottery in life, where as to be born French.................would be like coming last
Arguably the best scene from the movie. It was directly inspired by the oil painting 'Scotland Forever' by Elizabeth Thompson (Lady Butler). You can see the obvious comparison at 0.51.
@cameraguy38 -Correct, but also note during the slo-mo action the over music is like a fairground horse ride -I think this does help put the charge in a dream-world and maybe an anti-war type of scene as it is reduced to a child-like fairground ride ending in blood and death.Very poignant.
@Fartsurmonde I hadn't even considered the music before, but now you mention it, yeah, excellent stuff. We're being taken back to a childhood fantasy where riding horses into battle is a glorious thing. It's a dream these cavalrymen would have all shared as children, but then we're suddenly brought back to the blood and guts reality of it all, as if their entire lives had been lived for that moment. It is very well done.
@cameraguy38 -Yes my friend you should always consider all aspects of a movie as a great director always looks to convey with all the elements at his disposal whether it be sound,music,colour,black & white they can all be used to show a mood,a sensation or a message for instance -in this great film for instance he wanted to show the glory of the time but also it had anti-war element as in this scene and in another where a Saxony soldier in British red tunic shouts WHY! WHY!
@dave997 Then they'd be lancers, with an entirely different role. The Scots Greys were dragoons, and dragoons were originally conceived simply as mounted infantry that could fight either from horseback or on foot and fire carbines.
@dave997 -pikes and lances are very unworldly when on horseback -okay going forward but if your attacker came from the side you were in deep trouble. The sabre would be used to parry the lance and thrust up the lance could in one thrust or swipe take off the arm carrying the lance.So not retarded at all.
Taking numbers out of the question, remember the backgrounds of atypical recruits for each countrys' military. The lower class Englishman fought the middle class Frenchman, and only one shall prevail in such a conflict.
Very moving but very inaccurate, by all accounts the charge was a slow trot or even a walk as they did not have time to get to the charge after climbing the hill. In fact some soldiers described the Scots Greys "walking over" the French infantry soldiers of D'Erlon and then moving on picking up pace and being carried onwards. Uxbridge had intended the Greys to remain as reserve but they joined in and because of that they were all massacred at the French gun line.
I personally do not think that Britain was able to match Napoleon's forces one on one in continental Europe, without the support of a coalition of European powers, the dutch, the Prussians etc.....
The French relied on conscripts willing to die for their Emperor, a population of 40 million to levy from. Britain in comparison had 8 million. Britain remained unhurt due to the English Channel and the 1000 ship Royal Navy. On land, Napoleon is the master . No doubt about that.
You can't say always second fiddle. Yes Britain has the upper hand during the victorian era and right down to modern times. However, during the times of Louis 14th the sun king, France was the superpower of Europe. All throughout the early medieval age, France was the most advanced militarily, until the English had the Longbow.
Moreover, William the Conqueror is French and without them, England will not modernize as quickly as she should.
@ConstantineJoseph True it was a question of numbers Wellington said Britain's small army could not defeat the Napoleon. Its job was to show the Germans and Austrians who had the numbers that Napoleon could be defeated.
Actually, there was no army on the planet that can defeat the La Grande Armee. 500,000 strong before the invasion of Russia is an immense army.
Britain had no way of mustering and force in fighting Napoleon. The only person who defeated Napoleon was himself. His ego and the underestimation of Russian climate (very harsh place), poor logistics, huge theatre of operations. Caused his army to be destroyed, entirely......
You, and your ilk, always do an admirable job of rubbishing the British. A short review of Waterloo, will show that Wellington,...a very clever man..had the majority of his infantry lie down in 'dead' ground. Consequently the French artillery did not do the damage which they had supposed. British artillery used 'case shot' absolutely lethal to cavalry and infantry. The British went 'one-on-one' with the French through Spain, Portugal and France, and beat them. It's history.
@arriviste2020, If you know real history, you would know that the Old Guard was never sent against the Allied center during the battle. It was the Middle Guard. Today, the 1st British Grenadiers Guards received the title "Grenadier" when they believed the defeated the Grenadiers of the French Imperial Guard, but they only fought the Chasseurs of the 3rd and 4th. They ought to be stripped of that undeserved title immediately.
How does an experienced body of troops, their officers, observers and N.C.O.'s mistake Cavalry for Heavy Infantry? Difficult to accept that as fact.Of course there were lots of 'fact's' relating to the British being at war on Continental Europe, and elsewhere in the world, which people love to belittle, alter, decry etc. The British were instrumental in carrying the penninsular war, then pushed their way through France, then came Waterloo and others. Napoleon capitulated. Fini
@arriviste2020 "How does an experienced body of troops, their officers, observers and N.C.O.'s mistake Cavalry for Heavy Infantry? Difficult to accept that as fact"
Difficult to accept what as a fact?
Since when did i ever mention anything about cavalry?
@arriviste2020, Yes, I mentioned the Middle Guard Chasseurs, and they were infantrymen to make things more clear. Sorry, if I wasn't being specific enough.
I didn't say the Grenadier Guards mistook the Chasseurs as cavalry. I said that they mistook the Chasseurs as the Old Guard Grenadiers. That is where the "Grenadier" title came from.
So that is where the "cavalry" part came in a few comments ago. You thought the Chasseurs were cavalrymen, is that correct?
@ConstantineJoseph Well, Napoleon was said to be the master of attack. The master of the art of the offensive. In Wellington he found a stubborn and unwanted foe; the so called master of defence. This clash of the titans was decided by their men of course, lest we forget their part in the name of titular ego's. Waterloo could have gone one way or the other; Wellington knew this, and at least once expected the French to win the battle. His men held. The French fled. Our History. Britannia Victor.
@ThePalaeontologist Also, numbers are not everything in war, though they help. Of course they help. I say that the quality is more important though. The British were a cut above the French in modernity and battle honours in the regiments. Now, the Royal Navy prevented any invasion of Britain with better ships, and more of them too. Even if all the British Army soldiers in the Empire suddenly dropped dead, Britain would be able to recover and fight another day. Britain was France's archnemesis.
@ConstantineJoseph 8 million v's 40 million in 1815?? The polulation of France today is 65 million. The population of Britain today is now 60 million ...........WTH?? Did someone slip something into the tea when no-one was looking to make the British so rampant or did the French loose their 'Va,Va, Voom'??
@cosmictimes I think the French lost the va,va, voom around 1940 when they surrendered to that other lunatic Adolf Hitler, and they have been arse licking the Germans ever since
@ConstantineJoseph Hi Joseph, on land, Napoleon a great tactician (He took daring chances) Victorious in many battles except The only occasion that he fought the British - Waterloo. Recall that the British army in the Spanish Peninsula beat the French enabling the invasion of France. The Royal Navy ships you mentioned were hardly used directly against the French. (Except to blockade) Lord Nelson obliterated the French Navy over several battles using only a twenty or so ships.
@ConstantineJoseph Indeed Napoleon was a brilliant General but I can not agree that The British could not match him on land. That little corporal certainly had some desperate ideas & obsessions regarding his British betters, why the fellow even had a hair brained scheme to build a Channel Tunnel nearly 200 years ahead of his time ! Nothing wrong with a little forward thinking, but that was yet another ridiculous French folly !
On the sea English was the master no doubt, but on land in a one to one french was better.
In 1805 Pitt knew perfectly that and paid russia austria to make war to France, we have seen the result, 2 empires beaten by one at austerlitz, prussian beaten and so many victory from France against the best nation ofthe time
Not so many Nation can say that they have been master of Europe
Now 200 years after we can put aside the rivalry and say for that time : on land France on sea England
@pennbzh On land and sea Britain was better, the proof is in the history, if the French had been better they would have won. Wellington was Napoleons nemesis. You can shout, stamp you`re feet, and make all the excuses you like, but the fact remains that Napoleon was soundly thrashed at Waterloo.
As for putting the rivalry aside? lets raise a glass to Henry V and Agincourt
@ConstantineJoseph the British army was virtually undefeated against napoleons army in Portugal and Spain, also drove the French army from Egypt and Naples
@stefthewerewolf Anyone who has studied the period know of this charge but the Polish Light Horse in 1808 were not yet armed with the lance. That came a year later in 1809 after the Battle of Wagram when they were also renamed Lancers
The Prussians were important to the victory. Blucher had said he considered Wellington a man he could trust and promised he would support him. Wellingtons deployment at Waterloo allowed for the arrival of the Prussians on his left. I am British and a great admirer of Wellington but... this was an "Allied" victory. Germans made up 45% of the allied army to 35% British and 20% Dutch/Belgian. Without Blucher this would at best have been a draw. Without Wellington... well, speculation matters not!
@Viewr8806 it was the combination of British and Prussian military forces combining and fighting Napoleon that won it. Think for a second if the British were wiped out then the superior numbers of the French forces would have then turned on what was left of the Prussians and Destroyed them as well. So technically you need to learn history and maybe use your brain to figure out what would of happened if the British were wiped out by the French . And Wellington was a greater General than Napoleon
Yeah, great charge you Wellington loving louts! You're probably too uneducated to know that the French cavalry counterattacked and slaughtered most of your redcoated filth. Vive l'empereur!
Oh, and by the way I'm NOT French. I'm an American who hates you stinking British pieces of crap!
@ienjoypaninis What's your name, ienjoypenis? Anyway, it wasn't the British who won at Waterloo. That worthless piece of crap Wellington was saved by Blucher and his Prussians. You're the one who needs to learn his history, Mr. ienjoypenis.
@bellacaroabdourazak napoleon was an amazing general but wellington had destryed him at this battle. the prussians arived too late to even affect the battle. all they really did was finish off a routing and destroyed army
@ienjoypaninis "Although Napoleon was a greater general, Wellington had him in this battle regardless of the arrival of the Prussians or not."
Sorry, but history tells us that Wellington was losing by the time the Prussians arrived, so don't pretend otherwise. It takes more than brains to defeat Napoleon, you'll also need a very numerous army to crush him. Only superior numbers can decisively defeat Napoleon since brains are not enough. Waterloo is just another example of what I said.
If you studied the battle, then you would know that not only were the Prussians late in arriving, surpiisingly Wellington was holding his own with Napoleon.Yes, some of the fronts were weakened, the farm was in danger of being over run yet again. a pivotal point for the whole battle. However, dusk was fast approaching and Wellington was fully aware, that to hold on until ful dark meant survival. Napoleon was also aware of that fact. You should drop the "expert" from strategy.
Wellington made the statement during twilight, night was coming on helped by the clouds of dust, and burned black powder which engulfed the battlefield.. Makes little difference, Napoleon was defeated. History bears that out, so retrospect is just that, nothing more, nothing less.The French line WAVERED, after a set number of volleys from the British front.The British began to advance at the sign of the waver in the French line.It was the accepted method of warfare of the times
I honestly don't see how the night would help Wellington, you're confusing me a little. History has told us that Napoleon was close to winning the battle until Blucher arrived, and that's the only reason why he is defeated, because of superior numbers.
Wellington was an excellent strategist, Spain and Portugal proved that.He mapped Waterloo very carefully. His means of retreat were engaged, and depended on solid rear-guard action. As mentioned, using 'dead-ground' as a parking space for troops.Battles are notorious for being 'won', then victory is snatched from the jaws of defeat, time and time again. Had Wellingtons.defeat been instigated, darkness would have covered his strategic retreat from the field. No rout, no panic.
@Incertains Okay froggie. Apparently the french suck at leaving comments though, way to flood my inbox.
Weird that Britains so inferior to France, yet everyone is speaking English instead of French. Also weird that the closest thing to a successful french colony is Quebec which still calls queen Elizabeth their queen. Don't you find it bizzare how anglicized countries saved France during the largest war in history? Or how France couldn't properly hold it's overseas territories?
@12F220 aguilla, bermuda, antarctic territory, indian ocean territory, virgin islands, cayman islands, falkland islands, gibralter, montserrat, pitcairn islands, saint helena, ascension and tristan da cunha, south georgia and sandwich islands, sovereign base areas of akrotiri and dhekelia, and then there is the commonwealth.
@12F220 Commonwealth nations were built around Britain and still call Elizibeth II their queen. Although they are their own sovereign nations, they are still landmarks of past Anglo superiority.
What do the French have? A bunch of tiny Islands too, and some territory in South America. Other than that, the legacy of their colonialism is largely failure. Look at Haiti, or North Africa.
@ienjoypaninis then it appears to me that the britsh is just as far off as the french are today, both have insignificant little Islands, and both used to be colonial powers
@12F220 we stopped colonising a heck of a long time ago....however, many of the former British colonies wish, by choice, to maintain the link to Crown and Country. We stopped sending out gunboats and Royal Marines many years ago, In the words of the Scottish motto "Nemo me impune lacessit"
France military superiority over England can't be debate. you have lost all the major war agaisnt us. During napeoleon time you have hide behind all Europe. Wellington have been saved by prussians. Nelson have been defeated by latouche trévillé. Deal with it inferior brit race, you will never be at our level despite your arraogant point of view.
@Viewer8806 Blucher's arrival was not circumstancial, was not something Blucher decided to do that Wellington knew nothing about. The day before the Battle Wellington specifically told Blucher that unless he recieved at least 1 Corps of Prussian he would not fight at Waterloo, Blucher's response reached Wellington the morning of the Battle & he promised to bring most of his Army. Wellington whole plan was to hold the French back until Blucher arrived so they could counter-attack together.
@Viewer8806 If Blucher had not promised to bring most of his Army in support Wellington would have fallen back on Brussels & conceeded Waterloo without a fight. Given that Wellington commanded the entire battle for the Coalition from start to finish & only conducted it as a static defensives designed to hold back the French long enough for the Prussians to arrive & succeeded in doing this and attacking with the Prussians his worth is not lessened at all by Blucher's arrival.
@Viewer8806 You, in your Anglophobic bias, have made the mistake all Wellington haters make in regards to Waterloo by giving credit for the victory to the arrival of Blucher & the Prussians at the crucial moment while ignoring the fact that Blucher's arrival was planned in advance & was something that Wellington was relying on to tip the scales in his favor.
Waterloo was not won because of Blucher & the Prussians arrival - it was fought because Blucher & the Prussians were going to arrive.
I've met many Americans in my life. Some good, some bad. It's a land which has spawned an enormous diversity of people, very similar in fact to my own. I really admire the best of Americans and it really is a tragedy that you cannot aspire to be one of them. Your words are filled with ignorance, stupidity and meaningless hatred. You're not a real American, just an inhabitant with a US passport. I prefer to use your great men as a reference for "America".
Well, being honest, you have to love the French. Without them America would never have managed to gain their independence. The French cavalry counter-attacked and were destroyed on the British 'squares" Then the Brit cavalry, used a flanking manoeuver and destroyed large sections of the French Cavalry, as did the Royal Artillery, using 'case' shot. Your self - proclaimed hatred for the British is just a reminder of the greatest Empire ever.Ironic that you communicate in English:).
I have the painting of "Scotland forever" on my bedroom wall. Every time I look at it, I always think" what a senseless loss of human life. Need this film on dvd.
@Microglia1 Cowardice is something the french excel at we beat your superior numbers on your home soil at agincourt we beat you on your neighbours soil at waterloo and then you surrendered to mr hitler without a fight then we rescued you on your home soil
@Microglia1 Cowardice is something the french excel at we beat your superior numbers on your home soil at agincourt we beat you on your neighbours soil at waterloo and then you surrendered to mr hitler without a fight and we rescued you on your home soil
You yourself don't have the guts to be in the military or battles, yet you sit their mocking soldiers who fought in horrific battles.
Apparently you've never read a history book in your life either. French soldiers were slaughtered inmany battles in which they attacked with suicidal bravery - particularly at Waterloo.
Are you not aware that Wellington's army at Waterloo was one third one third British! - Wellington was dead without the Prussian arrival
@223stryker fortunaly we destroyed your army at castillon formigny and patay and won the 100 years war to show to the rest of the world that the french army was still better than british one.
infortunaly we fought the german and lost 100 000 men because british army flee from dunkerque and let french alone and of course we appreciated your great courage when you attacked the french navy at mers el kebir.
The French were able to save tens of thousands of their retreating troops in the evacuation at Dunkirk.
French strategy in 1940 was such that it purposefully didn't extend fortified lines along the Belgian border just so that any German invasion would be likely launched through Belgium.
The French 'navy had been given the chance to scuttle their ships before being attacked; those ships would have aided the Nazis in the battle of the Atlantic. The Free French were Brit/US equipped
@slizzler1 in no way the mers el kebir attack was acceptable, chuchill had just done it to show to the rest of the world the determination of great britain to protect themself.
Britain could not afford to lose the Battle of the Atlantic - a free fleet on the Nazi doorstep could have tilted the balance and changed the entire course of the war.... letting such a significant risk go unchallenged was not acceptable. The French Navy were given the option to terminate that threat.
@JBMontgomery87 "Beautiful scene, but sells the Greys a bit short"
The Greys did very well. They stopped the French advance and effectively won the battle. The trouble was that they hadn't been in action for twenty years. So they lost all sense of order and got themselves slaughtered by the French lancers
"They stopped the French advance and effectively won the battle."
That is incredibly false.
The Union brigade's charge was not even halfway through the battle- there were many pivotal crisis points after the defeat of D'Erlon's Corps attack. A lot of the Greys troopers were not even around in the regiment for 20 years.... British cavalry units were reputable for losing order in melees.
@slizzler1 "British cavalry units were reputable for losing order in melees"
Which they did in this case. But first they stopped the French advance. Wellington lost his heavy cavalry but he had never set much store by them anyway. The important thing as far as the allies were concerned was that the coalition line had held. Napoleon's strategy had been simple enough. He was going to turn Wellington's left flank and roll up allied line. When that didn't happen he was buggered, He didn't have the
@oarfrost men, time or ground to fight a battle of manouevre. All he could do was go bald headed at an enemy that was not only a master of defensive warfare, but also knew that pretty soon he would be joined by 50,000 Prussians.
"He was going to turn Wellington's left flank and roll up allied line"
Actually- no.....
D'Erlon's Corps attack was intended to punch straight through the Left-center of Wellington's line heading for Brussels... but yes- in such a success, D'Erlon would have deployed some troops to turm on Wellington's right-center.
It was uncanny almost how Napoleon chose the very thinnest part of Wellington's position for D'Erlon's massive attack. The Brit. Heavies really shined indeed.
@slizzler1 "It was uncanny almost how Napoleon chose the very thinnest part of Wellington's position for D'Erlon's massive attack. "
It was because Wellington's left was against a wood (the Foret de Soignes I think). Napoleon had a very limited idea of how the allies were deployed. All he could see was a wood that against which he intended to crush the allies when they broke. Unfortunately for the emperor, they didn't and he was.
"Napoleon had a very limited idea of how the allies were deployed"
yes- that's why it was uncanny. But I suppose on the west side, the French could see the bulk of Wellington's deployed reserve lines from the French positions west of Hougoumont.
@slizzler1 "But I suppose on the west side, the French could see the bulk of Wellington's deployed reserve lines from the French positions west of Hougoumont."
Strangely enough, no. The Fench couldn't even see the chateau. Napoleon didn't know if was a fortress or a beer tent. The Napoleon of 1814 wouldn't have made a move without checking to see where the enemy where, how the chateau was fortified and what Wellington had for breakfast. But by 1815 the emperor seemed to have gone a little ..
@oarfrost weird. He seemed to think that all he had to do was advance and the enemy would run away. He had a point in that the armies facing him were a pretty ragtag bunch. But they were better than expected and led by commanders who were used to leading such troops. So Napoleon went into action without a plan B and spent the day fighting a battle that had been designed by Wellington and Blucher
@oarfrost People are missing the point. He chose to attack the left flank because that was the direction from which the Prussians were coming, or had been earlier, so there was no point in simply attacking wellington's right and pushing him towards the Prussians. N's whole strategy was to prevent the forces joining. He also hoped that an attack on W's left wd force him back to the sea, where he would leave the Prussians to their fate.
This looks good but it could not have happend like that. As the Greys were passing through the Gordon Highlanders with the cry Scotland Forever some of the Gordons held on to their stirrups and were carried into the battle, but not at that speed that's to fast even for the Gordons :-)
@stefthewerewolf Double wrong: Murat lost 1500 men out of a greater number of people during the charge; the greatest charge in the history occured at Vienna in 1683, when 20000 (including about 3000 Polish Winged Hussars and more Polish lighter units) men charged for the Turkish troops besieging the city.
polish cav would have blown these cats out the water.. hmm its liek german in wwii one country against (many more countries) make the math who do you think is going to loose. haha its like if you get jumped at school by the bullies its 1 of you and like 5+
@stefthewerewolf why it is insignificant? i knew that they smashed a french regiment called the invicibles and they made heavy damage to the french artillery, and also that they gave respite to wellington's lines that was almost gone........anyway never heard about the polish lancers
@FellowTownsman than you visited a good school/college/uni - my eldest came home from history class and showed me what they were taught, and I am a historian myself: the Brits do not like to admit that it was Prussia that drove the victory home (because then there is the need to explain that Prussia was part of the German Federation at one time and we all know were that leads...)
And besides, it isn't a foreign lie - I live in the UK for a long, long, long time...
Thanks for that. I tracked the Christian Clavier mini-series down at Christmas...got it pre-owned on eBay. I really enjoyed it. I have seen Monsieur N, but plan to get it and watch again. I will check out The Duallists...cheers.
yet it is still taught to this day that the English won the battle of Waterloo al by themselves - there is no mention of Bluecher and his boys coming to their rescue (well, only as a remark, or by-the-by)...
It had been pouring down with rain the previous day and the battlefield had not dried out. The Scots Greys had to get through a thick hedge at the top of the slope they "charged" down to get at the French Infantry. Accounts written at the actual time of the charge by people who were in it or saw it etc suggest that the Horses were probably going no faster than a brisk walk. This looks better, but probably nothing like the real thing.
They also never charged....the mud and bodies meant they had a rather undignified trot into battle. However, they did capture the eagle and glory was indeed theirs that fateful day.
Please tell me you're being sarcastic? This is from when film makers would hire tens of thousands of extras to literally recreate a battle in all of its natural authenticity. There is nothing a computer can do to top that. In fact I have still not seen a convincing recreation of a large crowd using CGI.....even on the most expensive Hollywood modern epic. In relative terms, this film cost more to make than what they'd spend on a film today. You cannot beat this type of old epic.
@van1980 I agree but, he was such a detailed oriented person something so large would have bogged him down in infinite details. His art director would have taken years just to get the uniforms right.
Had Napoleon won,England would now be stinking of garlic ,rather than curry.
barneyboscoe 1 week ago
@barneyboscoe England does not stick of curry, you halfwit
Notchrhino55 1 day ago in playlist Favorite videos
English can say "THANKS"to Blücher for eternity.Fuckin'drinkers of tea are too much hypocrite to admit that!
Wandervogelspirit 2 weeks ago
@Wandervogelspirit
The British are well aware that Blucher joined the battle later - this was planned and agreed in advance between Wellington and Blucher.
EddieExile 1 week ago
@Wandervogelspirit and the Germans can't thank Wellington enough to have held off the French long enough so that 2 armies may TOGETHER defeat Napoleon
lubi125 1 week ago
@Wandervogelspirit Ha,ha,ha,ha well the tea drinkers had an EMPIRE and they thrashed that upstart Napoleon. To be born English is to win the lottery in life, where as to be born French.................would be like coming last
Notchrhino55 1 day ago in playlist Favorite videos
If Napoleon had won...Would have been wonderful!
CortoMaltese091 2 weeks ago
@CortoMaltese091 Well no need to even consider what if, he had no chance once he made an enemy of the British,
Notchrhino55 1 day ago in playlist Favorite videos
TA RUPA YO NAGALAS.. KARUPRUPA YO NI DULENG NGA ASIOG
rock2logist 1 month ago
whats the music in this scene called?
PingerGubesss 1 month ago
this scene is based on a painting. it actually looks like the painting its amazing
MrRagingbovine 1 month ago
- A most accurate title.
tromuniapp 1 month ago
Vive La Emperor!
Viz12345 1 month ago
The Prussians were brave Infanterists, The Brits best at Sea and the French were very motivated soldiers with a great leader.
shadowhunting 1 month ago
Napoleon: "Those men on grey horses are terrifying."
Aid de camp: "They are the most noble cavalry in all of europe and the worst led."
Napoleon: "That may be that may be, but i'll match them with my lancers."
skiperdy 2 months ago
Arguably the best scene from the movie. It was directly inspired by the oil painting 'Scotland Forever' by Elizabeth Thompson (Lady Butler). You can see the obvious comparison at 0.51.
cameraguy38 2 months ago
@cameraguy38 -Correct, but also note during the slo-mo action the over music is like a fairground horse ride -I think this does help put the charge in a dream-world and maybe an anti-war type of scene as it is reduced to a child-like fairground ride ending in blood and death.Very poignant.
Fartsurmonde 2 months ago
@Fartsurmonde I hadn't even considered the music before, but now you mention it, yeah, excellent stuff. We're being taken back to a childhood fantasy where riding horses into battle is a glorious thing. It's a dream these cavalrymen would have all shared as children, but then we're suddenly brought back to the blood and guts reality of it all, as if their entire lives had been lived for that moment. It is very well done.
cameraguy38 1 month ago
@cameraguy38 -Yes my friend you should always consider all aspects of a movie as a great director always looks to convey with all the elements at his disposal whether it be sound,music,colour,black & white they can all be used to show a mood,a sensation or a message for instance -in this great film for instance he wanted to show the glory of the time but also it had anti-war element as in this scene and in another where a Saxony soldier in British red tunic shouts WHY! WHY!
Fartsurmonde 1 month ago
sabres as your calvary's main weapon is pretty retarded i think, they should have pikes with sabres as a secondary
dave997 2 months ago
@dave997 Then they'd be lancers, with an entirely different role. The Scots Greys were dragoons, and dragoons were originally conceived simply as mounted infantry that could fight either from horseback or on foot and fire carbines.
cameraguy38 2 months ago
@cameraguy38 "Originally" but not after 1805.
kamurashi 1 month ago
@dave997 -pikes and lances are very unworldly when on horseback -okay going forward but if your attacker came from the side you were in deep trouble. The sabre would be used to parry the lance and thrust up the lance could in one thrust or swipe take off the arm carrying the lance.So not retarded at all.
Fartsurmonde 2 months ago
What about the charge of the Dutch Heavy Brigade?
JTWilliams74 3 months ago
Taking numbers out of the question, remember the backgrounds of atypical recruits for each countrys' military. The lower class Englishman fought the middle class Frenchman, and only one shall prevail in such a conflict.
OWTS1885 3 months ago
240p we meet again.
theSlaggyPope 3 months ago
Very moving but very inaccurate, by all accounts the charge was a slow trot or even a walk as they did not have time to get to the charge after climbing the hill. In fact some soldiers described the Scots Greys "walking over" the French infantry soldiers of D'Erlon and then moving on picking up pace and being carried onwards. Uxbridge had intended the Greys to remain as reserve but they joined in and because of that they were all massacred at the French gun line.
Billypig123 4 months ago
I personally do not think that Britain was able to match Napoleon's forces one on one in continental Europe, without the support of a coalition of European powers, the dutch, the Prussians etc.....
The French relied on conscripts willing to die for their Emperor, a population of 40 million to levy from. Britain in comparison had 8 million. Britain remained unhurt due to the English Channel and the 1000 ship Royal Navy. On land, Napoleon is the master . No doubt about that.
ConstantineJoseph 4 months ago 21
@ConstantineJoseph
although nepoleon did invade wales (albiet somewhat unsuccesfully) with the black legion
thebrigadier27 3 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph Being the master on land can only get you so far. That's why the French always played second fiddle to the British
aspiringdrummer17 3 months ago
@aspiringdrummer17
You can't say always second fiddle. Yes Britain has the upper hand during the victorian era and right down to modern times. However, during the times of Louis 14th the sun king, France was the superpower of Europe. All throughout the early medieval age, France was the most advanced militarily, until the English had the Longbow.
Moreover, William the Conqueror is French and without them, England will not modernize as quickly as she should.
ConstantineJoseph 3 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph True it was a question of numbers Wellington said Britain's small army could not defeat the Napoleon. Its job was to show the Germans and Austrians who had the numbers that Napoleon could be defeated.
freebeerfordworkers 3 months ago
@freebeerfordworkers
Actually, there was no army on the planet that can defeat the La Grande Armee. 500,000 strong before the invasion of Russia is an immense army.
Britain had no way of mustering and force in fighting Napoleon. The only person who defeated Napoleon was himself. His ego and the underestimation of Russian climate (very harsh place), poor logistics, huge theatre of operations. Caused his army to be destroyed, entirely......
ConstantineJoseph 3 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph
You, and your ilk, always do an admirable job of rubbishing the British. A short review of Waterloo, will show that Wellington,...a very clever man..had the majority of his infantry lie down in 'dead' ground. Consequently the French artillery did not do the damage which they had supposed. British artillery used 'case shot' absolutely lethal to cavalry and infantry. The British went 'one-on-one' with the French through Spain, Portugal and France, and beat them. It's history.
arriviste2020 2 months ago 2
@arriviste2020, If you know real history, you would know that the Old Guard was never sent against the Allied center during the battle. It was the Middle Guard. Today, the 1st British Grenadiers Guards received the title "Grenadier" when they believed the defeated the Grenadiers of the French Imperial Guard, but they only fought the Chasseurs of the 3rd and 4th. They ought to be stripped of that undeserved title immediately.
expertstrategy 2 months ago
@expertstrategy
How does an experienced body of troops, their officers, observers and N.C.O.'s mistake Cavalry for Heavy Infantry? Difficult to accept that as fact.Of course there were lots of 'fact's' relating to the British being at war on Continental Europe, and elsewhere in the world, which people love to belittle, alter, decry etc. The British were instrumental in carrying the penninsular war, then pushed their way through France, then came Waterloo and others. Napoleon capitulated. Fini
arriviste2020 2 months ago
@arriviste2020 "How does an experienced body of troops, their officers, observers and N.C.O.'s mistake Cavalry for Heavy Infantry? Difficult to accept that as fact"
Difficult to accept what as a fact?
Since when did i ever mention anything about cavalry?
expertstrategy 2 months ago
@expertstrategy
You mentioned the Grenadier Guards fought Chasseurs and mistook them for French infantry. Unless I have mis-read your statement?
arriviste2020 2 months ago
@arriviste2020, Yes, I mentioned the Middle Guard Chasseurs, and they were infantrymen to make things more clear. Sorry, if I wasn't being specific enough.
I didn't say the Grenadier Guards mistook the Chasseurs as cavalry. I said that they mistook the Chasseurs as the Old Guard Grenadiers. That is where the "Grenadier" title came from.
So that is where the "cavalry" part came in a few comments ago. You thought the Chasseurs were cavalrymen, is that correct?
expertstrategy 2 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph Well, Napoleon was said to be the master of attack. The master of the art of the offensive. In Wellington he found a stubborn and unwanted foe; the so called master of defence. This clash of the titans was decided by their men of course, lest we forget their part in the name of titular ego's. Waterloo could have gone one way or the other; Wellington knew this, and at least once expected the French to win the battle. His men held. The French fled. Our History. Britannia Victor.
ThePalaeontologist 2 months ago
@ThePalaeontologist Also, numbers are not everything in war, though they help. Of course they help. I say that the quality is more important though. The British were a cut above the French in modernity and battle honours in the regiments. Now, the Royal Navy prevented any invasion of Britain with better ships, and more of them too. Even if all the British Army soldiers in the Empire suddenly dropped dead, Britain would be able to recover and fight another day. Britain was France's archnemesis.
ThePalaeontologist 2 months ago 2
@ConstantineJoseph Was. Until his defeat...
66Bloodline66 2 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph 8 million v's 40 million in 1815?? The polulation of France today is 65 million. The population of Britain today is now 60 million ...........WTH?? Did someone slip something into the tea when no-one was looking to make the British so rampant or did the French loose their 'Va,Va, Voom'??
cosmictimes 1 month ago
@cosmictimes I think the French lost the va,va, voom around 1940 when they surrendered to that other lunatic Adolf Hitler, and they have been arse licking the Germans ever since
Notchrhino55 1 day ago
@ConstantineJoseph Hi Joseph, on land, Napoleon a great tactician (He took daring chances) Victorious in many battles except The only occasion that he fought the British - Waterloo. Recall that the British army in the Spanish Peninsula beat the French enabling the invasion of France. The Royal Navy ships you mentioned were hardly used directly against the French. (Except to blockade) Lord Nelson obliterated the French Navy over several battles using only a twenty or so ships.
Onedarkandwindynight 1 month ago
@ConstantineJoseph Indeed Napoleon was a brilliant General but I can not agree that The British could not match him on land. That little corporal certainly had some desperate ideas & obsessions regarding his British betters, why the fellow even had a hair brained scheme to build a Channel Tunnel nearly 200 years ahead of his time ! Nothing wrong with a little forward thinking, but that was yet another ridiculous French folly !
BigDon62 4 weeks ago
@BigDon62
On the sea English was the master no doubt, but on land in a one to one french was better.
In 1805 Pitt knew perfectly that and paid russia austria to make war to France, we have seen the result, 2 empires beaten by one at austerlitz, prussian beaten and so many victory from France against the best nation ofthe time
Not so many Nation can say that they have been master of Europe
Now 200 years after we can put aside the rivalry and say for that time : on land France on sea England
pennbzh 2 days ago
@pennbzh On land and sea Britain was better, the proof is in the history, if the French had been better they would have won. Wellington was Napoleons nemesis. You can shout, stamp you`re feet, and make all the excuses you like, but the fact remains that Napoleon was soundly thrashed at Waterloo.
As for putting the rivalry aside? lets raise a glass to Henry V and Agincourt
Notchrhino55 1 day ago in playlist Favorite videos
@ConstantineJoseph but in the sea the British are the masters!
lubi125 1 week ago
@ConstantineJoseph Ok so umm tell me why did they not achieve a larger empire then Britain?
borofalcon101 5 days ago
@ConstantineJoseph the British army was virtually undefeated against napoleons army in Portugal and Spain, also drove the French army from Egypt and Naples
engliscwarrior 3 days ago
@stefthewerewolf Anyone who has studied the period know of this charge but the Polish Light Horse in 1808 were not yet armed with the lance. That came a year later in 1809 after the Battle of Wagram when they were also renamed Lancers
FrancoHitlini 4 months ago
The french can't take we won the two biggest battles ever.............viva la poop..
artman479 4 months ago
Why the hell is this getting so many thumbs down?
LightStijn 4 months ago
How to defeat 2000 armoured cavalries in medieval 2? Use spearmen.
joey143anna 5 months ago
The Prussians were important to the victory. Blucher had said he considered Wellington a man he could trust and promised he would support him. Wellingtons deployment at Waterloo allowed for the arrival of the Prussians on his left. I am British and a great admirer of Wellington but... this was an "Allied" victory. Germans made up 45% of the allied army to 35% British and 20% Dutch/Belgian. Without Blucher this would at best have been a draw. Without Wellington... well, speculation matters not!
FrancoHitlini 5 months ago
@Viewr8806 it was the combination of British and Prussian military forces combining and fighting Napoleon that won it. Think for a second if the British were wiped out then the superior numbers of the French forces would have then turned on what was left of the Prussians and Destroyed them as well. So technically you need to learn history and maybe use your brain to figure out what would of happened if the British were wiped out by the French . And Wellington was a greater General than Napoleon
TheTerradon1 6 months ago
Yeah, great charge you Wellington loving louts! You're probably too uneducated to know that the French cavalry counterattacked and slaughtered most of your redcoated filth. Vive l'empereur!
Oh, and by the way I'm NOT French. I'm an American who hates you stinking British pieces of crap!
Viewer8806 7 months ago
@Viewer8806 Why don't crawl back under your little rock where the rest of filthy ignorant little runts like you belong. :)
TheCrusader1109 7 months ago
@Viewer8806 you're probably too uneducated to know that the BRITISH WON THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO.
ienjoypaninis 6 months ago
@ienjoypaninis What's your name, ienjoypenis? Anyway, it wasn't the British who won at Waterloo. That worthless piece of crap Wellington was saved by Blucher and his Prussians. You're the one who needs to learn his history, Mr. ienjoypenis.
Viewer8806 6 months ago
@Viewer8806 You seem really upset over British superiority over the French. What about Trafalgar? I guess that was a fluke too?
Although Napoleon was a greater general, Wellington had him in this battle regardless of the arrival of the Prussians or not.
Stop being so upset over the past you fucking aspie.
ienjoypaninis 6 months ago 23
@ienjoypaninis hope u know that if it wasent for th prussian it would have been yet an other napoleon victory
bellacaroabdourazak 4 months ago
@bellacaroabdourazak He stuck to the French tradition of losing. Deal with it.
ienjoypaninis 4 months ago
Comment removed
XBotticelli 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ienjoypaninis , "There have been 53 major wars in Europe. France had been a belligerent in 49 of them.
In 185 major battles that France has fought over the past 800 years, their armies had won 132 times, lost 43 times and drawn only 10.
Giving the French military the best record of any country in the world."
BBC History
XBotticelli 4 months ago
@bellacaroabdourazak napoleon was an amazing general but wellington had destryed him at this battle. the prussians arived too late to even affect the battle. all they really did was finish off a routing and destroyed army
Legitimatemuffins 4 months ago
Comment removed
XBotticelli 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ienjoypaninis , "British superiority over the french..." humm... that make sens... oh wait ?!
There have been 15 major wars between France and England , France won 11 times England only 4 .
if you don't believe this then just go on Wikipédia and look at "List of Wars involving England and France" and you will see that is true .
XBotticelli 4 months ago
@ienjoypaninis "Although Napoleon was a greater general, Wellington had him in this battle regardless of the arrival of the Prussians or not."
Sorry, but history tells us that Wellington was losing by the time the Prussians arrived, so don't pretend otherwise. It takes more than brains to defeat Napoleon, you'll also need a very numerous army to crush him. Only superior numbers can decisively defeat Napoleon since brains are not enough. Waterloo is just another example of what I said.
expertstrategy 3 months ago 2
@expertstrategy
If you studied the battle, then you would know that not only were the Prussians late in arriving, surpiisingly Wellington was holding his own with Napoleon.Yes, some of the fronts were weakened, the farm was in danger of being over run yet again. a pivotal point for the whole battle. However, dusk was fast approaching and Wellington was fully aware, that to hold on until ful dark meant survival. Napoleon was also aware of that fact. You should drop the "expert" from strategy.
arriviste2020 2 months ago 2
@arriviste2020, Wellington was on the verge of losing, and I seriously doubt he could have lasted until nightfall. He knew that he was losing.
"Give me night or give me Blucher"
expertstrategy 2 months ago
@expertstrategy
Wellington made the statement during twilight, night was coming on helped by the clouds of dust, and burned black powder which engulfed the battlefield.. Makes little difference, Napoleon was defeated. History bears that out, so retrospect is just that, nothing more, nothing less.The French line WAVERED, after a set number of volleys from the British front.The British began to advance at the sign of the waver in the French line.It was the accepted method of warfare of the times
arriviste2020 2 months ago 2
@arriviste2020,
I honestly don't see how the night would help Wellington, you're confusing me a little. History has told us that Napoleon was close to winning the battle until Blucher arrived, and that's the only reason why he is defeated, because of superior numbers.
expertstrategy 2 months ago
@expertstrategy
Wellington was an excellent strategist, Spain and Portugal proved that.He mapped Waterloo very carefully. His means of retreat were engaged, and depended on solid rear-guard action. As mentioned, using 'dead-ground' as a parking space for troops.Battles are notorious for being 'won', then victory is snatched from the jaws of defeat, time and time again. Had Wellingtons.defeat been instigated, darkness would have covered his strategic retreat from the field. No rout, no panic.
arriviste2020 2 months ago 2
@arriviste2020, interesting.
expertstrategy 2 months ago
Comment removed
Incertains 1 month ago
Comment removed
Incertains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ienjoypaninis
-"There have been 53 major wars in Europe
France had been a belligerent in 49 of them; UK 43.
In 185 battles that France had fought over the past 800 years, their armies had won 132 times, lost 43 times and drawn only 10.
Giving the French military the best record of any country in Europe".
BBC History
Incertains 1 month ago
@Incertains Okay froggie. Apparently the french suck at leaving comments though, way to flood my inbox.
Weird that Britains so inferior to France, yet everyone is speaking English instead of French. Also weird that the closest thing to a successful french colony is Quebec which still calls queen Elizabeth their queen. Don't you find it bizzare how anglicized countries saved France during the largest war in history? Or how France couldn't properly hold it's overseas territories?
ienjoypaninis 1 month ago
@ienjoypaninis what do the british have today of oversea colonies may i ask?
12F220 1 month ago
@12F220 aguilla, bermuda, antarctic territory, indian ocean territory, virgin islands, cayman islands, falkland islands, gibralter, montserrat, pitcairn islands, saint helena, ascension and tristan da cunha, south georgia and sandwich islands, sovereign base areas of akrotiri and dhekelia, and then there is the commonwealth.
ienjoypaninis 1 month ago
@ienjoypaninis okey, sorry, I forgot a lot of tiny little Islands, and what about the Commonwealth?
12F220 1 month ago
@12F220 Commonwealth nations were built around Britain and still call Elizibeth II their queen. Although they are their own sovereign nations, they are still landmarks of past Anglo superiority.
What do the French have? A bunch of tiny Islands too, and some territory in South America. Other than that, the legacy of their colonialism is largely failure. Look at Haiti, or North Africa.
ienjoypaninis 1 month ago
@ienjoypaninis Quebec?
TattieTam 1 month ago
@TattieTam Part of Canada, thus part of the British commonwealth. They do speak french, and wish they were french, but that's about it.
ienjoypaninis 1 month ago
@ienjoypaninis then it appears to me that the britsh is just as far off as the french are today, both have insignificant little Islands, and both used to be colonial powers
12F220 1 month ago
@12F220 One's colonialism has had a lasting impact and changed the modern world,. the other hasn't nearly as much.
ienjoypaninis 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@12F220 One's colonialism has had a lasting impact and changed the modern world,. the other hasn't nearly as much.
ienjoypaninis 1 month ago
@12F220 we stopped colonising a heck of a long time ago....however, many of the former British colonies wish, by choice, to maintain the link to Crown and Country. We stopped sending out gunboats and Royal Marines many years ago, In the words of the Scottish motto "Nemo me impune lacessit"
TattieTam 1 month ago
Comment removed
Incertains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ienjoypaninis
France military superiority over England can't be debate. you have lost all the major war agaisnt us. During napeoleon time you have hide behind all Europe. Wellington have been saved by prussians. Nelson have been defeated by latouche trévillé. Deal with it inferior brit race, you will never be at our level despite your arraogant point of view.
Incertains 1 month ago
@Viewer8806 Wellington was one of the greatest generals of all time, hardly worthless. And he invented wellies.
thetubewithin 6 months ago
@thetubewithin " And he invented wellies"
And sex.
Well, maybe he didn't invent sex, but he was at it like a stoat whenever he got the chance.
oarfrost 5 months ago
@Viewer8806 Blucher's arrival was not circumstancial, was not something Blucher decided to do that Wellington knew nothing about. The day before the Battle Wellington specifically told Blucher that unless he recieved at least 1 Corps of Prussian he would not fight at Waterloo, Blucher's response reached Wellington the morning of the Battle & he promised to bring most of his Army. Wellington whole plan was to hold the French back until Blucher arrived so they could counter-attack together.
11nytram11 6 months ago
@Viewer8806 If Blucher had not promised to bring most of his Army in support Wellington would have fallen back on Brussels & conceeded Waterloo without a fight. Given that Wellington commanded the entire battle for the Coalition from start to finish & only conducted it as a static defensives designed to hold back the French long enough for the Prussians to arrive & succeeded in doing this and attacking with the Prussians his worth is not lessened at all by Blucher's arrival.
11nytram11 6 months ago
@Viewer8806 You, in your Anglophobic bias, have made the mistake all Wellington haters make in regards to Waterloo by giving credit for the victory to the arrival of Blucher & the Prussians at the crucial moment while ignoring the fact that Blucher's arrival was planned in advance & was something that Wellington was relying on to tip the scales in his favor.
Waterloo was not won because of Blucher & the Prussians arrival - it was fought because Blucher & the Prussians were going to arrive.
11nytram11 6 months ago 3
@Viewer8806 you are filth who has just disgraced the entire human race. Grow a brain and scram before you make all of us regret being humans.
LordGuttenburg 4 months ago
@Viewer8806 Uneducated fuckface. You read a book you dumb piece of shit
StrathendrickPiper 4 months ago
@Viewer8806
I've met many Americans in my life. Some good, some bad. It's a land which has spawned an enormous diversity of people, very similar in fact to my own. I really admire the best of Americans and it really is a tragedy that you cannot aspire to be one of them. Your words are filled with ignorance, stupidity and meaningless hatred. You're not a real American, just an inhabitant with a US passport. I prefer to use your great men as a reference for "America".
TheRunereaper 4 months ago 2
@Viewer8806
Well, being honest, you have to love the French. Without them America would never have managed to gain their independence. The French cavalry counter-attacked and were destroyed on the British 'squares" Then the Brit cavalry, used a flanking manoeuver and destroyed large sections of the French Cavalry, as did the Royal Artillery, using 'case' shot. Your self - proclaimed hatred for the British is just a reminder of the greatest Empire ever.Ironic that you communicate in English:).
arriviste2020 2 months ago 8
Its just proof that Scotland are the best fighters in the world.
ThewhisperingCow 7 months ago
I have the painting of "Scotland forever" on my bedroom wall. Every time I look at it, I always think" what a senseless loss of human life. Need this film on dvd.
KoMmIzZaR98 8 months ago
French bastards!
richards1965 9 months ago
Scotland for ever.
elmagnificocavalero 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well i think in fact this movie without kubrick is also great
MitchMaker 9 months ago
@Microglia, even though the french had more soldiers, ok then
t1t296 9 months ago
English cowards rely on numbers! Avec le même nombre de troupes, le résultat serait différent.
Microglia1 9 months ago
Comment removed
223stryker 9 months ago
@Microglia1 Cowardice is something the french excel at we beat your superior numbers on your home soil at agincourt we beat you on your neighbours soil at waterloo and then you surrendered to mr hitler without a fight then we rescued you on your home soil
223stryker 9 months ago
@Microglia1 Cowardice is something the french excel at we beat your superior numbers on your home soil at agincourt we beat you on your neighbours soil at waterloo and then you surrendered to mr hitler without a fight and we rescued you on your home soil
223stryker 9 months ago
@223stryker
What's with your 'We' crap.
You yourself don't have the guts to be in the military or battles, yet you sit their mocking soldiers who fought in horrific battles.
Apparently you've never read a history book in your life either. French soldiers were slaughtered inmany battles in which they attacked with suicidal bravery - particularly at Waterloo.
Are you not aware that Wellington's army at Waterloo was one third one third British! - Wellington was dead without the Prussian arrival
slizzler1 8 months ago
@223stryker fortunaly we destroyed your army at castillon formigny and patay and won the 100 years war to show to the rest of the world that the french army was still better than british one.
infortunaly we fought the german and lost 100 000 men because british army flee from dunkerque and let french alone and of course we appreciated your great courage when you attacked the french navy at mers el kebir.
spad57 8 months ago
@spad57
The French were able to save tens of thousands of their retreating troops in the evacuation at Dunkirk.
French strategy in 1940 was such that it purposefully didn't extend fortified lines along the Belgian border just so that any German invasion would be likely launched through Belgium.
The French 'navy had been given the chance to scuttle their ships before being attacked; those ships would have aided the Nazis in the battle of the Atlantic. The Free French were Brit/US equipped
slizzler1 8 months ago
@slizzler1 in no way the mers el kebir attack was acceptable, chuchill had just done it to show to the rest of the world the determination of great britain to protect themself.
spad57 8 months ago
@spad57
Britain could not afford to lose the Battle of the Atlantic - a free fleet on the Nazi doorstep could have tilted the balance and changed the entire course of the war.... letting such a significant risk go unchallenged was not acceptable. The French Navy were given the option to terminate that threat.
slizzler1 8 months ago
@Microglia1 Strange coming from a Frenchman when you consider 2 of Napoleons principles;
1. Victory lies with the big battalions.
2. Never fight until you are 90% sure of victory - the 10% you can leave to chance.
freebeerfordworkers 9 months ago
@lebarosky, they are light cavalry
t1t296 9 months ago
@t1t296 scot greys are heavy cavalry like all the british heavy dragoon regiment
spad57 9 months ago
Napoleon on these units: Some of the best heavy cavalry in the world. Extraordinarily brave. Badly led.
lebarosky 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This film is made by Sergey Bondarchuk, I hope you know him as a creator of War and Peace (1966-68)
sc7prim 9 months ago
Comment removed
sc7prim 9 months ago
Beautiful scene, but sells the Greys a bit short. They rode down a French column and captured one of their eagles before the lancers routed them.
JBMontgomery87 9 months ago
@JBMontgomery87 "Beautiful scene, but sells the Greys a bit short"
The Greys did very well. They stopped the French advance and effectively won the battle. The trouble was that they hadn't been in action for twenty years. So they lost all sense of order and got themselves slaughtered by the French lancers
oarfrost 9 months ago
@oarfrost
"They stopped the French advance and effectively won the battle."
That is incredibly false.
The Union brigade's charge was not even halfway through the battle- there were many pivotal crisis points after the defeat of D'Erlon's Corps attack. A lot of the Greys troopers were not even around in the regiment for 20 years.... British cavalry units were reputable for losing order in melees.
slizzler1 8 months ago
@slizzler1 "British cavalry units were reputable for losing order in melees"
Which they did in this case. But first they stopped the French advance. Wellington lost his heavy cavalry but he had never set much store by them anyway. The important thing as far as the allies were concerned was that the coalition line had held. Napoleon's strategy had been simple enough. He was going to turn Wellington's left flank and roll up allied line. When that didn't happen he was buggered, He didn't have the
oarfrost 8 months ago
@oarfrost men, time or ground to fight a battle of manouevre. All he could do was go bald headed at an enemy that was not only a master of defensive warfare, but also knew that pretty soon he would be joined by 50,000 Prussians.
oarfrost 8 months ago
@oarfrost
"He was going to turn Wellington's left flank and roll up allied line"
Actually- no.....
D'Erlon's Corps attack was intended to punch straight through the Left-center of Wellington's line heading for Brussels... but yes- in such a success, D'Erlon would have deployed some troops to turm on Wellington's right-center.
It was uncanny almost how Napoleon chose the very thinnest part of Wellington's position for D'Erlon's massive attack. The Brit. Heavies really shined indeed.
slizzler1 8 months ago
@slizzler1 "It was uncanny almost how Napoleon chose the very thinnest part of Wellington's position for D'Erlon's massive attack. "
It was because Wellington's left was against a wood (the Foret de Soignes I think). Napoleon had a very limited idea of how the allies were deployed. All he could see was a wood that against which he intended to crush the allies when they broke. Unfortunately for the emperor, they didn't and he was.
oarfrost 8 months ago
@oarfrost
"Napoleon had a very limited idea of how the allies were deployed"
yes- that's why it was uncanny. But I suppose on the west side, the French could see the bulk of Wellington's deployed reserve lines from the French positions west of Hougoumont.
slizzler1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@slizzler1 "But I suppose on the west side, the French could see the bulk of Wellington's deployed reserve lines from the French positions west of Hougoumont."
Strangely enough, no. The Fench couldn't even see the chateau. Napoleon didn't know if was a fortress or a beer tent. The Napoleon of 1814 wouldn't have made a move without checking to see where the enemy where, how the chateau was fortified and what Wellington had for breakfast. But by 1815 the emperor seemed to have gone a little ..
oarfrost 8 months ago
@oarfrost weird. He seemed to think that all he had to do was advance and the enemy would run away. He had a point in that the armies facing him were a pretty ragtag bunch. But they were better than expected and led by commanders who were used to leading such troops. So Napoleon went into action without a plan B and spent the day fighting a battle that had been designed by Wellington and Blucher
oarfrost 8 months ago
@oarfrost People are missing the point. He chose to attack the left flank because that was the direction from which the Prussians were coming, or had been earlier, so there was no point in simply attacking wellington's right and pushing him towards the Prussians. N's whole strategy was to prevent the forces joining. He also hoped that an attack on W's left wd force him back to the sea, where he would leave the Prussians to their fate.
THthefirst 8 months ago
VIVE LA FRANCE!!!
tninbredretard 10 months ago
This looks good but it could not have happend like that. As the Greys were passing through the Gordon Highlanders with the cry Scotland Forever some of the Gordons held on to their stirrups and were carried into the battle, but not at that speed that's to fast even for the Gordons :-)
strathpipe 10 months ago
@stefthewerewolf Double wrong: Murat lost 1500 men out of a greater number of people during the charge; the greatest charge in the history occured at Vienna in 1683, when 20000 (including about 3000 Polish Winged Hussars and more Polish lighter units) men charged for the Turkish troops besieging the city.
klaudiuszvinicius 10 months ago
polish cav would have blown these cats out the water.. hmm its liek german in wwii one country against (many more countries) make the math who do you think is going to loose. haha its like if you get jumped at school by the bullies its 1 of you and like 5+
SpainBlood001 10 months ago
a most beautiful scene
t1t296 11 months ago
Charge of the light brigade is also well known
SuperBradva 11 months ago
@stefthewerewolf why it is insignificant? i knew that they smashed a french regiment called the invicibles and they made heavy damage to the french artillery, and also that they gave respite to wellington's lines that was almost gone........anyway never heard about the polish lancers
EUFede 11 months ago
@stefthewerewolf i'm talking about the most famous not the biggest
EUFede 11 months ago
is it true that this is the most famous charge i the history?
EUFede 1 year ago
@EUFede no the most famous charge was eylau french charge of the 80 squadron
spad57 10 months ago
Tobad Napoleon speak english!
wallentin76 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GLAMOUR WAR
unfukkkmee 1 year ago
@FellowTownsman than you visited a good school/college/uni - my eldest came home from history class and showed me what they were taught, and I am a historian myself: the Brits do not like to admit that it was Prussia that drove the victory home (because then there is the need to explain that Prussia was part of the German Federation at one time and we all know were that leads...)
And besides, it isn't a foreign lie - I live in the UK for a long, long, long time...
DomokomoNeyo 1 year ago
@9rcpcrs14
Thanks for that. I tracked the Christian Clavier mini-series down at Christmas...got it pre-owned on eBay. I really enjoyed it. I have seen Monsieur N, but plan to get it and watch again. I will check out The Duallists...cheers.
GhibliFan1 1 year ago
yet it is still taught to this day that the English won the battle of Waterloo al by themselves - there is no mention of Bluecher and his boys coming to their rescue (well, only as a remark, or by-the-by)...
DomokomoNeyo 1 year ago
the guy in front of the charge with his camera must've been like " DRIVE FASTER!!!" lol
Gulliman01 1 year ago
Yes Scotland make the impossible at this battle. We lose because Scotland make a glorious resistance.
guitoulamalice 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It had been pouring down with rain the previous day and the battlefield had not dried out. The Scots Greys had to get through a thick hedge at the top of the slope they "charged" down to get at the French Infantry. Accounts written at the actual time of the charge by people who were in it or saw it etc suggest that the Horses were probably going no faster than a brisk walk. This looks better, but probably nothing like the real thing.
digglyda 1 year ago
12 people were the French guys that got cut down by these epic horsemen.
thegameexperiance 1 year ago
Prussia!!
Basti6814 1 year ago
Zerg rush kekekeke
lordofgangstas 1 year ago
@DAToDATonian
They also never charged....the mud and bodies meant they had a rather undignified trot into battle. However, they did capture the eagle and glory was indeed theirs that fateful day.
GhibliFan1 1 year ago
Their Glory Never Fades
jfpOne23 1 year ago
they should re-make this film with modern special effects, it would be brilliant.
stuart556 1 year ago
@stuart556
Please tell me you're being sarcastic? This is from when film makers would hire tens of thousands of extras to literally recreate a battle in all of its natural authenticity. There is nothing a computer can do to top that. In fact I have still not seen a convincing recreation of a large crowd using CGI.....even on the most expensive Hollywood modern epic. In relative terms, this film cost more to make than what they'd spend on a film today. You cannot beat this type of old epic.
GhibliFan1 1 year ago
@stuart556, I doubt they could make it any better, this is as close as you could get to watching Waterloo, all the extras make the film a classic.
sirupate 1 year ago
Damn it, I wish Kubrick made his Napoleon movie. Would have blown everything out of the water.
van1980 1 year ago 13
@van1980 I couldn't agree more!!!
He had gathered lots of historical information about this period. Well, even more.
His project was (too?) ambitious... the movie would have probably be better than Barry Lyndon.
Ryusuken55 1 year ago
@van1980 I agree but, he was such a detailed oriented person something so large would have bogged him down in infinite details. His art director would have taken years just to get the uniforms right.
mosquito103 1 year ago
@van1980 There's a draft script he wrote for it available, if you're interested.
insainiac33 8 months ago
@van1980
Instead the russian director Sergey Bondartschuk made this movie. And it´s IMHO the best War-movie until today.
Not because it´s 100% historical accurate but it captures the essence of a battle like no other movie.
Two commanders and 200.000 cannon foder.
Sokra01 8 months ago