I am in im last year of school,alot of people in my year dont even now eney thing about the empire nore do they give a shit about it. It deply sadens me.
We Americans have a very strong fighting spirit with "hold our ground and fight the fuckers off" right at the center of it. We get it from the British, both from our shared heritage and having to fight them!
@SS13E3 I respectfully disagree. we worked together pretty well in Afghanistan. The fighting spirit is Very similar. If you compare the British army in the days of Queen Victoria to the US military of today, you will see it. Through two world wars to today The USA and UK have both saved the world and conquered it. We are the tag team champions of the world and we have more in common than we have different.
Saved what? 1940-42...UK looses control of 3/4 of Europe. All of SE Asia to the japs.
2007 Basrah and Helmand are lost to the insurgents.
There is nothing we have learned from these people or should learn. To this day they arent as aggressive when they should be. A good 1/3 of Helmand was lost in 07 and a retreat from basrah was undertaken during our 2007 surge (the surge that won the war)
They cant take credit for having won anything, only sabotaged us.
now the French army in its pre 20th century time was a force to look up to. They actually fought other 1st world armies. The German army at its height in WW2 was also a capable 1st world fighting organization.
All the Brits were doing for centuries was fighting 3rd world armies and loosing in many cases.
@SS13E3 The French nearly Lost the war at Verdun... there was a point in the fighting when they had no standing army due to mutinies and if the Germans only knew they could of took Paris.Likewise; the French were doing the exact same thing with there legion; conquering parts of Africa.
@SS13E3 The French were conquering parts of Africa at the time as well. The British spent most of the 1700s fighting and defeating the French, both had first world army's at time.
@SS13E3 The United States of America is the stupidest Empire that has ever lived. They never properly follow through with their imperial conquests, leaving their troops in the streets as a police force! don't they know the best way to pacify the locals and keep them under you're foot is to enlist locals to do that job? If the Americans want to continue their Imperial designs with witch they can't afford, they should be learning from their mommy Britain, but even Britain isn't the best example.
@SS13E3 The United States of America is the stupidest Empire that has ever lived. They never properly follow through with their imperial conquests, leaving their troops in the streets as a police force! don't they know the best way to pacify the locals and keep them under you're foot is to enlist locals to do that job? If the Americans want to continue their Imperial designs with witch they can't afford, they should be learning from their mommy Britain, but even Britain isn't the best example.
@SS13E3 its because european armies where used to european opponents who used the same tactics and rules of engagement, this was still the case right into the first world war where cavalry was used against tanks! the idea of changing tactics depending on the opponent and terrain was a distant concept to many generals. aswell as europeans believing they were better than everyone else lead they them to miscalculate and underestimate many new opponents
@askchipmonk Actually I believe it was ww1 that broke all the rules in "European tactics". The rules of war were first broken by the Germans when they used poisonous mustard gas to gain an advantage. Maybe its pointless to try to humanize such a morally cluttered thing as war in the first place.
@SS13E3 .....yes extended line instead of a British Square was one officer's mistake against all 30 000 of them. Plus,Yank, the Zulus who were the one of the mightiest and most disciplined military entities in history, never threw their Assegai's. They stabbed under the ribs with them in close quarter action. By the way. In the real Battle of Abu Klea we decimated the indiginents. Big Time.
for a Brit to call a 3rd world pikeman a mighty fighter when he is armed with a modern rifle is pathetic. We had short comings during our fights with the American indians, except we didnt give them a second to breathe, let alone annihilate an entire regiment.
@TheCrump3t It angers me how misinformed many people are about the Empire, we had the largest and most moral Empire in history, weather the apologists like it or not.
@mothman64 there r no morals in occupying others lands and stealing others countries .... killing ppl by thousands, and looking to other nations as inferiors!!
Why does no one uses the old Square formation or the old Fire line defensives lines anymore?. Given the more deadly modern weapons they could even more effective now. Add Tanks and vehicles instead or in addition to artillery & mortars, wow. Only the British could get away with wasting the lives of so many brave troopers and look great after.
@Wolfen443 Because there weren't airplanes in the C19 or tanks or cruise missles that could obliterate infantry from 20 miles away, so those tactics were effective. Now, they are not, because war is fought remotely and air power is the key. Even when squares were used, artillery was deadly to them - as some of Wellington's troops found to their cost at Waterloo.
@THthefirst, sorry I was just thinking out loud about how old battle tactics could work in a modern battlefield. I guess our Civil war changed it all indeed.
@MaxRWF No, thats why we have no dangerous animals, no big floods, no earthquakes bigger than a pot shaker, no active volcanoes, no killer boiling hot summers and no killer freezing cold winters. We dont get hurricanes, we dont have killer diseases in anything like the amount across the channel, the channel (only 24 miles of water) becomes an impenetrable barrier just when we need it to be, we make up less than 1% of the population of the earth and yet the influence we have had....
@MaxRWF I wont descend to such bullshit stereotypes. Needless to say whilst we've not been successfully invaded for over 940 years YOU were 70 years ago!
Oh and you had massively, deadly, widespread flooding earlier this year, and you have riots every few months in your inner cities because your people are too stupid or lazy to work (woops stereotype)
You have to check UK news... you had massive floodings in England in 2007 and 2009. And it's not like your Paki and Carribean communities weren't fighting every day in the street...
You're right about one thing, you're lucky to live on an island : as usual in times of war, you can sit on your island waiting for Russian/Prussian/US support....
@MaxRWF No mass riots and murders from our immigrant communities, we had small localised flooding that at most effects one town and kills virtually nobody.
Yes we're lucky to live on an island because our incompetent enemies cant cross 24 miles of water! Worse than that they are always so STUPID that they bring the Russians/Prussians/US to our side! And besides, it was the other way around with Prussia. We helped them out, giving them billions (in modern terms) to fight France.
Never heard about the 2005 Birmingham race riots ?
Yeah... crossing the Channel is just so easy... just see all the logistics, the costs, the preparation, the material and the personnel that D-Day needed...
Paying Prussians, Austrians and Russians to fight for you, wow that should be the most ashamed episode of the English military history
@MaxRWF The 2005 Birmingham race riots were nothing in comparison to the chaos in France. For a start they were confined to Birmingham and hardly anyone was really injured. Now your President wants to deport tens of thousands of Roma (ilegally as it is against European Union law)! Yeah crossing the channel IS just so easy. Merchant vessels, ferries and fishing boats have been doing it every day for hundreds of years!
@MaxRWF Paying Prussians, Austrians and Russians. Wrll you were at war with them anyway (France was not known for diplomacy!), we just decided to give them a hand. That and crush you at sea ("during the war as a whole the British captured 570 French ships altogether, with nearly 16,000 guns; they lost just 59 warships with under 1300 guns altogether") and drive you out of the Iberian Peninsular.
@MaxRWF Using European allies was sensible. You only have to look at the end result. France completely devestated and economically knocked back decades. Britain the greatest world power with by far the biggest economy.
You're so dishonest, crossing the channel in the Eurotunnel has nothing to do with an entire army crossing the channel under hostile fire.
You could'nt put us out of Spain without the Spanish Guerilla and without the the rest of Europe fighting us in the East
France never was as rich as 1815, thanks to the continental system, while Britain was economically devastated by this system and by all the bribes they made.
The big winner of Waterloo was Prussia with all the bad consequences we know
@MaxRWF Ha ha ha! The continental system was a massive flop! It not only turned everyone in Europe against France but also failed in its principal objective! Britain just sold its goods to the rest of the world and smuggled things into Europe on a massive scale. Even the French smuggled in British goods. Prices in France rose massively, there were huge shortages of important goods (including uniforms), the increasing levies for the French army devestated the industrial and agricultural sectors.
@MaxRWF Small fishing boats were crossing the channel for hundreds of years long before the eurotunnel. In fact smugglers were doing it against government ships every night for many wars previously. Napoleon spent tens of millions of Francs on the navy and on troop transports but was thwarted by the fact that the French (and Spanish and Danish) navies were smashed like matchsticks by the British navy at the Glorious First of June, Cape St Vincent, The Nile, Copenhagen, Trafalgar and Aix Roads
@MaxRWF The Spanish Guerrilla's fought well but would not have survived if it wasnt for Britain. In fact once again this was a brilliant example of French Napoleonic stupidity as they turned a pliable ally into a powerful enemy that caused no end of trouble for Napoleon. Meanwhile a small British army managed to knock out French army after French army. Prussia did not truly become powerful until they smashed you in 1871.
You weren't outnumbered in Spain. You were fighting with Portuguese and Spanish armies + you were on a friendly ground, while we had our supplies cut off or ambushed by guerrileros.
Prussia became powerfull in 1815 when the Congress of Vienna gave Rheinland to those prussian warmongers. It gave the industrial power that those madfucks needed to conquer Europe. That's why they attacked in 1866, 1871, 1914, 1945. About 75 millions dead, good job Congress of Vienna... lol
@MaxRWF French army in Spain and Portugal was over 250,000. British troops numbered 30,000-40,000. Add the Portugeuse army and it goes up to 65,000. The Spanish army was brave but pathetic by any standards and the Spanish guerillas would not have survived without British support.
The Prussians only became the warmongers after Napoleon tried to destroy them as a nation. And it was France's occupation of much of Germany that gave the idea of Germany as a nation such a boost in popularity.
@MaxRWF "What is undeniable is that France was considerably worse off economically and more backward politically in 1816 than in 1788, and that the Industrial Revolution had been limited to miltary related manufacturing, which was not particularly efficient. While Britain was undergoing a dramatic industrial revolution during this period, France in many respects fell way behind, and ceased to be a major economic and political rival to Britain until the late twentieth century".
@MaxRWF So OK i wont go as far as smith111146 and say that god is English or British, but you have to admit that we've had and have some damn fine luck!
Made by an Indian (Muslim?) director, this version takes a somewhat revisionist stance on the original novel... Unlike previous versions, this version centres its big battle scene on the 1885 Battle of Abu Klea ... Oddly, in this film the British lose the battle of Abu Klea while in reality they won.
@Astuga To be fair, the British square did break, albeit briefly, at Abu Klea and you can't really blame Shekhar Kapur for making it his big battle scene. And although it is some time since I read The Flour Feathers, I rather got the feeling that A. E. W. Mason tok a pretty revisionist stance on the British officer class.
Your video focuses on all the battles of the movie but there's actually a much deeper spiritual meaning to it all. Please have a look at my channel which contains videos of special features from the DVD, which give insight into some of the more subtle but quite profound messages contained in this film. BTW, I'm glad you showed Heath's amazing stunt at 7:10 - it's so dangerous that many stuntmen wouldn't do it... Wasn't he amazing?
Hate to burst people's bubbles, but there are many inaccuracies about this version of the film. Firstly,the British army stopped sending their soldiers into battle, wearing red, after the Zulu War of 1879. Secondly, the British WON the Battle of Abu Klea(1885). Lastly, the original movie ended with the battle of Omdurman (1898), where the Allied army's casualties were minimal. Sorry!
You are right with most of your observations.Thank you for that-it got me reading into a bit of the history of Sudan.There is just one thing I noticed though,and that is that the British did actually wear red tunics to battle after the Zulu wars.The last time they wore red to battle was at the battle of Gennis(apparently) in 1885.
I am in im last year of school,alot of people in my year dont even now eney thing about the empire nore do they give a shit about it. It deply sadens me.
kaiserjamieii 4 days ago
We won this battle. The Uniforms were not Red. More anti British Crap from a WOG film maker.
BlackCountryPuddler 3 weeks ago
they didn' t use the correct uniforms, bastards
diegarstigeratte 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@diegarstigeratte 'they didn' t use the correct uniforms, bastards'
I got it ; )
I saw the 1933 version when I was little
Best wishes
zombiekiller117 1 month ago
getting a bit tired with these anti british war films...seen this one and its not very historically accurate
rembrandt1941 2 months ago
Saw the trailer.
Sad... amerikan movies at its best.
History aint going to repeat itself if this was REAL.
I think I saw an older version but it didnt have the DRAMA in it like this does.
DarkPrinceNH5570 2 months ago
Did this just recently come out?
DarkPrinceNH5570 2 months ago
The best version of this Four Feathers story is "Storm over the Nile" 1955.
terrortorn 2 months ago
We need more (war)movies from that era(19th century).
AlexSDU 2 months ago
@AlexSDU
But not remake, pls.
AlexSDU 2 months ago
Respect to Britain from america
Threllkild 3 months ago
We Americans have a very strong fighting spirit with "hold our ground and fight the fuckers off" right at the center of it. We get it from the British, both from our shared heritage and having to fight them!
Threllkild 3 months ago
@Threllkild
there is very little british doctrine in american infantry doctrine, let alone similarities in fighting spirit.
They have alot to learn from us, not the other way around
SS13E3 3 months ago
@SS13E3 I respectfully disagree. we worked together pretty well in Afghanistan. The fighting spirit is Very similar. If you compare the British army in the days of Queen Victoria to the US military of today, you will see it. Through two world wars to today The USA and UK have both saved the world and conquered it. We are the tag team champions of the world and we have more in common than we have different.
Threllkild 3 months ago
@Threllkild
Saved what? 1940-42...UK looses control of 3/4 of Europe. All of SE Asia to the japs.
2007 Basrah and Helmand are lost to the insurgents.
There is nothing we have learned from these people or should learn. To this day they arent as aggressive when they should be. A good 1/3 of Helmand was lost in 07 and a retreat from basrah was undertaken during our 2007 surge (the surge that won the war)
They cant take credit for having won anything, only sabotaged us.
SS13E3 3 months ago
@Threllkild
now the French army in its pre 20th century time was a force to look up to. They actually fought other 1st world armies. The German army at its height in WW2 was also a capable 1st world fighting organization.
All the Brits were doing for centuries was fighting 3rd world armies and loosing in many cases.
SS13E3 3 months ago
@SS13E3 Hello, SSJewkiller! Any relation to "Sturrmann" ... 'another' Bosniac-American Nazi-loving cunt? LOL
crapatev 3 months ago
@crapatev
any relation to Gen Pakenham? from New Orleans?
SS13E3 2 months ago
@SS13E3 Nein, Herr Ubersturmfuhrer! Mein entire familie hess neffer set foot on Ameri soil. May I borrow your Jewskin lampshade? Such workmanship.
crapatev 2 months ago
@SS13E3 The French nearly Lost the war at Verdun... there was a point in the fighting when they had no standing army due to mutinies and if the Germans only knew they could of took Paris.Likewise; the French were doing the exact same thing with there legion; conquering parts of Africa.
OMFGitsAGIUSyouCUNTS 3 months ago
@SS13E3 The French were conquering parts of Africa at the time as well. The British spent most of the 1700s fighting and defeating the French, both had first world army's at time.
mothman64 2 months ago
@SS13E3 The United States of America is the stupidest Empire that has ever lived. They never properly follow through with their imperial conquests, leaving their troops in the streets as a police force! don't they know the best way to pacify the locals and keep them under you're foot is to enlist locals to do that job? If the Americans want to continue their Imperial designs with witch they can't afford, they should be learning from their mommy Britain, but even Britain isn't the best example.
mothman64 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SS13E3 The United States of America is the stupidest Empire that has ever lived. They never properly follow through with their imperial conquests, leaving their troops in the streets as a police force! don't they know the best way to pacify the locals and keep them under you're foot is to enlist locals to do that job? If the Americans want to continue their Imperial designs with witch they can't afford, they should be learning from their mommy Britain, but even Britain isn't the best example.
mothman64 2 months ago
what is the name of the song on this video?
Munchausen45 7 months ago
@ftenkmann Wow thats some Grade A spelling
DrinkToIreland 8 months ago
old tactics on a modern battlefield?
hell for britain 19th century tactics didnt even work at Isandlwanna against a stone age army of spear chuckers lmao
SS13E3 10 months ago
@SS13E3 its because european armies where used to european opponents who used the same tactics and rules of engagement, this was still the case right into the first world war where cavalry was used against tanks! the idea of changing tactics depending on the opponent and terrain was a distant concept to many generals. aswell as europeans believing they were better than everyone else lead they them to miscalculate and underestimate many new opponents
askchipmonk 8 months ago
@askchipmonk
true but the lancer vs panzer incident was a German propaganda myth to cover up their own losses that day
SS13E3 5 months ago
@askchipmonk Actually I believe it was ww1 that broke all the rules in "European tactics". The rules of war were first broken by the Germans when they used poisonous mustard gas to gain an advantage. Maybe its pointless to try to humanize such a morally cluttered thing as war in the first place.
3dwardcullen69 3 months ago
@3dwardcullen69 i meant it was ww1, as in it was ww1 that changed it because they realised that war needed to evolve
askchipmonk 3 months ago
@SS13E3 mmmmmmmmmmm
silu81 3 months ago
@SS13E3 .....yes extended line instead of a British Square was one officer's mistake against all 30 000 of them. Plus,Yank, the Zulus who were the one of the mightiest and most disciplined military entities in history, never threw their Assegai's. They stabbed under the ribs with them in close quarter action. By the way. In the real Battle of Abu Klea we decimated the indiginents. Big Time.
BlackCountryPuddler 3 weeks ago
@BlackCountryPuddler
for a Brit to call a 3rd world pikeman a mighty fighter when he is armed with a modern rifle is pathetic. We had short comings during our fights with the American indians, except we didnt give them a second to breathe, let alone annihilate an entire regiment.
SS13E3 3 weeks ago
It saddens me to watch these films and then look at Britain today, heartbreaking. Years of appeasing and apologising has lead to self destruction.
TheCrump3t 10 months ago 11
@TheCrump3t It angers me how misinformed many people are about the Empire, we had the largest and most moral Empire in history, weather the apologists like it or not.
mothman64 2 months ago 2
@mothman64 there r no morals in occupying others lands and stealing others countries .... killing ppl by thousands, and looking to other nations as inferiors!!
hamadtous88 2 days ago
@hamadtous88 the facts remain. Would you rather us or the Mongols?
mothman64 2 days ago
Come on, Vicar! Vicar, come on!
Close the square! Close the square!
JFKFlevoland 1 year ago
@ftenkmann "Four Feathers."
ImperialistRunningDo 1 year ago
is this a real film?
imenglishurnot 1 year ago
@imenglishurnot yes.
ImperialistRunningDo 1 year ago
What kind of rifles the use?
HOREO45 1 year ago
@HOREO45 The Martini-Enfield and Maxim Gun. Proved to be very effective volley fire power in its day.
OurManInMarrakessh 1 year ago
@OurManInMarrakessh Ah ok, thanks!
HOREO45 1 year ago
Why does no one uses the old Square formation or the old Fire line defensives lines anymore?. Given the more deadly modern weapons they could even more effective now. Add Tanks and vehicles instead or in addition to artillery & mortars, wow. Only the British could get away with wasting the lives of so many brave troopers and look great after.
Wolfen443 1 year ago
@Wolfen443 Because there weren't airplanes in the C19 or tanks or cruise missles that could obliterate infantry from 20 miles away, so those tactics were effective. Now, they are not, because war is fought remotely and air power is the key. Even when squares were used, artillery was deadly to them - as some of Wellington's troops found to their cost at Waterloo.
THthefirst 1 year ago
@THthefirst, sorry I was just thinking out loud about how old battle tactics could work in a modern battlefield. I guess our Civil war changed it all indeed.
Wolfen443 1 year ago
square formation pwns all cavalry don't the horse men know that?
Hawktotalwar 1 year ago
God was British! or even better English
smith111146 1 year ago
@smith111146
That's why it's raining 300 days per year in England ?
God can be such an asshole sometimes...
MaxRWF 1 year ago
@MaxRWF No, thats why we have no dangerous animals, no big floods, no earthquakes bigger than a pot shaker, no active volcanoes, no killer boiling hot summers and no killer freezing cold winters. We dont get hurricanes, we dont have killer diseases in anything like the amount across the channel, the channel (only 24 miles of water) becomes an impenetrable barrier just when we need it to be, we make up less than 1% of the population of the earth and yet the influence we have had....
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92
No earthquakes, no volcanoes, no huricanes...
Well, like most of Europe....
But God can't help the Brits with their crooked teeth, lol.
MaxRWF 1 year ago
@MaxRWF I wont descend to such bullshit stereotypes. Needless to say whilst we've not been successfully invaded for over 940 years YOU were 70 years ago!
Oh and you had massively, deadly, widespread flooding earlier this year, and you have riots every few months in your inner cities because your people are too stupid or lazy to work (woops stereotype)
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92
You have to check UK news... you had massive floodings in England in 2007 and 2009. And it's not like your Paki and Carribean communities weren't fighting every day in the street...
You're right about one thing, you're lucky to live on an island : as usual in times of war, you can sit on your island waiting for Russian/Prussian/US support....
MaxRWF 1 year ago
@MaxRWF No mass riots and murders from our immigrant communities, we had small localised flooding that at most effects one town and kills virtually nobody.
Yes we're lucky to live on an island because our incompetent enemies cant cross 24 miles of water! Worse than that they are always so STUPID that they bring the Russians/Prussians/US to our side! And besides, it was the other way around with Prussia. We helped them out, giving them billions (in modern terms) to fight France.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92
Never heard about the 2005 Birmingham race riots ?
Yeah... crossing the Channel is just so easy... just see all the logistics, the costs, the preparation, the material and the personnel that D-Day needed...
Paying Prussians, Austrians and Russians to fight for you, wow that should be the most ashamed episode of the English military history
Yeah... God is English... lol
MaxRWF 1 year ago
@MaxRWF The 2005 Birmingham race riots were nothing in comparison to the chaos in France. For a start they were confined to Birmingham and hardly anyone was really injured. Now your President wants to deport tens of thousands of Roma (ilegally as it is against European Union law)! Yeah crossing the channel IS just so easy. Merchant vessels, ferries and fishing boats have been doing it every day for hundreds of years!
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@MaxRWF Paying Prussians, Austrians and Russians. Wrll you were at war with them anyway (France was not known for diplomacy!), we just decided to give them a hand. That and crush you at sea ("during the war as a whole the British captured 570 French ships altogether, with nearly 16,000 guns; they lost just 59 warships with under 1300 guns altogether") and drive you out of the Iberian Peninsular.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@MaxRWF Using European allies was sensible. You only have to look at the end result. France completely devestated and economically knocked back decades. Britain the greatest world power with by far the biggest economy.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
You're so dishonest, crossing the channel in the Eurotunnel has nothing to do with an entire army crossing the channel under hostile fire.
You could'nt put us out of Spain without the Spanish Guerilla and without the the rest of Europe fighting us in the East
France never was as rich as 1815, thanks to the continental system, while Britain was economically devastated by this system and by all the bribes they made.
The big winner of Waterloo was Prussia with all the bad consequences we know
MaxRWF 1 year ago
@MaxRWF Ha ha ha! The continental system was a massive flop! It not only turned everyone in Europe against France but also failed in its principal objective! Britain just sold its goods to the rest of the world and smuggled things into Europe on a massive scale. Even the French smuggled in British goods. Prices in France rose massively, there were huge shortages of important goods (including uniforms), the increasing levies for the French army devestated the industrial and agricultural sectors.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@MaxRWF Small fishing boats were crossing the channel for hundreds of years long before the eurotunnel. In fact smugglers were doing it against government ships every night for many wars previously. Napoleon spent tens of millions of Francs on the navy and on troop transports but was thwarted by the fact that the French (and Spanish and Danish) navies were smashed like matchsticks by the British navy at the Glorious First of June, Cape St Vincent, The Nile, Copenhagen, Trafalgar and Aix Roads
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@MaxRWF The Spanish Guerrilla's fought well but would not have survived if it wasnt for Britain. In fact once again this was a brilliant example of French Napoleonic stupidity as they turned a pliable ally into a powerful enemy that caused no end of trouble for Napoleon. Meanwhile a small British army managed to knock out French army after French army. Prussia did not truly become powerful until they smashed you in 1871.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92
You weren't outnumbered in Spain. You were fighting with Portuguese and Spanish armies + you were on a friendly ground, while we had our supplies cut off or ambushed by guerrileros.
Prussia became powerfull in 1815 when the Congress of Vienna gave Rheinland to those prussian warmongers. It gave the industrial power that those madfucks needed to conquer Europe. That's why they attacked in 1866, 1871, 1914, 1945. About 75 millions dead, good job Congress of Vienna... lol
MaxRWF 1 year ago
@MaxRWF French army in Spain and Portugal was over 250,000. British troops numbered 30,000-40,000. Add the Portugeuse army and it goes up to 65,000. The Spanish army was brave but pathetic by any standards and the Spanish guerillas would not have survived without British support.
The Prussians only became the warmongers after Napoleon tried to destroy them as a nation. And it was France's occupation of much of Germany that gave the idea of Germany as a nation such a boost in popularity.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@MaxRWF "What is undeniable is that France was considerably worse off economically and more backward politically in 1816 than in 1788, and that the Industrial Revolution had been limited to miltary related manufacturing, which was not particularly efficient. While Britain was undergoing a dramatic industrial revolution during this period, France in many respects fell way behind, and ceased to be a major economic and political rival to Britain until the late twentieth century".
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@MaxRWF But why are we having this argument anyway? I didnt say god was British, someone else did. I merely said that Britain has remarkable luck.
thebigJM92 1 year ago
@thebigJM92 Luck? Really? In what ways?
THthefirst 1 year ago
@MaxRWF So OK i wont go as far as smith111146 and say that god is English or British, but you have to admit that we've had and have some damn fine luck!
thebigJM92 1 year ago
this new song is awesome! what is it? I can't even find it using my iphone app =/
ktsuchida3 1 year ago
whatz the name of the song
zuuuuu12 2 years ago
those brits. always fighting the mahdi, lol
PapagenoJuan 2 years ago
@PapagenoJuan
well they had just beaten the crap out of everybody else, why not have a go at the mahdi
Brann0099 2 years ago
what year is this based on?
jallerb 2 years ago
1885.
Finchy000 2 years ago
love this movie and awesome video
CAREY4926 3 years ago
i have seen it. its a long but good movie
lovewhitsnikkers 3 years ago
Made by an Indian (Muslim?) director, this version takes a somewhat revisionist stance on the original novel... Unlike previous versions, this version centres its big battle scene on the 1885 Battle of Abu Klea ... Oddly, in this film the British lose the battle of Abu Klea while in reality they won.
en.wikipedia. org/wiki/ The_Four_Feathers
Astuga 3 years ago 3
its made in canada ?
skyfrank 3 years ago
What it`s not even made in Sudan then?
Bah, Humbug! -_n
Astuga 3 years ago
@Astuga To be fair, the British square did break, albeit briefly, at Abu Klea and you can't really blame Shekhar Kapur for making it his big battle scene. And although it is some time since I read The Flour Feathers, I rather got the feeling that A. E. W. Mason tok a pretty revisionist stance on the British officer class.
oarfrost 1 month ago
Your video focuses on all the battles of the movie but there's actually a much deeper spiritual meaning to it all. Please have a look at my channel which contains videos of special features from the DVD, which give insight into some of the more subtle but quite profound messages contained in this film. BTW, I'm glad you showed Heath's amazing stunt at 7:10 - it's so dangerous that many stuntmen wouldn't do it... Wasn't he amazing?
springrose147 3 years ago
over all even with the bugs its a good movie, Prelude To War maches perfectly, good choice.
cromartie117 3 years ago
How have I not know of this movie for this long...I;VE KNOW OF BRYCE COURTNEY... BUT HOW THE HELL DID I MISS THIS?! :O
Baledwyr 3 years ago 3
Hate to burst people's bubbles, but there are many inaccuracies about this version of the film. Firstly,the British army stopped sending their soldiers into battle, wearing red, after the Zulu War of 1879. Secondly, the British WON the Battle of Abu Klea(1885). Lastly, the original movie ended with the battle of Omdurman (1898), where the Allied army's casualties were minimal. Sorry!
Georgejmh 3 years ago 2
You are right with most of your observations.Thank you for that-it got me reading into a bit of the history of Sudan.There is just one thing I noticed though,and that is that the British did actually wear red tunics to battle after the Zulu wars.The last time they wore red to battle was at the battle of Gennis(apparently) in 1885.
cricketmaniac1 3 years ago 2
Yes you are right. The first troops that wore khaki in Sudan were those troops that were sent from India.
Josef12056 3 years ago
And in the boer war that's were they adapted the full use of the khaki uniforms
matt2house 3 years ago 2
what is the song?
percydanvers2 3 years ago
first song is Prelude to war from battlestar Galactica, the last song is introduce a little anarchy from the Dark Knight soundtrack
Finchy000 3 years ago
nice movie
Jonnybooster 3 years ago 9
Great, absolutely underrated movie about friendship, honor and true bravery!!
ShadowCompany01 3 years ago 12
Yea this is probably my fav movie.
Finchy000 3 years ago