Added: 9 months ago
From: Zappiss
Views: 56,232
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (54)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • WHERE CAN I FIND OUT THE 5 HOUR UNCUT VERSION? Apparently the battles makes more sense with it.

  • "Sir, what are your plans?" ... "To beat the French."

    Good Old Wellington

  • i am a military stratagist and historian at 2:20 that stance may help reduce damage done by canon fire however if you charged 6 squadrons of light cavalery in from the front you could criple the first 3 lines and pull back before taking massive casualties 4:18 good offencive posture and would work great with a equally large force in reserve to push in the event of a meele charge the first force needs to form into closer ranks when fighting with muskets the more guns you have firing the better

  • seems fair, france powned the european countries in the 19th cent. germany did the same in the 20th cent. x)

  • @MrRomulusenRemus

    France did nothing after 1815 - and got pawned in the 1870 Franco-Prussian war.

  • @EddieExile yes...? and before 1815 ;P

  • @MrRomulusenRemus

    Yes that was 15 years out of 100 - when they won some land battles in Europe, got totally owned by the British at sea, destroyed by the Russians in 1812, and bled dry by the Spanish/Portugese/British in the Peninsular war.

  • Comment removed

  • @EddieExile

    today your economy rank or your army is not better than ours, and if you loose Scotland

    First French empire with the grande armée of Nap. was one of the greatest army ever, and the best proof is that everybody in the world knows who is Napoleon

    In 1805 or 1811 ruled Europe it's ruled the world, we taked madrid berlin wien moscow etc.. you can denigrate that i don't care, no many nations can say that

    Like the werhmacht we finally loose again the number not against England

  • @EddieExile god dude.... alright then the civilization at 800-1000...?

  • @EddieExile

    for your comment "france did nothing after 1815" we won the ww1 with you you remember?we paid the much more tribute to the victory and for the ww2 like in 1805 thanks mother nature not your army, no channel no battle of england, a sea to cross is not a field. (i don't denigrate your ww2RAF)

    Nothing after 1815, we are the country of culture, art, food, citizen rights, the most visited etc...the list is long and England?

  • Comment removed

  • Wellington always said afterwards that he had not seen Napoleon that morning because visibility was still too poor. Later, Napoleon withdrew out of sight of the battle.

  • Waterloo

    

  • @Panz82 In the full movie, the credits give special thanks to the Red Army. :D

  • whats the name of this movie plz!!!! :)

  • I am neither British, nor french nor Prussian yet I wonder why I have visited the Battle of Waterloo wikipedia more than anything else on the internet.

  • @Zappiss really nice... thx for telling me

  • Great movie its like real

  • The landscape in the movie is pretty far from the reality. I live 1 mile south of the Lion Hill (Butte du Lion in French, which is in fact located in Braine-l'Alleud and not in Waterloo) and I can assure you you'll find no hills or so surrounding the battlefield. There are only green fields presenting a mere vague relief.

  • @everybodynakhead

    The terrain was changed pretty dramatically if I remember correctly.

  • @everybodynakhead

    There were no computer visual effects, that's why they have found a field as close to the real battlefield as they could. In fact, there was some highlands on the field during the war according to the historical effect.

    Moreover, it is quite not possible to find any shooting locations 100% the same as during the war, especially large scale war scenes.

  • The British Army..... the best in the world.

  • @Rosiejoeangela don't forget Prussians who saved the British at Waterloo ;)

  • @TheFrenchscot

    No - the British holding Waterloo and the Prussians joining them later was planned and agreed in advance by Wellington and Blucher .

    Don't forget the French were trounced :)

  • @EddieExile don't forget the French were on the point to win and the intervention of Prussians changed the vision of the battlefield, plus there were only young non experimented soldiers with Napoleon the "Young Guard"...add the fact that Ney disobeyed Napoleon and charged against muskets with the cavalry...the fact is that English didn't have a cavalry such our and needed this error to win, because the inexperimented Young Guard were crushing he British infantry even outnumbered

  • @TheFrenchscot the loss of the cavalry allowed British soldiers to surround Napoleon...oh yes...don't forget that France submitted the whole continent and was on the point to submit Britain...(even if I don't like this idea personnaly)

  • @TheFrenchscot

    The British were a seapower not a landpower and they had less men, less guns, less cavalry, less experience and less cohesion than the French - they only had to hold Napoleon until the Prussians arrived as planned to win.

    All else is what if speculation.

    Napoleon screwed up by arrogantly dismissing the abilities of Wellington and the British, and claimed he didn’t need Grouchy’s forces.

    And the young guard never faced the British - they were annahilated by the Prussians.

  • @EddieExile not a landpower?... the British had the biggest empire by land mass. Thats was not achieved by seapower alone.

  • @bicepius

    The British empire was created by seapower which could project a relatively small well equipped army all over the globe - partly because it didn't need to maintain a massive continental army.

    The "landpowers" were those who maintained massive armies on mainland Europe like France, Prussia, Austria and Russia.

  • @EddieExile And of course the great land armies of continental Europe were often financed by Britaim to fight Napoleons armies.

  • @YaxKukMo1426

    True - whereas Napoleon simply conscripted much of his army from conquered territories.

  • @Rosiejoeangela

    please, stop this non sense.

    when all germany was united, there were no more france, great Britain or Italy.

  • it might have been a bit problematic for Wellington to bring Belgians to the field, 15 years before Belgium was created by throwing the Dutch out

  • Damn. They sure dont make em like this anymore.

  • @fluffsies1 They can't. It would cost $500 Million or more if they tried to do it now.

  • @fluffsies1 Yeah, it would be all CGI and would only be close up fast paced action filmed with only a few people and the rest CGI aswell as tons of historical inaccuracies.

  • Boney beat the Prussians, John Fran-ci. He wont defeat the British eye eye eye....

  • "What are your plans?", "to beat the french".

  • Whats the song at 55

  • @AUG351 la victoire et nous is the name of the music

  • xD when wellington was asked permission to shoot at bonaparte, his face was like.....you idiot! xD

  • @chidoriookami, I know his face was priceless. There was honor among them even bitter enemies back then. I bet that no modern general leads the troops at the front anymore or is as cool as the two of them.

  • @Wolfen443 Yes Europe lost its sense of Honor which made this continent so beautiful

  • Nice clip Zappiss;

    I like the dust coming up from the marching of troops over what was supposed to be muddy ground!!!

    It's odd they put Steiger on a fake -horse mount. I recall I saw him in a Western movie and using good riding skills on a real horse.

    Someone told me the Chandler version of Waterloo was spotty in details about Waterloo at crucial places- like the Middle Guard's attack.

  • this film must have cost a fortune to make

  • @givemethelotion The extras were Soviet soldiers, so they didn't have to pay them much. :)

  • Any way... the victory in waterloo belong to the germans

  • @Zappiss do you have the extended version.. there are some great battle scenes added in or atleat expanded.. the scene of the initial attack at hougamont pans to the right an extra 10 seconds or so.. the cav attack has added scenes... there is extra dialogue when napoleon goes to personally lead the old guard. stuff like that. My dad is in the Napoleonic military history author fall of fame and i grew up around it and am a military history major myself. i see u post some good military history!

  • @23mbtx23 Thanks. I have the normal dvd version, is it the extended one or is there another release besides that one? And by the way, are you familiar with the 1000+ page book "the Campaigns of Napoleon" by David G. Chandler? I just stumbled upon it in the library, it seems that it's regarded as the definitive history of the Napoleonic wars, got to read it when I have the time... I'd be glad to hear your comments if you know it.

  • @Zappiss it is a good broad view for sure. if you have any specific campaigns of interests thats where my fathers works really are. amazon or google search scott bowden napoleon at austerlitz that is considered one of the best campaign level studies in english ever. and google scott bowden military history press and his latest 4 or 5 volume set came out which have full color maps which completely blow away anything osprey does on the subject.. lemme know watcha think. I write on ww1 & the ACW

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more