Specifically I’m talking about pre-gun battle tactics. What movies show historically accurate battle tactics? I don’t care if the plot is accurate just the tactics. Hell it would be great if they showed any tactics even if it’s not accurate. It could be a movie set in a fantasy world as long as they are using recognizable weapons. It seems to me that with most movies with medieval or equivalent weapons both sides line up across from each other and after the hero says a few words the two sides run at each other and crash in the middle. Which movies at least attempt to show something more tactical?
The TV show Rome was praised for somewhat realistic battle tactics. Although the budget limited them to more discussion than actual depiction.
Also, pre-gun might be earlier than you think. China had “guns” by the 1000s AD, and Europe was using them during the 1300s.
I am quite aware of when guns and gunpowder were invented. They did not become the principle weapon for quite some time. If there are movies or shows that portray early gunpowder use in at least a semi-accurate way in battle by all means by all means mention it.
A tv series that makes a decent attempt at times to show tactics is The Last Kingdom. I have not seen the recent seasons but they at least attempted at times to show more than “run at that guy.”
The hoplite phalanx in Alexander was supposedly well researched and depicted accurately (including it eventually getting broken)
The Game of Thrones episode “Battle of the Bastards” had mismatched battle tactics (incompetent by Jon Snow and well done by Ramsay Bolton) - Ramsay should have easily won a battle with such a poorly led opponent (and a numbers advantage), but Snow got lucky when allied cavalry showed up at exactly the right moment to flank the Bolton forces. Ramsay used his advantage in numbers well, successfully surrounding the opposing infantry.
Very well performed and executed episode, though I had some issues with the writing.
I hate to say anything good about Mel Gibson, but The Patriot was pretty damn accurate in its costuming and its battle tactics, both squad-level and division-level, plus really accurate hand-to-hand.
The Roman maniple formation in Spartacus must have had Stanley Kubrick thinking he’d have made a decent Roman general.
I recall use of the testudo in The Eagle.
The English troops in Barry Lyndon did a good job marching into the French volleys.
Right, that was believable in whole, but what was a little unbelievable was how Jon’s army was so quickly and effortlessly surrounded - in reality it seems that it would take a lot longer for heavy infantry to perform such a maneuvre. It seemed that the surrounding infantry just ran quickly, unopposed, to form a ring around the combatants.
That’s a great example of what’s NOT historically accurate.
-
The French stand and kneel motionless, firing volley after volley at short intervals without ever reloading their muskets. Muskets couldn’t be reloaded in a kneeling position, and two volleys per minute was a good rate of fire.
-
There’s no system of rolling volleys by company, or moving the line forward while the rear rank reloads. All of them seem to be firing at once.
-
They are apparently using almost smokeless gunpowder. In reality they would soon have been enveloped in clouds of smoke.
-
The effect of their fire at long range is excessive. Muskets had a maximum effective range of 100 yards, and even then there was not that much effect.
-
The English colonel must obviously have been insane, because nothing else would explain why he would simply advance his regiment into heavy fire in an open field without stopping and returning fire. It was standard practice at the time that regiments would slowly advance towards each other, with both sides firing, until one side gave way.
It would be difficult to find an example of 18th century warfare that’s less accurate.
Not too hard to show realistic battle tactics when the battle is only spoken off not shown.
Yes, but that formation was not used in circumstances like that.
See this video of Israelis using a kind of testudo in 2014, while being bombarded with rocks, etc. It shows that it could have been very effective, especially in siege operations.
But it was not usually used in open combat because it limited movement too much.
The typical Roman enemy had a lot more than “rocks” to fight back with.
The testudo was effective against arrows and javelins as well.
From what I’ve read, it was used in multiple different circumstances.
I wouldn’t clasa the scene in The Eagle as “open combat”, more just a small sortie. One that falls apart when the chariots are brought in.
hmmmm
Arrows will happily pierce most shields and remain lethal. So will a Javelin,
If you are taking arrows and Jevelin in a testudo formation, things have already gone badly wrong.