Upcoming Movies

[Big Insect]

By this time, English Archers were 'pro's', not  so much 'levy', so think that most would have had 'some sort' of 'protection' / 'weaponry'. This was s 'an armed raid '...

English sources don't categorise archers as archers in this era (right the way through to early Tudor period) they are just called 'soldiers'. Same as there are no references to the word 'billmen' until Henrician times.
Those 'archers' belonging to professional retinues (as took part in the Agincourt campaign) would have been as capable with a polearm and/or sword and buckler, as with a war-bow. They were professional soldiers. I also suspect that by this time they probably fought in a reasonably dense formation and would have been well armoured - at least on body and legs. Munition armour was a lot more prevalent even in the early C15th than we actually believed previously.

Agincourt is a classic 'constricted front' battle - like Horacio on the bridge or the Viking champion at Stamford Bridge - or the Spartans at Thermopylae - it's just that it all turned-out well for King Henry in this instance.

Interesting stuff - looking at other well documented medieval battles - such as Granson, Morat  Nancy etc if you read the contemporary accounts you get a very different view of how certain troop types operated - such as Swiss pike keils moving (at pace) over wooded hilly terrain to outflank the Burgundian position - try that on most wargames tables and you'll be in for a long and potentially dull game 

[Heedless Horseman]

English sources don't categorise archers as archers in this era (right the way through to early Tudor period) they are just called 'soldiers'. Same as there are no references to the word 'billmen' until Henrician times.
Those 'archers' belonging to professional retinues (as took part in the Agincourt campaign) would have been as capable with a polearm and/or sword and buckler, as with a war-bow. They were professional soldiers. I also suspect that by this time they probably fought in a reasonably dense formation and would have been well armoured - at least on body and legs. Munition armour was a lot more prevalent even in the early C15th than we actually believed previously.

Agincourt is a classic 'constricted front' battle - like Horacio on the bridge or the Viking champion at Stamford Bridge - or the Spartans at Thermopylae - it's just that it all turned-out well for King Henry in this instance.

Interesting stuff - looking at other well documented medieval battles - such as Granson, Morat  Nancy etc if you read the contemporary accounts you get a very different view of how certain troop types operated - such as Swiss pike keils moving (at pace) over wooded hilly terrain to outflank the Burgundian position - try that on most wargames tables and you'll be in for a long and potentially dull game 

Battles can be won by the unxpected...Against The Rules... That's WHY they were won!
You will know much more Medieval than I. But I was amazed on watching a recent doc on Bannockburn.. It 'posthumated' a dawn assault... D2...up a valley and through woods...to surprise an English Camp 'expecting' a 'set piece' battle, later.
'Scottish Spears... good on defence'...
Or, English at Flodden... excellent defensive position, but attacked disorganised Scots, down hill.
Richard III 'outdated' cav charge 'could' have worked? Just didn't.
Just exercise judgement ... and roll the dice! Just as they did!
Apologies for ignorance of much medieval!

[Ace of Spades]

It sounds a little bit like Dunkirk.

people who loved Dunkirk will probably like this one too. For me personally it was a dissapointing visit to the cinema... as was Dunkirk.

Cheers,
Rob

[Ithoriel]

As one who loved Dunkirk, I hope to get a chance to watch it then.

[Heedless Horseman]

Any views on '1917'? Trailer does not inspire... especially, the 'SPR' 'motivation' storyline... but, any good?

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

It's OK but shold be called 1916 - there is little shell damage around. Plot is OK and the kit looks about right. Not bad but probably best to wait for it to come up on terrestial TV.

[Ithoriel]

Any views on '1917'? Trailer does not inspire... especially, the 'SPR' 'motivation' storyline... but, any good?

It's an excellent "Boy's Own" story. It's beautifully shot, well paced, keeps the tension going, gets the period detail pretty well correct BUT it's a blockbuster movie, not a historical documentary. If you are the sort who's enjoyment of a film is going to be ruined because it is not getting the historical minutiae right, don't watch it. 

Definitely better on the big screen, however, I'd second Ian's suggestion to see it on TV, if it's available.

[Heedless Horseman]

1917. Thanks, Guys. Might give it a try from TV or cheap dvd. It is the 'personal interest' motivation that puts me off... too 'Hollywood'. So many blokes did similar... in so many wars, without that... so makes it feel a bit 'iffy'. Could just ignore 'story'! In 'Private Ryan', it was the beach landing that 'made' the film... the rest was, well...

I have posted on another forum, comment about '1917' and the ''Golf Course' battleground. May as well copy to here... hope no one will mind.

" 'No Man's Land' could vary in cratering, etc. Depends on 'where' and 'when'.
Much fought over areas.. especially where lines close together... could be the horrible images so often seen.
However, I have seen several aerial photos... of SOME areas... in which the cratering was pretty much confined to the trench / wire entanglement zones... with 'No Man's Land' between the lines, relatively untouched.

If no targets in 'No Man's Land'... why shell it?
Open ground is a better kill zone from a Defender's point of view,... and Attackers Command would not want troops 'dropping into cover' and 'sticking' there. However risky a crater might be... probably safer than in the open.

As the period of use extended, sporadic shellfire at wiring parties, patrols, listening posts, etc. would gradually churn things up more. But, it was the extended, concentrated barrages before a major assault... and 'counter' fire, that really hammered the ground. "

After many years exposure to photos in books... (and Wargames tables!)... giving an 'impression' of battlefields in several periods... watching DVDs such as the 'Pen & Sword' series has been rather an eye opener. Battlegrounds were so 'BIG'! Hard to imagine the prolonged terror and fortitude of those who had to advance across large spaces of 'open'... in the face of archery, artillery or MGs. Movies , with their 'in shot', heroics... just cannot show the 'scale' of things... and the True Heroism of those who were there.

Anyway, might give 1917 a 'try'! Thanks.

[FierceKitty]

Ah, never underestimate the profound stupidity of human beings, especially in large groups.

[fsn]

I was disappointed with "1917".  I felt it was a story written by a 6 year old.

[T13A]

1917 was a big disappointment for me as well, the story line/plot was absurd (IMHO).

Just my tuppence worth of course!

Cheers Paul

[mmcv]

I enjoyed 1917, plot concerns aside, it was well shot and captured some of the feel of the period and made for an entertaining watch. Pretty much everything Ithoriel said really. I watched it on my tablet (on Amazon Prime I think) a little while back so can't speak to big-screen experience, but was enjoyable enough there. And I mean a small screen held close to your face is kind of like a big screen far away.... 

[fred.]

I enjoyed 1917, plot concerns aside, it was well shot and captured some of the feel of the period and made for an entertaining watch. Pretty much everything Ithoriel said really. I watched it on my tablet (on Amazon Prime I think) a little while back so can't speak to big-screen experience, but was enjoyable enough there. And I mean a small screen held close to your face is kind of like a big screen far away....  :-

I too enjoyed 1917, I'm not sure what I was expecting given the overall plot point, but the cinematography and overall film experience is fantastic. I watched it streamed on the TV a few months ago (may even of been a year ago...)

[Big Insect]

New Dune movie getting closer to cinema release - October 22nd
+ a new (extended) trailer - most exciting:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcQx41TM6MY

AND

A new Matrix film for Xmas (is it me or is Tiffany as gorgeous as ever!!!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ix7TUGVYIo

[FierceKitty]

New Dune movie getting closer to cinema release - October 22nd
+ a new (extended) trailer - most exciting:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcQx41TM6MY

AND

A new Matrix film for Xmas (is it me or is Tiffany as gorgeous as ever!!!)

She has the bad habit of doing clothed scenes, just for shock value.

[Big Insect]

She has the bad habit of doing clothed scenes, just for shock value.

: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ix7TUGVYIo

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

She has the bad habit of doing clothed scenes, just for shock value.

Bad bad Kitty - out out out !

[Big Insect]

New Dune Movie is FAB!

Makes me want to dust down those FWC toys and get zapping the lazer agian (ooo-errr missus)!

[Heedless Horseman]

'Indestructible' looks fantastic... hope the music was just for the trailer? Wonder if an English dubbed version? If it had been a Hollywood movie...

[Heedless Horseman]

If 'Indestructible' is 'Invincible'... have ordered 2h DVD with subtitles in English. Looks same, so will have to see!