Military Historian Reviews the Best Movie Battle Scenes of All Time

Foreigners were actually filmed during the making of this film. Oh, I love that mud. When I met D-Day veterans, I asked them what it was like and it's surprising how many of them say just go and watch the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan. Overall, it's a completely horrible portrayal. Hello, my name is Dan Snow. I am an expert in

military

history. Today I'm going to pick six of my favorite

battle

scenes

in Hollywood history. These are the ones that, despite some inaccuracies, I think give us a real idea of ​​what it might have been like to be on one of these terrible

battle

fields Alexander Battle of Gargamela 331 BC.

C. there is Alexander the Great, who must be his cavalry companion. A lot of attention was paid to historical accuracy in this film. Brilliant looking at the cerissas. those six meter long spears wielded by the foot soldier, the heavily armed Macedonian foot soldier, the

best

acting in the world, must be the Persians a little less well armed, but yes, Alexander leads his cavalry in this Mad Dash towards the right wing and everyone says: what is it? doing, but it is about to change direction in a surprising and completely wrong way for the Persian army. The Persian leadership looks a bit gloomy and somewhat effeminate.

That is, I think, a sign of the kind of slight racism of the film's producers that no Persians were actually filmed. the making of this

movie

here comes the challenge this is interesting the rise iii had chariots and had flattened the battlefield removing all the obstacles, bushes and anything that was in the way to make sure he had a good playing field for his cars. Okay, the Persians would have been less armed, but actually the

best

armed groups in the Persian army would have been the Greek mercenaries fighting their fellow Greeks who were under Alexander the Great, they would have been heavily armored and there would have been adequate infantry.

Clash Darius' Empire was massive and stretched from India to the Mediterranean, so he had Bactrian people, Armenians, his troops from India, they had Arab tribesmen, so they would have been riding camels, so it was a very multicultural army. Thanks, oh yes, they do. holes that they made, they made channels in the large phalanx in the master in Phoenix to let the carts in and then they end up in this dead end in this dead end where, as you can see here, they are killed and dispatched. It was a precise tactic, the foreigners and the two by two are not very effective and then they just hold on to Spears.

I think it would have been more hesitant to have the larger bodies of men advance in

time

for a big push from Pike in Clash, as they called it. in a different period And the main battle here I think would have been against heavily armed Greek mercenaries working for the Persians, so they would have had similar weapons in a shorter space, similar weapons to the Macedonians and it would have been a fight brutal pushing there there. you go, Alexander raised his hand, they switched to the left, they zigzagged back and because the Persian cavalry rushed to the left, there is now a large gap in the center of the Persian army where the Persian emperor Darius is now unprotected by his cavalry .

I have been left on a wild goose chase and Alexander comes like a bolt of lightning to the Persian Center and Darius sees that charge coming and sees death in that charge. I like the fact that there is so much dust. I think these battles would have been very very dark for the people involved in them at the

time

, the chaos and confusion and the dust kicked up by the horses that were at the feet of tens of thousands of men on a hot day, would have been so dark that the rice is shown here without fighting. on the front line like Alexander and his main generals, it is true, was not and that was part of the reason perhaps why he lost his Empire.

He couldn't show that charismatic leadership on the battlefield, but Alexander shows quite a bit of bad luck when facing him. the accompanying cavalry the best cavalry in the world which is actually Robin Lane Fox that footage there shows the historical advisor the great biographer of Alexander the Great I met him once he told me that his price for advising on this film was that he would receive being in it and that it's him charging with the horse companion, so Alexander now leads his cavalry companion and some infantry in this giant wedge against the Persian center that appears where they weren't supposed to be, the old trick in

military

history, appears where there is the enemy.

He wasn't expecting you and the enemy wasn't expecting him here. The Battle of Gargamela is the second of the two great battles that Alexander fights to conquer the Persian Empire. It's a strange

movie

. Alejandro because people often criticize movies for being historically inaccurate. It's actually quite accurate. pretty loyal to that film's sources and yes, it's a bit laborious as a result, they actually try to cover everything we've heard about Alexander's life. We give you all the anecdotes here one by one and it doesn't work. plus a movie because not only does it have a great Central narrative that some writers make up, it's almost like they went too far the other way and tried to be too literal, there are certain howls, certain weird things about it.

For example, no Persians or Greeks were involved in making that movement, shooting that movie in front of the camera, so the people look like Western Europeans or are drawn from the director's imagination, but I think they do go somewhere. effort to make the battles realistic in terms of the uniforms and equipment of the men involved, so I think it deserves a historical advisor. Robin Lane Fox knows more about Alexander the Great than anyone alive, so I think they deserve credit for That's why I've included a battle scene from the classical world and it's Gargamela Alexander's greatest victory, which is reasonably accurate.

I love Gladiator. I love that theater of fight

scenes

, but it's completely made up, it has no basis in historical facts, so here we are. I'm going to go with Gargamela Outlaw King, remember this well, the speeches before the battle, now that's what he said, but the second he wasn't at the Battle of Loudon Hill, it was the Earl of Pembroke that was in charge of the army English, I would have spoken. French, but never mind, that's a different story. Heavily armed English knights on horseback, that's accurate, but they would review the cavalry battle from their point of view.

Oh, I love that muddy look at that mob. That's great. They would have been these medieval and modern battlefields. The battlefields would have been so muddy, in fact I think during the filming of this the mud just got stirred up, wasn't it artificial? It was just created by all the extras, all the horses, all the camera crew and there was a saying about 'There will be mud. There will be blood, which is appropriate. I could talk about honour. You are here,' says King Robert Bruce as he pronounces his speech. He could speak English, French, Gaelic, Scottish, so I don't know what language he should have used this time, but it is. a good speech for the country, for the family, for you, I don't care as long as you fight, oh, I like that battlefield because apparently it was a track with firm ground on both sides of the track and very, very swampy ground and rugged on the other side, so the Scots chose that place very intelligently to deny the numerical advantage of the English.

You force them to fight on a narrow front. It is always the key tactic if you are a smaller force versus a larger one. Savage, the heavily armed and well-mounted knight. Galloping towards the enemy who could resist. Against that, Robert Bruce will learn a lesson in previous battles. He would not be able to fight the English on his own terms if he stood there while the heavy horse attacked. Heavily armed knights. Galloping towards you, these men couldn't be expected to resist some of the stronger ones. Professional soldiers in Europe attack you, so in this battle he does, he has an innovation in this battle.

He has dug some trenches along the narrow battlefield. You can see here. It's a brilliant representation, so when the Cavalry arrives, the trench is completely against the pipes. Go up, any survivor who makes it through will enter a spike wall and this was the tactic that Robert the Bruce would use in this battle and several battles later, just long spikes giving the infantry protection against those huge horses. Horses won't willingly jump on those. The pikes are not suicidal and you can't force them to do it, so they will be thrown aside at the last moment and the charge will descend into chaos as it is now Robert, the Brewster Warrior of a At a young age, he and his brothers had been trained as Knights, he was well known for his leadership on the battlefield, unlike Edward II, who did not do so at the end of a later battle.

Robert the Bruce would kill someone in single combat before the battle began which gave a huge boost to his own side, unlike Emma II who I don't think you would have encountered in this situation, here you can see the filmmakers doing what they always do, which is breaking up the battle to make it more visual and more dramatic. and two fighting hand to hand, room to swing an ax or a sword. I think in this battle you would have found that that English charge ran into Spears' Scottish wall and the trenches and, in fact, there would have been a pushing, er, hand-to-hand combat. at the front, but then the English would have turned and fled.

I don't think there are that many fights. I don't think there are as many chaotic and anarchic fights in smaller groups of people. The foreigner does a great job. Showing the terrain, the soil in England, in Scotland, is very, very wet, the fields are much worse drained than today, it is quite wet today, horses get stuck, people in armor get stuck, people drown in the mud, I have no doubt. a Scottish chronicler wrote a beautiful account of this battle. um, he wrote the screams and cries of him. He stood up loud and clear. It was a painful noise to hear.

It's understandable. I think they went too heavy on the body count. Here you can see why. The director wants to make each scene as apocalyptic as possible, in fact we only think 100 people died in this battle, so what I think happened was the English charge came in, which is shown brilliantly here, they were frustrated by that. On the Spears wall there was some rgbaji which was that interface between the English and the Scots and there were the English who fled and in fact the Scots moved up the hill behind them so I actually think it would have been a little bit different but Overall this film gives you such a powerful feeling of a medieval northern European battle these heavily armed knights these horses this clash of infantry against horses the exhaustion the mud the face to face brutality shows a clash between Robert the Bruce and Edward II of England now with the second, I don't think he would have been willing to take on anyone in single combat, certainly not Robert the Bruce, who had fought all his life, a very successful leader of Guerrilla Warfare, now successful in the field Of battle, in many of us, it was a fact that you tried to decapitate the other enemy's army at the Battle of Shrewsbury.

Many efforts were made to kill Henry IV at Shrewsbury. They almost made it. Would you do it? It was a key battle tactic to attempt to decapitate the enemy army and kill their leader. Killing the king, that was the quickest way to achieve victory. I doubt Robert Bruce would let him stagger like that. I love the battle scenes in Braveheart. I love watching them grow, but I think the filmmakers have tried to take it to a level. I've made it dirtier and more real and I think in your description of Robert the Bruce's innovation of using these long pikes to persuade the English horses not to press their attacks, I think this is brilliant, they've got the trench there. you have the mud of the battlefield, you have the confusion which I really like and I think in Braveheart you have kind of burning logs and certain things that look a little more cinematic, but this feels like I like an authentic view of a medieval battle between England and Scotland.

The story can be awkward and sometimes you really want the key protagonist to be there when you want him and, annoyingly, Edward II wasn't here for this battle. I think they put it in. here in battle because they look forward to the great battle of Bannockburn 1314. The decisive victory of Robert the Bruce, that means that Scotland will be independent, it was never conquered by England and that battle you do have in the second on the battlefield . he wasn't leading his men as shown there and you also have Robert Bruce standing in the front row wielding his battle axe, so I think the filmmakers here have lightly illuminated two of these engagements in the Scottish Wars of Independence, the last of the year.

Mohicans, shows that this shows the British column moving through this clearing with forest on either side. I think realistically there would have been more explorers in those woods. They were notstupid, they were not suicidal, they knew how dangerous it was to march. Throughout this land, when the Native Americans owned this land, there would have been scouts in those woods in front and to the side of that foreign column. I have included this battle, although it did not actually take place like this, there was a massacre of British prisoners after the fall of Fort William Henry, but it was not as large as this one, as an entire British regiment was basically wiped out, although it is the most accurate description. brilliant story of the war on the American frontier in colonial times. period of the French Indian War of the 1750s, shows British redcoats in unknown terrain fighting indigenous peoples, in this case the Hurons led by Maguire and just for me it has echoes of a real historical event that was the Battle of Molonga Halo in which a British force was annihilated by the French and their Native American allies.

I find the images of the Clash of Cultures The Clash of Cultures fighting techniques so powerful in this clip in this film you get Carol Monroe and her horse there, the senior officers of the British battalions would have ridden in infantry times they would have been mounted on a horse, They can see the battlefield, but any of Captain and Below would have been on foot with their men. The camp follows women and children with the army. They would have absolutely been cooks and laundresses and would have supported their men, there would have been children there and you can also see some Native Americans allied to the British, suddenly there is an ambush on both sides at once and there are many accounts of the British forces.

Being ambushed in this way in the French Indian War, the Seven Years' War in North America, in a thick forest, the British were used to fighting in flat, open territories in Flanders, for example in present-day Belgium, They had to learn a different way to fight in North America. Their tactics of forming long lines and firing musket volleys did not work when there was a lot of cover and you could fire a volley and then advance for close combat. Native Americans did not have an indigenous way of producing weapons and gunpowder. They would. they traded them for beaver pelts, they stole them from the dead, the British or the French gave them to them depending on who they were allied with and they became experts in using them for hunting and fighting, it's terrifying and once it's that thin.

Red Line, once the British lines burst, the Native American troops that can make it get in between the British and their fighting skills, their physical conditioning, their agility can really come into play. Foreign pistol, very slow to reload, but devastating at close range, is not unusual. actually for the native americans to adopt the european children they raise them as native americans or indians as they were called at the time so its not an impossible story he used his rifle he was a great shot there would have been some, mostly there were muskets. the battlefield, but it must be determined whether a slot in the barrel and the projectile can be pushed out with greater speed and precision so that the rifles can move away with much more precision.

The British hacks here are accustomed to using the Tomahawk to scalp one of the greatest musical scores of all. Maybe we should also say in passing brilliant music before dying and this is Colonel Monroe, who did not die in the William Henry procedure, but General Braddock dies at Monongahela. It was not unusual for British forces to lose senior officers in ambushes. I chose this because it really explores the different types of fighting, the two styles of fighting that are seen in this terrible war being fought along the colonial frontier in the 18th century. Both are very effective on European battlefields.

The massive musket volleys were devastating, but in the woods and on the Broken Ground, in the heat and uncertainty of North America, the more relaxed and much more hand-to-hand the nature of Native American fighting was, it would prove absolutely lethal and, to win in North America, You had to accept both, you would have to train your men to win in both, it was a difficult task. What I love about the scene is that there is no CGI, there is a physicality here, a realism here that is just excellent. Michael Mann worked with Daniel Day Lewis Daniel.

Davis lived in the desert for months before this, he's as expert with his tools as Tomahawk, his rifle takes off, takes off, it's almost as if a part of him has a liquid movement. They recruited about 9,100 Native Americans from across the United States, so you get a real sense of the scale, the mass, the noise of the battlefield and, again, the physicality of that way of warfare. Cold Mountain, so this is Cold Mountain, this represents the battle called the Battle of the Crater that was part of the Siege of Petersburg. and the march of the northern armies toward Richmond, the Confederate capital, in 1860 1465, took place on July 30, 1864.

And it's a great reminder, it represents trench warfare in the 19th century and trench warfare was quite common in the United States Civil War. was common in other wars of the late 9th century, it was no surprise in 1914 and here it is, the Union forces have found a way to try to break the trench stalemate without attacking them in human wave formations and being shot down. but by tunneling under enemy lines, packing a charge of gunpowder, a charge of explosives there and then lighting a fuse, this shows life in the Confederate trenches, it is daylight, in fact, the fuse was very complicated, it was incredible, look at this detonation, it was a lot.

More complicated than that, they had to relight the fuse a couple of times. In reality, it happened at night, around 4:40 in the morning. It's dark, but it was a big explosion. The Union Army was supposed to send a unit from a black African division. -The Americans who train tirelessly were very prepared at the last minute the day before they were withdrawn and white troops were inserted in their place, but then look what happens, they go down instead of going around the edges of the box, they enter the crater, these untrained and unprepared. The men charge towards the crater and they run into the steep other side of the crater, they move at the bottom but the Confederate troops at the top start raining murderous fire on them and I think this part is, I think this part here is. one of the most savage performances of war I have ever seen, they got them to gather on the ridge line of the crater and rain fire on the Union troops trapped there.

I like this part. There's a nice detail here next to those, uh, Stars and Stripes, the US flag, you see a unit with yellow cross-chambered flags that is actually the 14th New York Artillery. They had been garrison troops firing large Manning artillery guns around places like Washington DC protecting it in case of a Confederate attack now that Ulysses S Grant, the commander of the American forces advancing towards the Confederate capital in Richmond, Virginia, men like this They had been sent to the front, they were no longer needed by Garrison, so they were some of the first troops to enter the crater on that fateful day.

The unit would suffer terribly both in this battle and throughout the siege of Petersburg. Foreign African American soldier. There were some African American soldiers who were sentenced as reinforcements, but they intended to send this crack unit of African Americans, no one knows why they didn't. Maybe they didn't want the white troops to get the glory, maybe they were worried that if it went wrong they would have been accused of sacrificing black Americans, no one knows for sure, but it was a disaster for the Union forces, it could have lifted them. . could have been a breakthrough in The Siege, it kind of brought water to Quicken, but it didn't and I remember reading somewhere during the making of this movie that they actually showed the execution of a black soldier who surrendered for a Confederate soldier and this was one of the worst battlefield massacres in the Civil War.

Hundreds of African Americans were murdered in cold blood after they had surrendered. They have been captured after the Battle of the Crater. The siege of Petersburg which is the Battle of the Crater. Only one tragic episode extends from the summer of 1864 to the spring of 1865. It is a savage positional battle much like the battles of World War I that would occur a couple of generations later, in the end, the Union troops they broke. through the siege lines and are able to capture the Confederate capital, Richmond, Virginia, just a few hours later, because it is only a few miles north, it was the end of the Confederacy, but it came at a terrible price.

I really want to include this clip because I thought we have classical warfare, medieval warfare, we have early modern warfare, the colonial era, this is 19th century warfare and it's a mix of modern warfare that we recognize later in the 20th century. , you have longer range weapons, you have much more firepower and explosives, but also the men are still crushed, they are still holding their battle flags up, they are attacking in large numbers, so the US Civil War It is a bloody and horrible war because it occurs right at the junction of these two guys. of different ways of waging war and unites the ancient and the modern All quiet on the Western Front.

I would say this is reasonably early in the First World War. If you look at the equipment on the uniforms, the amounts of barbed wire on the battlefield are not enough. They would have been so intense later in the war, but you can see the fields with jumbled bodies littering No Man's Land. These long, straight trenches are more typical of the early years of World War I, as seen in a very organized event on perhaps a counter. -The German attack and doctrine were after an Allied attack trying to immediately counterattack while disorganized. It seems like it could well be a case of that, but it's already quite late in the war, they'd have the steel helmets sooner.

In the war, they had the leather with the famous spiked helmets that was so favored by souvenir hunters, oh my goodness, there will be spaces like that in The Wire so your troops can get out between your own barbed wires. Well, pretty quickly, everyone activates and control breaks down, although there are only a number of individuals out there, you would look for any cover you could on the battlefield, you raised your head up to an inch or two, you could easily, you could easily attract to the enemy sniper. shoot when you're in no man's land, you're alone, so I said you just have, you can be pinned in that position all day, you have the food and ammunition with you, you had to be self-sufficient. enough and I hope that maybe you can return at dusk in this period.

Interestingly, all the German troops were armed with rifles, very good Mauser rifles, but you don't see some of the weapons systems that started to be introduced a little later to give the infantry more firepower, they picked up their entrenchment tool and swords or entrenchments were incredibly important in this period; He actually uses them to bludgeon and stab a French infantryman, but they would have been that he would have taken out his entrenching tool and tried to dig up, scrape up some dirt, try to get underground and that initially, actually, in the decade 1940s, how the first trenches were formed when men dug underground linking that with a neighboring Foxhole and before you know it, you have a continuous line. stretching from the Alps to the channel coast.

I didn't know he was going to use that tool to stab a Frenchman. At this point, the Allies were not shooting at armored vehicles known as tanks and we know it, especially on the first occasions. when they were used, they terrified the enemy, their impact was both mental and physical, they were tracked. Vehicles, they were able to cross no man's land, the broken ground, the mud that would have stuck any other vehicle and they had armor. the outside so that the bullets from the rifles, the bullets from the machine guns could ricochet off them, they were also armed with an artillery piece at times and machine guns depending on the tank, these are French from their charm and I think they are not very reliable, they are not used, that is often interesting, they have chosen this tank, please show the tanks very effectively, in reality, the tanks were very prone to failure, they really fought and would.

The idea that they would move forward this way is probably the best case scenario, many of them were vulnerable to failure and here you see them stuck together. grenades on the tracks infantry certain infantrymen could overtake the tanks in the way you are seeing here terrifying ideally the tank should advance with the infantry hand in glove the infantry hiding behind the tanks taking cover the tank crushing any obstacles the infantry movingthrough barbed wire like that and then infantry able to suppress any enemy resistance that's around the tanks, but you see that and you see the French following them here, they have their flamethrowers later in the war, you start getting weapons like flamethrower. you get trench mortars, you get handheld machine guns, which means the infantry has more and more firepower.

I think this is very realistic as the war progresses, you have more of a mix in the rear of where you have the tanks and you also have infantry sails, different types of weapons, it looks much more like a later battlefield. World War I, this, overall, is a completely horrific depiction of the horror that those men face day in and day out and I think you see it. in the actors and you see it in the faces of those infantrymen at the end of the war, they would have been so degraded that they would have been so traumatized.

All Silence on the Western Front is actually based on a very, very famous novel, written by a guy who was a German in World War I. It's one of the classic Great War novels written before World War II, but in many ways it predicts many of the trends that would lead Germany into the hands of the far right. of Hitler and seeing Europe plunged once again into a terrible conflict in the Second World War. I think it was in the Czech Republic where they created this vast space something like 10 football fields wide where they built a first world battlefield and there's something horrible about it. but it is also something incredible, something overwhelming, it is something very difficult to see, you are amazed, you are amazed but you are also shocked.

I feel like the top prize has been a little overlooked by filmmakers who grew up, the early World War films, World War II really dominated recently, that's been rectified and it's great to see more filmmakers turning their attention to that atrocious conflict of 1917. It was a great film, but I included this one because I wanted to show something from the German point of view, what is the impact of tanks as a psychological weapon when you are a defender and what this does so brilliantly is that shows the horror of the day. -The current brutality of the Western Front, where you exist in this destroyed lunar landscape of mud and death, but you also see how technologies and war change, and this is a vital link between what happened before and the second world war we are experiencing .

I'm coming to Saving Private Ryan when I meet with the D-Day Veterans. I asked them what it was like and it's surprising how many of them say just go and watch the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan. There are inaccuracies, of course, there are inaccuracies. The film is not a documentary. Things are done for dramatic effect, but there's something about the way Spielberg creates this scene that makes it so believable. It was a revolution in cinema. There's a guy throwing up on the side of the landing craft. There they were, but. They had been circling the boats all night They were very seasick Many of them wanted to get to shore They were hungry They had vomited up the previous night's food They were in bad condition Omar was the bloodiest of the landing craft beach oxen They were brave men they would have to go to the beach back to the beach back to the beach to pick up more troops to shelter them they knew what was on the beach they are incredibly brave having escaped from the Firestone they have to go back to that again and again I think that level of self control is another good thing, the classic lines that I will see on the beach the men would have been wet and cold, it was a nice gloomy day and that part of the English The canal was cold even in June, the ramp goes down, It is one of the most shocking moments in the history of cinema.

I remember seeing this at the time. Very innovative use of cinematography. Everyone on the landing craft dies at that point. A fight with German machine guns. If he had fired that quickly, the barrel would have melted from the heat, but that is a forgivable exaggeration. The beach is a little narrow here. The tide would have been higher. They had a lot of ground to cover. Plenty of flat Sandy Bottom to cover before. made on the gravel beach Spielberg puts them a little closer. I think they could also be upside down, but according to Robert Capper's original photos, those beach obstacles are upside down, but again there is a small detail where the alien was much taller.

The German defenders were there when you go there, you can't believe why the allies tried to land there. The German defenders were entrenched on higher ground. By bad luck, the German defenders were actually awake that night for a rehearsal, a training exercise, so they were more prepared than on other beaches and as a result the first waves of the American attack were decimated, almost some units annihilated. It's very difficult, it is very difficult even now to read the accounts of the first wave in Omaha there There are many stories of D-Day veterans who saw this film for the first time and were traumatized by having flashbacks and it must be deeply shocking to see it.

Yes, and this is the key to D-Day: it is about small, well-led groups of very brave people. men advancing with the right equipment, you can see now that they are organizing to make that leap to the German defenses and simply probing holes in Hitler's Atlantic Wall, the Atlantic Wall was strong but very fragile and when a hole was made and you infiltrated it, it became very, very vulnerable because you could move behind it in a circle and flank the enemy, so the key was to get tow holes just to put punctures in that Atlantic wall, that's what they're doing, that Now we're aiming to get our group to win first and once they're up against that boardwalk they'll have a little more cover and they'll be able to determine what the next step is, try to suppress those bunkers and then once they express their monkeys break through that Atlantic Wall, that big defensive line, you're in the fields behind it, you can deploy, you can take the Germans from the rear, you can outflank them, and although it's a brutal process, once you break it, once you get into that. wall, the rest will fall more easily because this movie is so powerful and so well made that it obscures all the other realities of D-Day.

Everyone thinks this is what D-Day was like. In fact, Omaha Beach, the first wave of Omaha. It was the toughest of all the D-Day fighting. There were other beaches, some fighting at Swords Gold and Juno Canadian Beach, where there was much less German resistance and there was a very, very brief period of violence before the German defenses were penetrated. . It was in Omaha that it was a long and brutal process, so what the filmmaker did here was take the bloodiest worst part of D-Day and use it to tell the story of The Landings, so maybe we get an exaggerated idea of ​​how horrible That was all along the way. coast, but on some of the other beaches the casualties were quite low, this has to be on the list because the beach landings when Private Ryan was saved have gone down as one of the most recognizable iconic war scenes of all time .

There may be some historical accuracies, but it's brilliantly made, revolutionary for the time, and features D-Day, which is one of the most famous military events in history. Well, those are my battles. I hope you enjoyed my interpretation of them. Let me know what you think by leaving a comment below. and if you have any suggestions let me know too. If you like the movie, you can catch me reviewing battle scenes from the early modern period, Age of Empires, right here, thanks for watching.