Actually it's been over two hundred years. I'm not particularly fond of the Brits. They haven't gotten over The Revolutionary War of The War Of 1812. They're rude and condecsending of America even after having bailed their asses out of two world wars.

Why do the soldiers just march and walk forward, while the enemy is shooting at them. Why did they take turns shooting?

@@johnmcdonald9304 You are a person with no knowledge of what transpired in 1812 or the 2 world wars, if you did then how did your Pacific fleet get destroyed at Pearl harbour , it would appear you dislike the English, news for you I am majority an Irish man who served in both the RAF and the ARMY what have you done cretin

Potato gaming literally the dumbest type of warfare.

@@anthonysharp1490 It wasn't the entire fleet that was destroyed, but a setback yes indeed. It also galvanized America. In any event, I take you at face value. My father and uncle both served in WWII, as did my paternal grandfather and others of my family. My father served in the Pacific Theater of War; my uncle was with Patton, and was in the Battle of the Bulge. In WWII, the United States and England were staunch allies against perhaps the greatest evil to ever come forth upon the face of the earth. This is what means the most to me in the relationship between our two nations; despite our hostile beginning. Be well.

Thx man it truly is awesome

when you upgrade your lvl 1 gun too much it gets overpowered

Same

How about the guy that lost his leg

Badass for sure

I love the smeel of gunpowder in the morning

i would prefer mg42 thankyou very much

Me

You see go find a video made by a guy called Brandon. Those musket would sound louder and harder it's hard to describe when loaded with a real cartridge.

Meanwhile in Napoleon Total War, they sound like firecrackers.

still love that game!

ahahahaha lol

watch that sequence in slow motion and you will see that they show them armed with a hodgepodge of weapons. Some have Rifles, some have muskets one guy has a blunderbuss.

he simply hates the English. I guess next he will be fighting them in Australia. as a home boy, I guess that will be easy.

MarxistKnight hehe...damn right

MarxistKnight and both from England, #LOL

Not to forget his heroics at Gallipoli.

Thanh Tran he will fight both the british and the jews.

ah yes

20 minutes? I'd watch a 4 hour movie of a battle taking place in real time.

One of the few accurate things in this film!

The rebel colonists were useless before French resources and manpower arrived.

@@JetstreamAviation747 fr

@@JetstreamAviation747 sarcasm?

@@robloxrobloxeverybodyroblox nope.

That dying colonial was none other than Odo from Deep Space Nine.

@@Rockhound6165 Is it okay for me to say I like Dax better? Terry is so pretty. Odo comes in a close second. ( sorry worf, you join the station a tad late )

Gabriel should have gone for a head shot

The priest(or Quaker) has always been one of my favorite characters from that movie. A gentle man forced to show his warlike prowess is a trope that I'll always love.

British veteran regulars musket accuracy: stormtrooper% Random militia man from the streets of boston musket accuracy: 101% I'm all for movies that portray the revolutionary war, I just don't think they should be hyperbolized.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH so true! I just stepped on one about a month ago... it was like getting shot with a 38 special through the foot

Thank you Arthur Morgan

Lol maybe its a lego land mine

When I was a kid my family rewound and rewatched that scene a dozen times. I've never forgotten it. It'd be a good quick way to go though, better than infection or surgery for sure.

What about dying from infection of losing your leg and blood loss?

@@andrewjackson1379 I was about to say that. Getting your head blown off like that probably doesn't make you pretty enough for an open-casket funeral, but at least you'll be dead before the pain stimuli even reaches the pain receptors.

The dude turned into the headless horseman.

At least it was quick and painless. But, imagine if it didn’t decapitate you and you had to feel the pain.

Thats cap bro I need proof.

@@YEEEEEBoaiwhat do you want his powder horn 😂

nottrue

Mel Gibson is a true Patriot and has 3 of the best movies I ever watched the patriot braveheart and we where soldiers once all have meaning to me cause of my scotch Irish heritage

you are damn right my dude

Or dodgeball

The laugh will be shipped within 2-3 business days. Estimated delivery: June 16 - July 2 Item returned to sender.

Got that right soldier

Really? Os very young

@@FernandoRojas-du3sg He died in 2008.

LMAO

I believe there was a bridge involved at the Battle of Stirling Bridge, unlike what we saw in Braveheart...

@@cleverusername9369 correct

What a fucked up mix American and Australian. Bet you he never shuts the fuck up . He plays general drunk a lot .

Yes, Mel Gibson was America's best general from the Revolution, through the Braveheart time period, right up until Mad Max, that is why America Rocks bro!

WALN Zell lmao

Lmao

Order 1778

Antiochus III the Great well either way their way of fighting is madness

It was a civil war. Estimates vary between 100,000 and 250,000 loyalists fled to Canada and Britain after independence. They lost their lands, businesses and many were killed. This has been largely covered up, because the agenda has always been to frame it an "us vs them", but it never was like that. The patriots were always a minority (with the backing of the wealthy, lying media and the French) and independence was eventually forced upon the majority without democratic mandate.

@bob Yes, the media (anti-British) propaganda were the CNN of the day. Look at the portrayal of what happened at Boston for instance. A small group of British soldiers were attacked by a mob, guns were fired and 5 people were killed. They only reported one side, and named it "The Boston Massacre". Imagine what would happen in America today, if a small group of armed police officers were attacked by a large angry mob. If the mob didn't disperse, a lot more than 5 would be killed. That's just one example, unfortunately the British lost the propaganda war before the shooting even started.

@bob "bob replied: "methylene5 Lying Media, ? What CNN? And the French were at war with the British, we done the same." I was replying to your earlier comment, which has since vanished. I was showing the media was rather one sided, which it was.

​@@methylene5 It seems that you would have preferred an alternative past where the US remained part of the empire well into the future but it is clear that the US and Britain could not coexist as a united system. British and American values are too distinct. Look at Britain today. We should be happy for the war that we are not like the British.

ikr

Movies would suck if its realistix

An officer ofthe time wrote that a trained man with a well made smooth-bore musket could reasonably expect to hit man-sized target ay 150 yards, less at 200and beyondthst "you mights well fire at the moon!"

Everybody standing shoulder-to-shoulder ... you gonna hit something - every time.

In the war, The gunpowder made the bullet shoot farther than they do today

That is insane way of battle. I couldn't imagine. Knowing you ar going to die.

Honestly a pretty fucking stupid way to fight all things considered. I think the only reason it even started is the technologically advanced British were mostly fighting against people without guns. I mean c'mon.

Good old days

@@MC_swampmonster Really? I hate the lobsters and would love to hear about their use of bio-weapons in that period

Pfff the dumbest type of figthing each other, looking at the enemys rifle and waiting to get hit

@Napoleon Milos did they not have organ gun type guns? Multiple barrels attached to the same carriage that could be fired one after the other? Or did that not come till later

there was a little known weapon called a 'Puckle Gun' that was essentially a big revolver that fired little cannon balls

@@peacebewithyou911 They had organ guns for a while. King Henry VIII had one. However they were not used in the Revolutionary war

@Heofonfyr25 Because a lot of movies still think that roundshot aka the most common round used in Cannons back them explode when in reality they didn’t

@Heofonfyr25 Yeah same

Just get darth mod, adds a ton of new stuff, improved graphical effects, new sounds, and the muskets actually sound like muskets.

Remake it because I do like certain features from Napoleon and Shogun 2's campaign multiplayer. I can't remember it. I'll update this comment when I play NTW and Shogun 2

I can give it to u but

BRING IT! Can't STAND this fantasy BS the Total War franchise is hooked on now.

Or Napoleon 2

If only it was this easy in Total War.

thefoolishgmodcube lollllll yes just stop a chain rout that way.

Dark Vadertrauebrein I was obviously displaying sarcasm

Ninja with a repeating flintlock.

Wow you're such a manly man's man!

And if a woman does that, is she a man?

@@Amp661 Id say we would be. We do have man in our gender name after all.

"Don't fire until you see the greens of their teefs!" {austin powers}

It’s “Don’t fire until you see the whites in their eyes”

@@sirknight6283 Don't fire unless there is time to run away.

The British didn't have the best infantry, it had the best navy (French and Prussians had the best infantry)

@@abrahamvargas3272 wrong. British red coats were the best marksmen. Hence the biggest empire of all time

They defeated the Brits because they got helped by 3 World powers (Spain, France and Netherlands) and the Brits were fighting Napoleon's France the same time.

@@robzsarmy5471 Yes but still they faced them in open battle(; that is badass bro

@@jonaspianomusic3101 Thats true

@@jmcb5062 *human beings fighting for king and country

The Brown Bess was actually effective up to 109 yards, the pistols could be effective at 30 yards

you do realise the Continental Army had access to Kentucky Rifles which were more accurate than smoothbore muskets right?

The Americans were British before they made America America 🇬🇧➡️🏝➡️🇺🇸

Jett Mcleod not all Americans at the time were British, a lot of the settlers came from other countries

oCombatIV or Colonies

@@oCombatIV actually very few did. It was almost entirely British.

Actually only about one third of the colonists were British. I learned it in history class....

Zealot!

there’s a lot of redcoats in that film

"Hugs" from America.

@@jmcb5062 the States did repay France back in 1917 in fact when the Americans began to arrive they had signs on the ships that said Lafayette (the French command during the Revolution) we have arrived.

err that’s not true

@@feliciajanes1610 yes it is. Britain was crushing America in the civil war for a while, they probably won most battles of the civil ear.

That doesn't make Mel's career look good.....

Press F to pay respects

How? The Patriot ISN'T a quality movie...

@@Pikkabuu That's a matter of opinion? Just like your picture "ISN'T" a quality image!!!!!!!!!

@@georgejcking No. It is a fact that the Patriot is pseudohistorical movie that is whitewashing US history and paints the British as VERY evil.

it basically is

The worst ways to die 😩

Well if they were to do something like pick them up, their line would fall and would be prone of breaking. So if you do anything that can cause the line to be delayed for a millisecond, you'd get shot by an officer

Yeah boi

Nothing Is True Everything Is Permitted

The French weren't helping us, they just hated the British and wanted to ruin the American colonies for them. France wasn't a Republic during the American Revolution. In fact, the French monarchy was particularly tyrannical and cruel. The British monarchy actually wasn't really tyrannical, King George III was only tyrannical in comparison to George Washington, but every leader looks tyrannical when you compare them to the likes of George Washington. The whole myth that "France and the US were allies who believed in Republicanism and fought against the dastardly British Empire in the cause of freedom and liberty!" Is a complete lie. Again, France was always far more tyrannical than Britain was and France didn't even become a Republic until the 1790s - 20 years after the American Revolution. People often think that France was the first Republic in Europe, but that title actually belongs to England. In the 17th century, the English monarch started becoming tyrannical and attempted to emulate the absolute power that French monarch's wielded. The English did not like the idea of a Monarch with absolute power at all. And, in 1649, they killed the king and became a Republic known as the 'Commonwealth of England' under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell. The English monarchy was reestablished a few years later, under the condition that the Monarch does not attempt to take absolute power and become tyrannical like a typical French monarch. England beheaded their King and became a Republic 150 years before France ever did it. The English/British have always been very individualistic and suspicious of authority, and that's probably where Americans get it from too. The French lived under an extremely tyrannical monarchy for centuries before they began fighting back, meanwhile the English overthrew and executed their King after just a few years of slowly increasing tyranny. Interestingly, most American colonists were actually Loyalists during the English Civil War and were against the execution of the King and did not support Oliver Cromwell.

@@Dushmann_ You are oversimplifying the motivations behind French involvement in the American Revolution. While it is true that France was a historic rival of Britain and sought to weaken their global influence. France did provide significant financial and military aid to the US and also supported the American cause on moral grounds. Characterizing the French Monarchy as tyrannical & Cruel is a bit of a subjective statement. Compared to what or whom? What is the big deal about who was a republic first? So what? Who gives a rat's ass? Are republics the be-all-end-all of polity in your mind or what? I agree that comparing King George III with Washington is not a valid historical comparison. With regard to England being the "first republic in Europe": While the execution of King Charles I in 1649 did establish the Commonwealth of England and temporarily abolished the monarchy, remember that England later restored the monarchy under different conditions. The title of the "first republic" depends on specific definitions and historical contexts. France became a republic in 1792, but you cannot say that England remained a republic after Cromwell. That is just bogus. England briefly became a republic in the 17th century with the execution of King Charles I. However, this event was followed by the restoration of the monarchy, and England remained a constitutional monarchy, not a republic. The French Revolution, which led to the establishment of the First French Republic, occurred in the late 18th century. The idea that the French lived under "extremely tyrannical monarchy for centuries" oversimplifies French history, and the causes of the French Revolution were multifaceted. The American colonists were not involved in the English Civil War, which took place in the 17th century. The English Civil War primarily concerned political and religious conflicts within England, not the American colonies. You are oversimplifying history and basically just throwing a bucket of shit at the wall. Sure some of what you say sticks, but some of it also stinks!

Did he die in the film? Since he survived the revolution in real life I believe

@@juanlmec Col William Tavington (played by Jason Isaacs) was based loosely on real life British cavalry officer Sir Banastre Tarleton. Tarelton had a reputation for violence, although he never burned a church full of civilians or executed POW's, that was fiction for the movie. In the film Tavington dies (as seen at the end of this video), but Tarleton survived the war and died in England over 50 years later aged 78.

@@penguin8669 since you can survive being stabbed in the neck i like saying that he survived

@@penguin8669 Well the film needed their obvious villain.

@@penguin8669 he cut down surrendering americans, he was horrible irl

idk if that's waxhaw considering we don't see any British cavalry in that scene

for me its the worst part. For me this is the best part 1:59

@Gavin Bailey killing for the same cause? Of how?

@Gavin Bailey That is absurd. I don't recall that the Patriots were fighting for monarch, in which case, they weren't. They were fighting for their own independence just because of some taxes and common mistake. Killing for cowardice? I think you need to reread your history book instead of spilling words that hold no meanings

@Gavin Bailey Instead of calling me an ass, learn to use specific points in the argument that you make that will limit the chance to cause confusion, dumbfuck

​@Gavin Bailey "They were all fighting for the monarch. They were fighting to gain dominance over the colony to use it as their own. A Red Coat is a Red Coat. Otherwise, as I said, killed for cowardice." Gavin, if you would critically analyse what you've been taught with the vantage of modern hindsight, you'd understand that what you said is propaganda at the time, and unfortunately is still taught as "history" in the US. The vast majority of people in the colonies did NOT want independence from Britain, that is an undisputed fact. Even with the lies being printed about the British, there was never more than about 1/3 support for independence. Do you know how much the British were taxing each colonist, on average? 1 shilling per annum, or £0.05. Average annual pay was about £5 in the colonies, that's a 1% tax. After the 7 years war, in which the French attempted to forcibly remove the English speaking people from North America, the British ended up with £70,000,000 debt, which doubled Britain's national debt to about 137 million, and nearly bankrupted Britain. At the rate the colonies were being taxed, 2.5 million colonists x 1 shilling = £125,000 per year. It would have taken 560 yrs to pay off that debt. However, they had no intention of paying a dime. They said that because they "helped" in the 7 yrs war, they were even. Not an ounce of gratitude for that, nowhere in the Declaration of Independence did they make any mention of plans to pay any of that money back. Just the lame excuse of lack of representation, etc. But they did have "some" representation, by parliament on their behalf. King George III did not have the power to dictate, he had to answer to parliament. In time they would have got the representation that historical sources claimed they wanted. The money was being raised for defense, King George III should have just said, fine we won't tax you at all then. But we won't defend you either, so get ready for 10%+ tax hike so you can defend yourselves. Or perhaps not even bothered helping in the 7 yrs war either.

Did you just forget the part where those soldiers and cavalrymen set fire to the estate, killed multiple unarmed civilians and wounded soldiers, kidnapped forcibly conscripted people, and stole all those horses and oxen? That was the Tavington character that ordered all that and the soldiers and the cavalrymen under his command did so. That scene establishes that he is a rogue officer and a villain.

That’s fire from the explosion of the canon wen the gun powder exploded

Well it's America so it's ok toby hell if they did make a movie like you said the Viennese the USA is so good it would have opposite effect and it would piss of the vietnese

Mel Gibson is just an asshole

Good point.

I agree but both are fun to watch

@@moesyzslak2939 The hell are Viennese and vietnese