The New World: A Beautiful Mess 

Helmets of this period are all over the place, they chose to equip him as a slightly out of date cuirassier, had they gone up to date with an English Savoyard harness it would have looked very odd indeed and detracted from the movie.

Your 13 year old self would have been happy about the swords.

I doubt colonists would have had the most up to date armor anyway 😐 please review Cold Mountain.

This man is a heretic! To the cross! For the lord!

@@craftpaint1644 That film probably has one of the most accurate portrayal of the Civil War battle to date.

Ah you were eating healthy chicken nuggets

@@seanriedel8933 Not so much, haha. A chicken salad sandwich. Not a salad with chicken, lol!

@@perciusmandate still, much healthier than mcnuggets

@@robjones1328 stop trying to condemn this man!

But do you watch Knightfall tho?

Also it was so true to the movie it made me laugh

Don’t poop in the river ! That’s how Cholera starts ! 💩 🦠 🌊🤢☠️

@@bmyers8356 That thought had crossed my mind.

Also, don't poop in the river right next to someone who's washing their crockery and cutlery in the river while a boatload of tourists with cameras is going by, unless you really want to be famous on the internet when they get home. Yeah, that happened. For the record, I was on the boat, not pooping.

@@Sableagle a likely story. (looks at you dubiously)

yeah I highly doubt a Rebel strike team could destroy that much without some alarm being raised I mean come on you're telling me that not a single Imperial tech saw what was happening on an Imperial world with very tight security.

Solo is a poor imitation of history. Trench warfare didn't look like that!

Many Bothans gave their lives in the making of "The Making Of..." that movie.

@@euansmith3699 They all contractionally have to say they enjoyed the experience though.

@@jonathonrodriguezthomas6457 I completely. They treated the Imperials like they were completely blind. I get that the rebels are the heroes, but honestly I think the villains would've been more intimidating if they used any common sense like deploying the garrison

Siiiiighh. That would be me.

I like my chicken nuggets good sir and I saw one, ONE episode. I thought it had potential...

@@LadyTylerBioRodriguez getting real.

Top 5 worst humans:. 5. Stalin 4. Mitch mcconnell 3. Himmler 2. Hitler 1. Tyler who watches knightfall

@@taloob493 My aunt would probably agree. Plus I'm a papist. Real wretched sinner.

The scale of agriculture also varied by location and population. South and central america were much more heavily farmed than most realized. Many of the rainforests of today are not that old relatively.

I read something once about English settlers moving west, into lands that had not seen armed conflict between Europeans and Native Americans, but where the population had nevertheless been decimated by disease, and the English were amazed to find what appeared to be overgrown, untended orchards, with fruit trees lined up in rows, and they had no idea who could possibly have planted them, to the point where they speculated that they had grown that way naturally, like large-scale fairie rings.

The notion of the "untamed forest" might stem from the reasoning the settlers used to take Native Land - that the Natives did not "manage" it and thus had no right to it. We might still, collectively, believe the lies of our forefathers. As for the more sustainable Management of nature being "economics", you're damn right. And while I'm Sure most of us agree that we don't want to live like the Native Americans in the 17th century (medicine, education, a State with a Monopoly on force, democracy and many other things are real nice to have), there are lessons to be learned on how to conduct our own economics. If not in Practice, then in "spirit", if you'll allow me that Joke. Sustainability is not a "nice to have" for our economies, it is an absolute necessity, and for that to become a reality we will need to downsize parts of it. And ya'll need to pick up small-scale farming/gardening. Calling it now!

If there were deer around, they consumed them...as the settlers learned to kill and eat as well. One good size buck could feed a family for quite a while if salt or smoke cured

I completely agree and I've often said the same thing. I'm certain if native Americans were given access to modern equipment in 1492 they would have done exactly what we did with it

One day ago?!

Wait, does shitting in the woods not make me morally superior to you?

@@sebastiansullivan6450 I was about to say that

@@sebastiansullivan6450 he probably has videos available early for patrons. That happens a lot, apparently

I always think of Jesus with diaper rash. 😁

He forgot the follow-up questions: "are the swords on display correct to the period? And are they used in a fashion that matches their design?" Spoiler: the answer to those two questions is frequently "no." :-P

I'm a history nerd, I generally ask "Are there 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 guns in this film? The answer is usually no. And anyone who mentions "Battleship" is getting shot.

@@jamesharding3459 Under Siege

"Phrasing Mother!"

and they better go clang clang clang!

And don’t forget they gotta swish swoosh

I used to like swords in movies. Then I started getting into medieval history and now I HATE swords in movies. Nothing's ever period correct in terms of armor or weapons. Everyone's wearing various bits of leather "armor" of dubious efficacy, and so, so many random metal studs arranged in various patterns, and so, so many random smelly furs. Worse, it becomes painfully obvious how bad the fights always look when you know a bit about how swordplay was actually done. It's just really hard to not notice the actors are mostly just swinging at each other's swords rather than trying to kill each other- and sometimes if you freeze the frame their swings often miss by several FEET. It's understandable for safety's sake, but it doesn't make for a very immersive or authentic experience as an audience member. Worst of all is fire arrows. I hate fire arrows so much, I won't even start on fire arrows. There's only a few movies I can think of that do swords some type of justice. Off the top of my head I recommend _Rob Roy_ and _The Duelists_ for some near-realistic sword fight scenes. If you like swashbuckling on the seas, I highly recommend _Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World._ It's the most historically accurate movie I've ever seen and it's also very entertaining. There are many swords, or at least upwards of several.

@@choronos I'm fine with close enough (long sword being too long, or something) or weapons, fighting/talking style, and clothing showing character (flashy man has shiny sword)

The pamphlet known as "Knightfall" is nothing but shameless Popery!

Now youve done it

@@danielt.9101 beat me to it

Damn, I would love that!

This literature is the work of the devil himself! Douglas MacKinnon, Rick Jacobson, Metin Huseyin, David Wellington, Samira Radsi, Thou art wretched sinners, utterly unworthy o’ God’s love. A fountain o’ pollution is deep within thy natures, and thou livest as winter trees; unprofitable, fit only to be hewn down and burned. Steep thy lives in prayer, and hope that God sees fit to show mercy upon thy corrupted souls.

This makes so much sense.

@@o0Avalon0o in my marriage the heating is always being bargained on

Ohhhh, they're *Carolina parakeets*! I was wondering what parrots were doing on the East Coast in the 1600s. I feel silly (but better informed)!

That's not saying much.

The Patriot is a pretty low bar for historical accuracy, like a couple centimeters up from the ground low.

LMAO!

There are plenty of wildly stupidly inaccurate movies. I think the reason the Patriot gets singled out is that the cast is absolutely killing it the entire movie. It's just so well acted, and not in a pretentious arthouse way. Those people were clearly enjoying playing those roles. Especially Jason Isaacs. I think the frustration is at what otherwise should be a very good movie.

Naturalism!

I’m from Williamsburg and it was jarring to recognize background trees from the scenes on the chickahominy river

My parents live in South Carolina now. I visited them in August a few years ago, and I'm pretty sure that's what hell feels like. Hell is always traditionally depicted as fiery, but I personally think hell is disgustingly moist. Your socks are always wet, you're always soaked in sweat, and nothing ever gets dry- that's what awaits you in hell.

@@choronos Yeah it wasnt until i went to arizona that i realized i hate the humidity and not the heat!

I live a few minutes from the events portrayed in this film. I wonder how people then could hack it. On top of that, the first colonists didn't have mild winters. Much of Jamestown burned in early January 1608, during a time remembered as the Great Frost.

Modern? The most asked question in the history of mankind. Each day it's asked around 8 billion times, give or take.

As Douglas Adams wrote: The three phases of civilization can be described by the questions, How can we eat? Why do we eat? and finally Where shall we have lunch? And if Terry Pratchett had written it perhaps it may have been: How should I poop, What does it mean to poop, and Oh god why are the toilets in this airport out of order?

21st Century person: The toiltet Atun Shei: The riverside Me: I see, a man of culture

@@mikaelleonbriones6356 Ah yes, the *T O I L T E T*

Deuteronomy 23:13 would indicate that it's actually one of the most fundamental questions of human society. Also, heh-heh, "fundament".

Just like Kingdom of Heaven. Great film (when watching the Director's Cut) but GOD is the main character like a piece of wood because of his anachronistic anti-religious angst.

It's an easy claim to throw out there with no back up. He fit the time as much as anyone else.

You may love it, but it's not reality. Just a feeling you have. Plus you are too vague in your comment to even have any logical point. So, feel better?

@@earnthis1 Coockoo! Coockoo! Coockoo!

@@earnthis1 clown 🤡

@@earnthis1 🤓🤓

I did actually. Although I didn't have the nuggets this time. That was the blinkest cannibal episode.

And watching Knightfall.

I jumped, but I don’t watch Knightfall😂

My favorite skit of his was the one where he is a nazi who is fighting a Russian soldier to not be taken but then an "aw shucks" American comes in and the Nazi instantly surrenders and asks for a great new life in the US as a rocket scientist :)

Such a drama kid it's beautiful

theatre kid I should have said

I read that as skirt at first...

He did say he was pretentious film student.

I can literally watch him talk about anything while standing in the woods wearing historical clothing

Totally agree

ObesetoBeast you’re inspirational af

Well, even the ones who WERE quote spouting philosophical geniuses also took massive poops. Probably. :)

I hate that word. It's so gross.

Some of our best and brightest probably had some real moments of clarity while ensconced in the privy.

@@chrisbonin2174 Wasn't Martin Luther very vocal about how he had some of his greatest ideas/thoughts while sitting constipated on the toilet? Much to the embarassment of modern Lutherans.

You're gorram right, on both counts.

That comment had a Firefly feel to it. LOL

The MA BOI reminds me of the MADA DUDE from the Gods and Generals review

Considering him mentioning Demonology in a previous vid I'm sure he's ridiculously immersed in King James.

Yes, in fact one of the most admirable subjects about hunter gatherers, was their leisure time. They didn’t do “back breaking work” as it was not an efficient way of life for them.

Also building massive monuments like the Cahokia mounds for a more recent example.

Has to be said, the working class could have the same standard of living working about 2 or 3 hours per weekday, it's just that there is a capitalist class extracting their wealth. Hunter-gatherer societies and small-scale agricultural societies of course do not have a capitalist class to extract wealth, so of course they only work as much as they need to sustain themselves, not also a lord of some sort.

​@@Quintinohthree You are missing out the very important detail that hunter gatherer groups were very small and humans in general were in much lesser numbers. They could not sustain a big population, not physically nor governmentally. Imagine thinking there is no wealth extraction outside of capitalism, lol. Pray tell, what would you be doing during your 2/3 hours of allotted work? Feminist dance theory for the commune? Somehow the answer is never farming.

@@Quintinohthree This is blatantly untrue. Even if the value produced by the labor of all workers at a company was evenly distributed, life would not significantly improve for most individuals. This is because the wealthy, although rich on paper, are not a significant fraction of the aggregate demand of society. The 1% may have 50% of the wealth, but the only consume 5% of the resources. Your claim that the average worker could somehow reduce their working hours by up to 60% is therefore ridiculous. No society has ever done so, and until productivity further increases, no society ever will.

Excellent observation and case in point Star Trek is often beloved because it does the opposite of this film. Instead of being melancholic for a supposed simpler past, Trek is optimistic for a future where TECHNOLOGY makes our lives better.

Well doesn't technology cause more lasting to nature than nature does to technology, Idk maybe I'm wrong. What I'm trying to say is that the romanticization of nature or technology/civilisation isnt without a grain of truth. One point being, is that nature while apathy like technology alot of what comes out of nature as a result of it is alive whereas anything that technology produces isnt (unless you count cloning and artificial cells but those aren't in abundance yet). Another point to bring up is that with technology comes people and with people comes ideas and with ideas comes conflict and maybe that's because of nature's apathy is exactly why its seen as purer and simpler than technology/civilisation cause dealing with nature is easier than dealing with people. This idea isn't a modern one either so it goes back as far as the first civilisation with the epic of gilgamesh having a character that exemplifies this idea. So your point about it being a modern view with sentiment for the past isnt true.

@@lampad4549 conflict isnt human. Its found in nature too. Do you think apes and lions and ants and microbes livein perfect harmony? No, its a constant race to secure enough resources to propogate your existence. In fact, the fact we have IDEAS means weve risen above the need to spend every waking moment for survival. If you seriously think nature is "simple", please just go outside and try to survive in it. No help. No nasty, evil technology. Just you. Tough isnt it? The thing missing from this conversation is that ultimately, the tech v nature debate is just a placeholder for alienation v nostalgia for belonging. Now you can ascribe alienation to whatever you want, but pining for the ability to shit in the woods wont help you escape it.

The romanticization of the natural world, at least in the American mindset, can be largely traced back to Thoreau's camping experience that he wrote a very dry book about... in which he was still close enough to civilization that his mommy could do his laundry for him.

The technology vs nature is false. Technology and nature can coexist in harmony and I hope this will happen more in the future. Nature can inspire technology... And technology can protect nature... From big rock from space for example... Yeah, dinosaurs a pretty sour they whose in perfect harmony with that asteroid... We can even use technology to protect nature from bigger disasters like the homo sapiens... End I find the separation of technological from natural a little of arrogant and with too much religious flavor for my taste... Human belongs to nature so everything humans do is natural eve the technology... I don't hear anyone say termites nest at not natural or when other life forms cause distractions or even extinctions that are unnatural... To separate human from nature is wrong... end when you describe human "staff" as unnatural you do exactly that...

Yeah it's a movie I'm mixed about personally. On one hand it's beautifully shot, superbly acted and one of Mallicks best film's. Yet it also perpetuates a lie about Pocahontas, of the monsterous things that actually happened to her and the countinued lie that european and native tribal relations were anything more than a protracted genocide. While I know this isn't Malicks intent the most pervasive lies are ones steeped in accuracy in parts that lead people to believe the whole and can be more damaging that just straight up fantasy. It's a strange middle ground that I find uncomfortable, like if the Nazis won the war and made an Anne Frank film where she falls in love with a German soldier.

@@danielyoung6778 yea, the whole writing a story about some princess that would've been really into you if you ever met is kinda weird, especially since you are racist against them at the same time

@@PropheticShadeZ racism amongst those who marry or go with or even have children with is not too uncommon ironically enough.

This is the key thing nearly everyone misses. Technology helps us fend off nature, and also protect it to some extent, but the way most of our technology is used currently makes it completely opposed to the well-being and sustainability of nature, the planet, and ultimately, us as a species. We need to find a way to live sustainability so that we do not decimate nature and take us with it.

It's often about hating modernity more than loving or understanding those basic societies. That's why most are far less accurate than this good but imperfect movie.

Hay....

I can only think you've never heard the British MP, Jacob Rees-Mogg. (If you haven't heard him speak, keep it that way. You'll be happier).

Same applies to Kent Hovind.

@@Sableagle Ay! I was wondering if anyone else knew about inmate #06452-017.

The Early Modern period is not the same as the Medieval period, but I can see the confusion as much as people confuse the Medieval period for the Dark ages. Early Modern period: Spanish Empire, Religous fracture in Europe again and most importantly Centralized power. Medieval period: Decentralized goverment, Feudal wars and the increased power of the Church. Dark Ages: Very decetralized goverment, Kingdoms establishing themselves on Romes corpse at least the Western one and a return to tribalism and local government.

As far as I remember that was one of the themes in Disney's Pocahontas, the whole ''Savages'' song is how about they fear and hate each other for the exact same reasons, without realizing how similar they actually were.

Yeah but they should do it in a way that also avoids the false equivalency that Pocahontas made.

@@2122Hellfire nah

4 commentary tracks on the Extended cut DVDs! Plus crap tons of mini documentaries on the film making. And with the death of DVD in favor of online streaming, I'm pretty sure that nobody will ever top Peter Jackson's achievement, do they even bother with director commentaries any more? I certainly never see any if they do, how would I?

movie magic was a great show in the 90s

Did you watch Knightfall though.

As Andrew says, get your hands on the extended edition.

He hated working with Terence Malik. Publicly vocal about how the film had no storyline and he would never work with Malik again

The Thin Red Line has the same effect. I watched it the same time as Saving Private Ryan and preferred it much more. A work of art compared to an entertainment.

I doubt it's pretentious

Because a teacher has to have some fun, too. A little edge keeps the peeps on their toes. Maybe sarcasm would have been a better word.

But US spelling whilst speaking with an English accent for the Guardian review. (Mind you, I liked all the accents he did.)

RIP Mr. Plummer

I had no idea that it was and then looked it up. I had no idea that people larped as medieval nobles on a hunting vacay.

Had to look it up, too. That looks like way too much effort and not to mention, silly.

The magistrate of the Shire? That'd be Thain Paladin Took II.

The best summary of that film was from France where it said, "Luc Besson (director) succeeds in doing what the English have tried to do for 600 years: Make Joan out to look like a crazed lunatic."

@@transrapide She was a Schizophrenic Teenager. I found the performance highly believable, I say that coming from a family that has issues with Schizophrenia. That doesn't mean Joan was "insane" but it does meaning she was in a state beyond reason with anyone else. That being said, she was absolutely herself regardless of her surroundings. In different circumstances she would have been made a nun given her visions.

@@transrapide I think most historical religious/zealot characters held in high esteem can safely be lumped into the crazy bin. That’s assuming if we look at historical events with skeptical, scientific lenses. That doesn’t diminish what they did

He already has, 2 years ago: "The Most Fµçкed-Up Scene in Movie History | Video Essay"

@@joelsmith3473 I mean a full breakdown of the film, not just a reference to the films opening. That was barely 5 minutes into the film. There are outstanding Inner monologue scene's throughout the film. What I love about the film is how it each individual is forced to find their own answer to her story.