Medieval movie

>Medieval movie
>Knights aren't shown using poleaxes for some reason
When will there be an accurate depiction of knights in movies?

Attached: Knights.jpg (1219x726, 99.22K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/sLr1GZ5oI2Y
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>medieval warriors can't have helmets because muh actors face
>WW1 to modern soldiers have helmets in every film they're in

Attached: 0c393c1b71d47ee7e3c822c12658093d.jpg (474x409, 13.86K)

>most people think of the armet when it comes to medieval helmets, which completely covers everything
>WWI helmets people either think of the Stalhelm or the Brodie, which only cover the top of the head and neck

There are plenty of open face medieval helmets though.

For men at arms. Not for knights

And there were more helmets than the Stalhelm and Brodie, but those are what people think of so that's what you see in movies because people are retarded.

Even though Braveheart wasn't the most accurate in some parts, I really enjoyed seeing the use of more realistic weapons, armor, colors and tactics. And Monty Python, even though it's a comedy, also did ok with armor and colors. But yea, all modern stuff has slowly devolved into the grey and brown mess with no helmets and only swords. And more fire arrows, of course

Ahh, the halberd
A more elegant weapon of a more civilized age

Attached: Kruber_1.3.png (389x612, 262.27K)

>there will never be a epic about Charlemagne

Attached: portrait-of-charlemagne.jpg (1200x1200, 430.88K)

Just open the helmet's visor if you want to show the actor's face.

There's a big shortage of High Middle Ages kino.
The Carolingian Empire, the Heptarchy, the Formation of the Holy Roman Empire all are great stories with a lot of material to make great films

The halberd is the weapon of the common soldier. Poleaxes were the weapons of nobility.

>knights are stereotypically English instead of French

youtu.be/sLr1GZ5oI2Y

Attached: 79c4d1ace00c7c6a08dc7f2990a2837f.jpg (640x343, 56.85K)

Literally just a fancy version of the halberd they adopted because the knights were dying to men at arms with halberds all the time.

Charlemagne wasn't in the High Middle Ages. He was Early Middle Ages. There's a big shortage of any historical Middle Ages kino. Otto the great's forming of the Holy Roman Empire would be kino, certainly.

retard knights are from all of Europe

I hope someday someone makes realistic medieval kino. I like comfy medieval kino but I want to see what it was really like.
>feces and rubbish everywhere
>awful lighting
>bad teeth
>10% of people physically deformed in some way because doctors don’t know shit

*shoots knights into extinction*
Heh nothing personnel

Attached: 220px-Jacob_de_Gheyn_-_Wapenhandelinge_4.jpg (220x307, 23.49K)

Hi
Mark eaton here shcollalagalditoria
AMA

Bad teeth is more of a modern phenomenon, caused by a modern diet.

chivalry originated in france but 90% of knights in movies talk with some gay middle english accent

This has been debunked

Middle Ages are included in the definition of modern in this case. Peasants raised on grain are weaker with worse dentition than hunter gatherers and nomads.

Shut up retard
Otzi had awful tooth decay and was barely in his 30s

So? It literally doesn't matter

>Charlemagne wasn't in the High Middle Ages
You're right, my mistake.
Yeah, there's such a dearth of Middle Age films, but then you remember why.
Kingdom of Heaven was not only historically inaccurate to the extreme, but it featured a heavy handed modern political message completely out of place with the setting.
The Last Duel took a fascinating historical event that's almost folklore no France that relates to justice, innocence, the waning of chivalry and what it meant to a "Medieval #MeToo".
We want medieval films, but all we'd get is more zog propaganda with niggers filling the screen
Outlaw King was great though

France lost it's status as the seat of chivalry with Agincourt

>Wears full plate armor
>Still use a shield
I hate this

Attached: 1595426342343.jpg (453x470, 15.5K)

Pretty sure France ended up winning the hundred years war

Me too.
Even in fantasy video games, I can't use a shield if my character has plate armor.
What I'm using the shield for? Defending my armor from scratches?

Is it any good?

Attached: 51vsjs-fdDL._SX300_SY300_QL70_ML2_.jpg (216x300, 13.57K)

Yeah, with cannons

He is dated to the copper age post-widespread agriculture.

For me its dual wielding a sword/shield alongside a shield, stealing my opponent's shield, and stabbing him in the dick.

Attached: 63546354354.png (1293x512, 507.92K)

And?
Knights dont use longbows either

You’ll want to have a shield. Getting hit in armor is better than getting hit without armor. Taking the hit on the shield is better than get hit in armor. Is that not logical?

Attached: 6F104887-4E26-4A0C-B1C2-E7DD0B6BD067.jpg (1808x1808, 758.97K)

>no Barry Lyndon-tier Medieval kino ever
AAAAAAAAAH

>a Christian
>inspires 17th-19th century western Euros not to shower for being too immodest
>now black people dab on whities for their ancestors being scared of bath water

And that's kinda the whole point
The Knighthood of France failed against the worst of England. Saint Dennis' sword broke under the arrows of Saint George.
By the time the war ended chivalry and feudalism were on decline, tactics and technology had changed the battlefield
There's wasn't any Knightly Spirit to be won back