What do you prefere, large scale battles, small fights among few men or single duels?

What do you prefere, large scale battles, small fights among few men or single duels?

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=kUox_hQAih8
youtube.com/watch?v=qRxwBb7ev1Y
youtube.com/watch?v=XvYBENPcUFM
youtube.com/watch?v=k97nvOSBDnk
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

all of the above

This is the correct answer

This. As long as they're done well.

Exactly why Saving Private Ryan was so good. Large Scale (DDay), Small Fights (skirmishes and defense of the bridge).

Yep, a movie with both is GOAT

Large scale for me personally

If they can actually do large scale battles believably then I'd prefer them, but they seem to always devolve down to small fights or single combat for the sake of simplicity/narrative.

Large scale battles are my favorite thing in movies, but small conflicts and duels tend do trag me.

A large scale battle where everyone stops fighting to enjoy a duel against the top fighters.

Well I think you mean in terms of the camera just follows one character in a big battle making it look small

Large scale. But nothing will ever beat Waterloo.

Need more soldiers playing soldiers and attention to tactics and bigger details. Like said, the story generally focuses on one character in the midst of the Large Scale battle, rather than the Large Scale battle itself.

No, I mean they abandon realistic/believable battle tactics that masses of men fought in so that individual characters can fight one-on-one duels or against a progression of disposable enemies that they cut down from a single direction.

I wouldn't mind a smaller scale shot that followed only a few individual fighters if they used believable tactics and/or it felt like they were a unit working within a larger force.

This is actually very realistic. There are many British accounts of fighting on the Indian peninsula, where two badass swordsmen meet by chance on the field and end up being in duel. Dudes around them on both sides would stop and watch to see if their badass would beat the other guy's badass. Sometimes the swordsmen eventually acknowledged each other's skill and mutually departed back to their own lines to fight noobs instead.

Small-scale fights.

Whenever a director is handed a large-scale battle, it's like they suddenly become a fucking retard and just have everyone charge head-on.
>but muh tension and drama
It's way more dramatic to see the ebb and flow of the battle, where each side is using their best tactics to beat the other, and one side grows more desperate as defeat begins to set in.

Name 10.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=kUox_hQAih8

Medium sized battles for me

How can the German on the far right even see?

Big fights are best fights

youtube.com/watch?v=qRxwBb7ev1Y

Guns or swords?

Your preference for each

I don't have anything specific, just accounts that my history teachers have pulled from journals and after-action reports written by officers and correspondents.

>large scale battles actually happening outside of two paradigms

Kek.

"no". It's either horse and archer or shield and spike. Get over it.

What are you even trying to say?

What are you?

What is the best large-scale battle depicted in film and why is it the Battle on Ice?

youtube.com/watch?v=XvYBENPcUFM

Bon mots

You know it isn't you're just trying to look educated.

It's honestly my favorite and I love to watch it.

What battle sequences do you feel are better?

youtube.com/watch?v=k97nvOSBDnk

If you're talking about actual battles, many newar and more famous films.
>Omaha Beach at Saving Private Ryan
>Stirling and Falkirk at Braveheart
>Kerak at Kingdom fo Heavev
>Rorke's Drift at Zulu
>Mogadishu at Bçack Hawk Down
>Silarius River at Spartacus

Am I the only person that thought Black Hawk Down sucked? How people can put it on the same level as Saving Private Ryan baffles me.

> How people can put it on the same level as Saving Private Ryan baffles me.


I disliked SPR, but BHD is in my opinion far superior.