The film was awful went it came to the fighting between the French and the Syrians. There should have been a lot more gun fire between the French and the insurgents. There should have been a lot more explosions of French artillery shells bombarding the city. They show the city against the background of a early sunrise; however, there was no heavy columns of smoke that resulted from the French artillery shells exploding in the city There was also no sound of French airplanes and having them bomb and machine gun the Syrians' positions.<br /><br />In addition, the way the French troops move around the city was terrible. In a combat situation, troops would have their rifles at port arms so they be ready to bring their weapons to a firing position just in case they get fire upon. They would not be walking around the city with rifles on their shoulders and walking in a parade ground formation.<br /><br />One person stated that the American people during the 1920s never heard of the Syrian revolt. I suspect one reason why the Americans never heard about it that the American press was concentrating on Prohibition, robbers like Pretty Boy Floyd, John Dillinger, organized crime like Al Capone, labor strikes that occurred after World War I, and the communist scare of the 1920s. Even if it was printed in the paper, it was just a sideshow event that never got much notice. I bet that today most Americans still don't know about the revolt in Syria. The only time we paid attention to Syria was during the various Arab-Israeli Wars and Syrian intervention in Lebanon.<br /><br />It was and still easier to concentrate on doing war movies against the Japan and Germany since we won those wars.