In movies/books set in the Napoleonic Wars, the British are normally deployed into lines and the French into columns. The columns are usually the advancing ones, charging into the line as the line hold their ground and fire volleys at the advancing column. In the movies it's always depicted that this situation benefits the British, because they outshoot the column (the whole line can shoot vs just the front rank or the outer edge of the column), and they don't have to move (meaning they can reload easily and faster). Not to mention that it seems scarier to be in the front rank of a column.
The result is normally the French getting slaughtered before they even reach the line, or when they arrive they would be so outnumbered that it becomes an unbalanced melee. Well, to be fair of course English-speaking movies tend to show British victories.
Actual history reading seems to confirm that the French indeed liked fighting in columns, but why did they do this when it seems obvious that the line is more advantageous? The only advantage I can think is probably faster speed (because less files to harmonize), but I don't think this justifies the greatly reduced firepower.
And why is it in the movies the French seems to be the one attacking and the British standing their ground? How would the French deploy if they're the defending side? Is there a good example of a French victory using this kind of setting?