How are these trick shots, and not refined? Those sound like belittling statements. He has done good research and discovery of how ancient warriors fought. It is fair to call them different techniques, but not refined vs unrefined. It would take some serious practice to duplicate the masters in either style.
Your comment does make me consider, though, whether longbowmen use a technique more similar to the modern sports technique than to Andersen's here. Kind of like how sniping is more similar to target practice than urban combat.
Accuracy vs. volume of fire is not an easy question to settle, given that they can't be compared directly, but require very different tactics and training.
Check this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOHGUExSGH8 (and for background, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XomJdLZGyCM ).
Most of the depictions of longbowmen in battle that I've seen make me suspect that they're going down the volume-of-fire route.
Kyudo is a very nice and sort of meditative experience. I'm guessing it's the same for other forms of stationary archery. It'll really teach you how to work your bow. Slowly and methodically. No one who practices kyudo expects to be able to fight a battle with it. This guy pretty much shows why.
On the one hand, I can believe he'd be able to do this sort of thing quite easily with low-powered bows. On the other, you really wouldn't want to be holding the sorts of positions he gets into for very long at all if they were heavier.
I'd also, just for interest's sake, be interested to put him up against an experienced modern recurve archer at, say, 40 metres. Close range trick-shots would, I suspect, lose out to more refined technique over much more than that.