Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuWhen a high-ranking war planner is captured and held in a German prisoner of war camp, a team of specialists take on the dangerous mission of trying to break him out. Trouble is, he doesn't ... Alles lesenWhen a high-ranking war planner is captured and held in a German prisoner of war camp, a team of specialists take on the dangerous mission of trying to break him out. Trouble is, he doesn't want to be rescued.When a high-ranking war planner is captured and held in a German prisoner of war camp, a team of specialists take on the dangerous mission of trying to break him out. Trouble is, he doesn't want to be rescued.
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Did not enjoy this one. Mediocre actors, historically Incorrect, archetypical Germans, glorification of resistance and its enablers. Cheap special effect matching the performance of the actors. N-th iteration of the subject. Very boring, not entertaining at all in my view. It's probably better to spend your viewing time with an accurate documentary on the subject.
The movie was very poorly made and very historically inaccurate. Please don't waste your time and money on it. There are many problems with the film, but I'll only mention a few so I don't waste your time like the movie does.
1st, there is a beautiful squadron of fighter planes soaring through the air in the movie poster, but none are seen flying in the movie, only one in a hangar.
2nd, in 1944, no SS unit would have been issued a machine gun MG08 from WW1, but it is used on several guard towers during the film.
3rd, one of the SS soldiers on patrol is wearing a helmet with Heer, or army, decals on it, not SS. On top of uniforms being incorrect, the simple actions of the characters are illogical and inaccurate. In the scene where the escaping POWs must make it past a guard tower with a machine gun nest, one man runs into the gunner's sight to serve as a distraction while another man shoots the gunner in the head. The problem is that the distracting man makes it back to the group unscathed, because the gunner didn't turn his machine gun right at the enemy clearly standing before him. Instead, the gunner shot every last brick in the wall near the man as he slowly turned his machine gun in the man's direction. Instead of just turning and shooting, he shot while turning, which is plain dumb. Common, Germans lost the war, but where not stupid. Also, in the scene where Ellie accidentally shoots the soldier on patrol who nearly killed her and nothing happens. Nobody hears the shot. It's not like it was just several meters away from a building full of SS guards, of course not. Even though Ellie and John talk shortly after about why she shot him and Ellie claims it was a mistake, nobody hears the shot. It's impossible that not one soldier heard a gunshot go off right near their camp and didn't go check out what happened.
It's just a disgracefully bad movie, it's illogical and unfortunate for a movie that really did have some potential in the beginning. Very sad.
PS: These critiques are written by my 13-year-old son who knows history way better than the film makers.
Low budget yes, cliched and wooden and what surprised me was that I viewed it to the end.
I honestly don't think the 1 & 2 star reviews are totally fair as I have seen far worse movies. Admittedly its not brilliant by any stretch of the imagination and maybe 5 is a little too generous but I didn't think it was a total write off.
I think the biggest issue with this film is that any war movie dealing with action and combat sequences needs a big budget and the budget constraints were clearly visible here. The audience has to be able to suspend belief and feel that it really is Occupied France in 1944 and that these events are really going on which sadly I didn't. It looked and felt more like a film made in the woods near my home last week. The script was poor, the action sequences lacked much action and as another poster pointed out historical accuracy has to be key.
I really like Kelvin Fletcher and had really hoped this would be an enjoyable and entertaining movie and I think he did the best he could with what he had to work with. But sadly the whole thing was a disappointment which was sad as the story itself clearly had some potential.
I think the biggest issue with this film is that any war movie dealing with action and combat sequences needs a big budget and the budget constraints were clearly visible here. The audience has to be able to suspend belief and feel that it really is Occupied France in 1944 and that these events are really going on which sadly I didn't. It looked and felt more like a film made in the woods near my home last week. The script was poor, the action sequences lacked much action and as another poster pointed out historical accuracy has to be key.
I really like Kelvin Fletcher and had really hoped this would be an enjoyable and entertaining movie and I think he did the best he could with what he had to work with. But sadly the whole thing was a disappointment which was sad as the story itself clearly had some potential.
Wusstest du schon
- PatzerWhile hiding in the woods, Ellie gives her Machine Gun to Anatole as she sets off in pursuit of John. However in the next shot she is holding it while moving. In the following shot its gone again.
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is We Go in at Dawn?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 25 Minuten
- Farbe
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was We Go in at Dawn (2020) officially released in India in English?
Antwort