Devil's Men

I apologize in advance for my writing as English is a second language.

I was told by a couple acquaintances about the film Devil's Men (The German title translated to English is Devil's Brigade). As a student of the US/Canadian 1st Special Service Force, I was quite intrigued as this subject has not been broached by film since the rather abysmal film from the 1960s. I didn't have high expectations due to the rather cliché and gaudy poster that harkens more to stylish war films of yesteryear but due to my interest in the subject, I pressed on to watch it anyways.

This movie was far too long. I felt numerous times that the film was about to end only for it to continue another 15 minutes then to just tease me again. The acting wasn't terrible, though I wished I could have watched it without German dubbing since I prefer to watch films with their natural language with subtitles. It was full of cliches and honestly felt like it was a fever dream of what someone thought war was like if they only watched old war films from the 1960s. It was full of cliches like bootcamp scenes from Full Metal Jacket remade for children. I was shocked by the lack of real violence. What bothered me most was the portrayal of the German army as caricatures, just tools for the story rather than a formidable force that the 1st Special Service Force respected. They emphasized kids being in the ranks of the Heer when that didn't happen until far later in the war. It also portrayed them as quick to surrender and almost idiotic. In one scene, several US soldiers sneak up on Germans standing in the open and it didn't seem realistic at all. I realized the 1st Special Service Force were known to take prisoners and that they were feared by their German counterparts but it simply wasn't translated well in the movie because none of it seemed plausible the way it was written. Some of the areas they filmed looked like Europe but others didn't. The Monte La Difenza scenes look more like a desert rather than the mountain (I've actually visited the location as part of a historical paper for the University of Stuttgart). I didn't care for the love story, it felt too artificial and the actors didn't have much chemistry. The song midway through the movie also felt like it was added last minute and disjointed the feeling of the film. The last thing that I didn't like was the music that felt way too cheerful for the story. Those times were very dark days for us and the music felt like an overly patriotic understanding of what war is like.

The story of Sam intrigued me, however, and I learned that it was based on a true story and book. I was able to find a copy of the book and I had a chance to read it before I wrote this review. The book was very well done and it pains me to say that the film doesn't do it justice. Sam in the book was nothing like the Sam in the movie. Sam in the movie was very sad and mopey while the Sam in the book was far more jovial. I wish they would have taken more of his writings word for word from the book. It would have enhanced the experience overall. The writers really should have workshopped their work more to more accurately reflect what the book offered in terms of mood. As I said earlier, it's like a 1960s war movie in mood, not what war is actually like or what it does to people.

I hate tearing something down without providing some positives (something I've learned in academia). The filmmakers themselves did a rather good job with the videography. It felt slightly more professional than typical amateur productions. Also much care was given to the authenticity of uniforms, weapons, and equipment. They went as far as perfectly equipping the actors exactly how members of the 1st Special Service Force appeared which is no easy task as we have struggled with our museum to accurately portray these men. I was happy that real people were used as characters rather than fiction. If anything I'm very happy I watched this because it introduced me to Sam's book which hold a special place on my shelf.

The first few minutes are a turn of...At just 1.30 minutes in the movie, there is a close up of a soldier holding a rifle which is not even a replica of a WW2 weapon, and looks like it was made as a high school wood shop project that got a C- as test score.

Costume designer needs a rocket up the you know where. Military uniforms have no authenticity. At the 10 minute mak, in a combat training exercise, the soldiers are all wearing different uniforms, if they could actually be called uniforms. Cover-alls of different designs/style?? At 13:30, why the heck is a soldier in uniform from Wyming wearing a German Iron Cross (and a poor replica at that). Notably, the soldier is wearing the "Devils Brigade" insignia, being the special combined US/Canada commando force. These insignia were not granted until after graduation, not during training.

Notably, the 1st Special Service Force as they were officially known, trained near Helena, Montana. The filming location of this movie is clearly not in Montana.

When we see the soldiers doing knife combat training, the knife held by the trainer is clearly NOT the V-42 as issued to them. (google it)

We see the soldiers drinking from beer bottles that are clearly not 1940's, but more recent.

The movie portrays what would have been the assault on Monte la Difensa. The scene in the movie does not even remotely match the landscape. And the combat scene does nor even remotely resemble the actual history. Movie shows failure of the soldiers and early detection, while in reality , was a complete surprise attack by the allied forces.

In that battle, the M1928A1 Thompson was the most widely used weapon, but this movie does not show a single one. Mostly Garands and M1s shown in the movie.. During the assault on Monte la Difensa, the movie shows an assembly of captured alleged German weapons, but what is shown are firearms post WW2 from different countries.

The movie also shows sporadic battles with rest time, but in reality, it was full on without respite.

Also, in the movie during the battle at Mt Sammucro,the movie says it was December 23, and soldiers say they do not want to die on christmas day, but the battle was well before christmas being between 8-17 December 1943. We also see soldiers fighting in heavy snow in a wooded forest.... but the real battle was on a steep rocky mountain devoid of vegetation and there was no snow. And the big one, The Devils Brigade did not fight in that battle. It was the 5th Army Division.

Overall... the movie has no authenticity, no historical accuracy, no accuracy to detail, poor acting, poor camera work, and really has no story line at all. The scenes jump all over the place. There is no flow.

Do not even bother watching this dribble.

I do not blame the director-role of Dave Bresnahan. Good job taking that seat.

But I guess there was no money to dig deeper and doctor the script?

Result of this:

Protagonist questions the sense of killing. I question my nausea while watching and why I don't just turn off a film instead of hoping something more will come.

No good action, no spark that ignites, nothing special about the devils.

Also, I have an FMJ déjà vu: First training, then combat deployment. The story remains boring, and the music is too heroic and loud. Also, later on, the characters remain dull and tedious.

I am too disappointed to research "Hollywood vs Fiction" and the real story behind it. Also it's a remake?

When I stumbled upon this 2023 war movie titled "Devil's Men" by random chance here in 2024, of course I opted to sit down and watch it, as I do like World War II themed movies. Howeer, I must admit that I wasn't exactly harboring much of any expectations to the movie, as it had managed to land a staggering 3.6 rating here on IMDb, when I sat down to watch it.

Sure, I had never heard about "Devil's Men" from writers Dave Bresnahan and Mark J. Nelson, so I didn't know what I was in for here. And as such, then they had every opportunity to entertain and impress me, I suppose.

I wasn't familiar with a single actor or actress on the cast list, and that is actually something I enjoy when I sit down and watch a movie; as there are no associations to other characters portrayed in other movies. The acting performances in "Devil's Men" were fairly okay.

Most of the skirmish scenes were lacking dynamic camera work in order to make it more adrenaline-filled and exiciting. It wasn't that it was badly filmed or anything, but the skirmish scenes were just too flat and one-dimensional, and that was a shame, because a war movie is so much more enjoyable if it feels like the audience is right there in the chaos of warfare. And it wasn't as if there wasn't enough skirmish scenes to pick from.

The wardrobe department and prop department definitely stepped up to their tasks and made it looks like an authentic World War II, and for a war movie that is a make or break deal. So thumbs up for accomplishing that.

The music in the movie was a bit too over-the-top. They simply used too much of that 'epic' atmospheric music throughout the course of the movie, and it was a bit too loud in comparison to the overall rest of the movie. A minor detail, but a nuissance nonetheless.

"Devil's Men" is a watchable World War II movie, though personally I could have used a bit more dynamic cinematography during the skirmish scenes. But all in all, a fair attempt at a World War II movie. If you enjoy World War II movies, you might get a particular kick out of watching directors Dave Bresnahan and Weston Childers' 2023 movie.

My rating of "Devil's Men" lands on a five out of ten stars.

This movie is supposedly made from the letters sent home by an actual soldier in WW2. They obviously had a very limited budget and couldn't afford a military advisor or historian. The costumes are so far from authentic US military uniform and insignia that I was completely distracted, but it got worse. The buildings, vehicles, ranks, weapons, tactics, terminology and even the locations are just wrong.

The sound and musical score are jarringly bad and the accents are pathetic. The dialog is poorly delivered and the acting is not great.

The story itself is reasonably good if you can get past everything wrong I've previously mentioned. I dare say this could've been a good movie if it had been made with any resemblance of a decent budget and an eye for historical accuracy.