Compañia de Heroes

With seasoned war film veterans this film really disappoints. Mainly because of the 1990's CGI effects and not being realistic.

They use several clichés; unlimited ammo, inaccurate spraying of bullets when they shoot they're machine pistols, guys falling BEFORE the shot hits, and they fall several meters when they get shot, the Russians and the Germans speaks perfectly good English.

I don't know how much Jürgen Prochnow got to play a part in this movie, judging by his acting, not enough...

The only good thing is that that you get to see Vinnie being Vinne and beats up several guys on his own, which would be expected.

A lot of not great acting in this movie..

I like WW2 movies. It's not that I expected a lot from this one. Overall it let me down. I have enjoyed some of the main actors in other movies. The premise was solid. But the overall feel of the movie was it was trying too hard. This is a B movie at best. I watched the entire movie and was mildly entertained. Set your expectations low. It seems that any "new" war movie is either a blockbuster or a sub-par offering. My personal rating system is fairly simple. If I watch the movie in it's entirely it automatically gets a 5, because it did what it was supposed to do. It entertained me. Company of Heroes will go on my shelf and probably never be watched again. It must of been a straight to DVD release. http://thelemondreport.blogspot.ca/

I watched the movie with my uncle, an infantry veteran who was a radioman during the Battle of the Bulge in the area the movie depicts. He was excited to see his unit's insignia, Indian head on a Star, and looked forward to the action. He came away disappointed. The story is fictional as explained in small print in a disclaimer by SONY in the rolling credits after the movie. The attention to detail was appreciated but missed a lot. He said tommy guns were a rarity to the infantryman. Eight shot M-1 was standard issue. The ease with which the enemy positions were penetrated was impossible. The weather conditions were brutal, not spring-like with melting snow and puddles on water. Troops sitting around with open jackets; really? No, in reality, the ground was so frozen, you couldn't dig a hole to hide from the incoming artillery! So, if you are looking for a Band of Brothers type of movie or Saving Private Ryan, you won't get it here. I am not totally dissing it; I appreciate the effort put into it. But it could have been so much better. The big question is "why not look for a plot based on factual context?" It is out there and other directors have had success with it.

I am watching Company of Heroes presently. The story is set in the Battle of the Bulge period. The force on the attack are Americans. Normally in a war one uses the weapons of your own side. The "sniper" hero is carrying a post-war FN-49 rifle. It was first issued to a military unit in 1949. Another soldier in the unit was carrying a British issue Number IV Mark 1 or Mark 2 SMLE infantry rifle.

Their historical sins were not limited to the American unit. It may sound trivial, but the babe spends half the movie in pants. That may sound trivial but the Feuhrer forbade women to wear pants. She wouldn't go into a Nazi base in tight fitting slacks.

Well, you may think that's all trivial but that's just immediately ended the suspension of disbelief for me. It only gets worse from there. The plot is equally ludicrous. Let's just say that by the time the whole mess had happened, we have managed to run into a Russian who speaks excellent English and a British bar brawler who both save the day in their own way.

So, is it a "stay away" movie? No. If you REALLY need something to soothe your craving for some violence or a 21st Century politically correct WW II movie, this will fit the bill quite well. But that's about all.

Well, yes, they do, apparently. In the old days war movies used to be full of inaccuracy's, have stupid plots, really stupid action sequences and the occasional love story. They were enjoyable for what they were - a piece of entertainment but without the seriousness to stop you enjoying s good old fashioned shoot-em-up war flick. Then came movies like Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down to spoil the lot. All this realism, slight adherence to facts and decent story lines really wrecked the genre. So thanks be to God there is still someone out there who doesn't give a f**k about all of that and can still make the same pile of do-do we got in the 1960's. Guns that can shoot endless rounds of ammo, bazooka's which can blow up tanks, tanks that look like nothing you are ever likely to find in any book about tanks, German's who can line up as if on parade to get shot, prisoners who are well fed, camps which look like building sites, etc. etc. etc. This is not the worst war movie I have ever seen but it was close. What the f**k Tom Sizemore and Jurgen Pronchnow were doing in it only their pay check knows. And, yes, there is a nude scene for no apparent reason. Like the rest of the movie you ask yourself WHY??????