Murder Company

I find it difficult to describe how awful this film is. The characters are all one dimensional, the enemy (German troops) is portrayed as incompetent boobs, and the dialogue is shallow.

In supposedly hot combat zones, American soldiers discuss whether an officer is dead or not while the Germans assemble to machine gun them down, but to no avail, one of the good guys sneaks up behind and kills all them! Then calmly goes about his day.

Dialogue is all trite, filled with cliches and old, tiring stories that have been done a dozen times before, with some minor change. Truthfully, this production was more like the "Apocalypse Now" production done in Rushmore than an actual war film.

I have thought about this for a long time and will share my thoughts. There are so many low-budget war films out there and they all share the same qualities: less than 10 soldiers on each side running around a forest which could be your backyard; no wide angle or crane camera shots - everything looks like it was filmed with an iPhone; and less than riveting acting and dialogue. There are occasionally actors familiar from the 80's like Toms Berringer or Sizemore. I'm sure it is the same in all genres but I notice it most in war films. They just don't cut it. Maybe there is the odd Blair Witch low budget gem out there but I haven't found it.

A World War ll movie with no military discipline or courtesy. This movie is so amateurish it is horrible; it is also sloppy. Uniforms are wrong; military weapons are incorrect; story line is pathetic. This is a high school story which is nothing but dribble. How anyone should be happy to make this movie only indicates how desperate they are for the work. What a complete waste of my time. I wanted to like it, but I could not; I laughed in too many places that were funny to me, but the writer did not intend this. This is a movie the writer should return to college for a history of World War ll and learn how 6 June 1944 was accomplished. This to a movie that should languish on the shelf.

Retired 24 year veteran says... I really can't add much insight that many of the other reviews already offer. It's historically bad, costumes rate a "meh", and the weapons...oh, the weapons are CGI wonders of imagination. Imagined by someone with very little to ZERO weapons experience. Seriously, it's a war movie so at the very least they could have Googled, Wikipedia'd, watched a YouTube video or two about the weapons. This has the appearance of a "Call of duty" video game weapons expert with CGI muzzle flashes, zero recoil, and in many cuts, no expended brass being ejected. Hahahahaha!

Okay, all done with the nonsense stuff. I suspect we all know Kelsey Grammer, he's very good. The character he plays however, well, good thing they got Kelsey Grammer to play him. Joe Anderson is a pretty good as well. That said, I didn't think it was the acting that made this movie bad. Bad writing, check! Bad directing, yup! Bad military "stuff" across the board, yeah. The actors, familiar or not, did pretty well with the hands (or lines) they were dealt. I watched it through to the end and only mostly regretted the time spent.

The Americans are guarding this 'bridge' that if the Nazi's get control of the Americans will loose the war. The bridge is over a creek that a toddler could cross without getting his feet wet. Not sure why they didn't show a big awesome bridge from somewhere else, but they didn't.

The French resistance fighter took out countless Germans without ever missing a shot and never needed to reload his bolt action rifle

So basically a really dumb (almost non existent) storyline - so so acting.

Totally a good movie 'Not to Watch' unless you are into pain. 'I still Can't believe I watched the Whole thing'