द्वितीय विश्व युद्ध के अंत में, एक सख्त ब्रिटिश अधिकारी नाजियों द्वारा बंधक बनाए गए एक अमेरिकी को निकालने के लिए एक आखिरी असंभव मिशन पर बवेरिया में दुश्मन के इलाके में मित्र देशों के कमांडो ... सभी पढ़ेंद्वितीय विश्व युद्ध के अंत में, एक सख्त ब्रिटिश अधिकारी नाजियों द्वारा बंधक बनाए गए एक अमेरिकी को निकालने के लिए एक आखिरी असंभव मिशन पर बवेरिया में दुश्मन के इलाके में मित्र देशों के कमांडो के एक बैंड का नेतृत्व करता है.द्वितीय विश्व युद्ध के अंत में, एक सख्त ब्रिटिश अधिकारी नाजियों द्वारा बंधक बनाए गए एक अमेरिकी को निकालने के लिए एक आखिरी असंभव मिशन पर बवेरिया में दुश्मन के इलाके में मित्र देशों के कमांडो के एक बैंड का नेतृत्व करता है.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I love WWIi films but not this one. So bad in so many ways. Like a 1" thick wooden table could really serve as a shield against a machine gun. Like military men in that era turning their machine guns horizontally while firing or the two handed hold on a pistol grip? I don't think so. Or bombs being dropped and grenades exploding with nearly zero damage to soldiers going unscathed. So hard to watch this very misguided update to such small things that for me, made this film nearly unwatchable. Even though the the story was supposedly based on a true story, I didn't really care if the good guys finished their mission successfully or not. Total waste of time.
This low budget movie has so many flaws, it's ridiculous. It looks as if it was put together by people who collected army gear and then decided to make a movie with it.
Anyone who has ever served in the military or even been to a proper reenactment will start to see the problems within the first 10 minutes.
From the start, it's quite obvious that no military consultant was used for this film. Field gear is worn incorrectly, some of it looks fresh from the surplus store and it's mismatched.
The German soldiers really bombed. Their field gear & appearance is extremely poor, unauthentic & some of the uniforms look almost homemade. There's no excuse for this when quality reproductions are widely available from a multitude of sources.
It's a shame they couldn't even pick up a book or do an Internet search to use as reference for what equipment & grooming standards to use.
Save yourself the time and money and pass on this one.
Anyone who has ever served in the military or even been to a proper reenactment will start to see the problems within the first 10 minutes.
From the start, it's quite obvious that no military consultant was used for this film. Field gear is worn incorrectly, some of it looks fresh from the surplus store and it's mismatched.
The German soldiers really bombed. Their field gear & appearance is extremely poor, unauthentic & some of the uniforms look almost homemade. There's no excuse for this when quality reproductions are widely available from a multitude of sources.
It's a shame they couldn't even pick up a book or do an Internet search to use as reference for what equipment & grooming standards to use.
Save yourself the time and money and pass on this one.
This is possibly the worst movie I've ever been forced to endure. I really don't know anything else to fill up 600 charachters.
The story is bad. The directing is bad. The video quality is bad. The sets are bad. The actors are bad. The job of costuming the actors is bad. Even. The audio is bad. There are no redeeming features to this movie at all. There is no reason to watch this movie. This makes time pass slowly and painfully. You'd be better off banging your head against the wall until you go unconscious than use this movie to pass time.
I gave no idea why anyone gives this movie more than one star.
The story is bad. The directing is bad. The video quality is bad. The sets are bad. The actors are bad. The job of costuming the actors is bad. Even. The audio is bad. There are no redeeming features to this movie at all. There is no reason to watch this movie. This makes time pass slowly and painfully. You'd be better off banging your head against the wall until you go unconscious than use this movie to pass time.
I gave no idea why anyone gives this movie more than one star.
Cable TV has a lot answer for. And that 'lot' is the number of very poor quality movies (those rating less than 5 stars on IMDB) being pumped out and not worth the effort of hitting the play button. I can only presume this is to give the growing horde of cable channels some "content".
They are awful, cheap things that are worse than time-passers, films that can be used to do just that. No, they are time wasters. That time being the 20 minutes one spends giving it a chance, before switching it off in contempt.
Poor benighted "Wolves of War" here is just yet another one. I have taken aim at it here because I just spent 2 hours trying to find a historically based movie to watch. I tried 4, 2 set in Roman times and 2 in WW2. They were all garbage.
And it is not just today, but for months I have flicked through the cable dross and found hardly anything to watch. To review this movies, which is my job here, I will say that it is: merely adequately acted, (no one was anything other than a cliche)', poorly budgeted (it looks cheap) and full of technical errors, (a character gives his main weapon to someone else while he goes out alone to operate the radio. In enemy territory!). But these just few problems are not "WoW"s sins. There is a plethora of the said "bill fillers" that work exactly the same way. Even the opening credits of the different movies use the same regimen, Black and white historic stills fading in and out of ones of the cast "acting".
But being one who is here to help let me suggest: Movie makers, pool your resources and make a few quality movies rather than copious poor ones. That way you should be able to afford a good director and historical/technical advisors who actually are knowledgeable, instead of just thinking they are, thereby cheapening the whole production down to garbage level.
Near enough is never good enough, when the customer is paying for it.
They are awful, cheap things that are worse than time-passers, films that can be used to do just that. No, they are time wasters. That time being the 20 minutes one spends giving it a chance, before switching it off in contempt.
Poor benighted "Wolves of War" here is just yet another one. I have taken aim at it here because I just spent 2 hours trying to find a historically based movie to watch. I tried 4, 2 set in Roman times and 2 in WW2. They were all garbage.
And it is not just today, but for months I have flicked through the cable dross and found hardly anything to watch. To review this movies, which is my job here, I will say that it is: merely adequately acted, (no one was anything other than a cliche)', poorly budgeted (it looks cheap) and full of technical errors, (a character gives his main weapon to someone else while he goes out alone to operate the radio. In enemy territory!). But these just few problems are not "WoW"s sins. There is a plethora of the said "bill fillers" that work exactly the same way. Even the opening credits of the different movies use the same regimen, Black and white historic stills fading in and out of ones of the cast "acting".
But being one who is here to help let me suggest: Movie makers, pool your resources and make a few quality movies rather than copious poor ones. That way you should be able to afford a good director and historical/technical advisors who actually are knowledgeable, instead of just thinking they are, thereby cheapening the whole production down to garbage level.
Near enough is never good enough, when the customer is paying for it.
Of the many recent low budget war movies, most are just plain terrible. I would not call this movie terrible, but neither would I say it was a blockbuster. I was not disappointed to watch it.
The CGI and pyrotechnics were obviously poorly done, however, I found the quality of acting fairly good quality.
The authenticity of the vehicles, weapons and uniforms was correct for the period of time, but the film locations and sets was off putting. Supposedly set in Bavaria in Germany, which is high alpine country, this movie was obviously filmed in British countryside with no mountains at all or even a high hill to be seen. The buildings were clearly English cottages, not at all even resembling Bavarian architecture.
The goofs came regularly throughout the entire movie. For example, the parachute harnesses were incorrectly worn and there was no hook before jumping, nor did the parachutes have a rip chord. The occasional modern vehicle sighted in the background, or a modern electrical switch on a wall stuck out like sore thumbs while watching the movie, as did a modern hand grenade being thrown down the stairs. Also staring the viewer in the face were the armbands of the Germans, who were foot soldiers, however, the emblem (wolfsangel) was actually that warn by the SS2nd Panzer Division of WW2.. However, even with all the negatives within the movie, the storyline was good and plausible, and the movie did not fail in delivering that story, although, I think the length of the movies was more than it needed to be. There was way too much dialogue which in most parts, was not relevant to the story.
In all, not a top notch war flick, but is passible.
The CGI and pyrotechnics were obviously poorly done, however, I found the quality of acting fairly good quality.
The authenticity of the vehicles, weapons and uniforms was correct for the period of time, but the film locations and sets was off putting. Supposedly set in Bavaria in Germany, which is high alpine country, this movie was obviously filmed in British countryside with no mountains at all or even a high hill to be seen. The buildings were clearly English cottages, not at all even resembling Bavarian architecture.
The goofs came regularly throughout the entire movie. For example, the parachute harnesses were incorrectly worn and there was no hook before jumping, nor did the parachutes have a rip chord. The occasional modern vehicle sighted in the background, or a modern electrical switch on a wall stuck out like sore thumbs while watching the movie, as did a modern hand grenade being thrown down the stairs. Also staring the viewer in the face were the armbands of the Germans, who were foot soldiers, however, the emblem (wolfsangel) was actually that warn by the SS2nd Panzer Division of WW2.. However, even with all the negatives within the movie, the storyline was good and plausible, and the movie did not fail in delivering that story, although, I think the length of the movies was more than it needed to be. There was way too much dialogue which in most parts, was not relevant to the story.
In all, not a top notch war flick, but is passible.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe truck used by the protagonists is an actual vintage truck of WWII Germany. On the rear panel of the truck are the white painted words, "Abstand 100M", which translates into, "Stay back 100 meters". This message is a legal requirement in modern Europe for slow moving vehicles, including historical vehicles, that have limited rear view.
- गूफ़In one scene, combatants are seen hiding behind a genuine German car called a "Kübelwagen". This vehicle is likened to a "mini-moke". It's panels are made of thin aluminium, and yet, somehow the bullets ricochet off the thin alunimium panels.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Wolves of War?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $13,625
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 27 मिनट
- रंग
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें