This is not the worse war movie I have ever seen, but it ranks right down there at the bottom.
I am totally and utterly dumbfounded by the comments that say that this is a "realistic" war movie. I agree that it is very "different" (not much combat action, lots of small talk, off screen combat, on screen tension), but to say that the move is realistic is ridiculous. I could write forever about the unrealism, but here are just a few items.
1. The lieutenant gets killed at the outset, so command passes down to three battle-hardened combat sergeants,. . . who then spend the rest of the movie crying, confused, unable to lead, unable to read maps, uncertain what to do, uncertain how to command, and having existential anxiety. Indeed, this appears to be the fundamental theme of the entire movie! (They should rename it "The Crying Sergeants"). I've got big news for you. Combat platoons are run and commanded by the sergeants. They are the most competent men and leaders in combat. Young officers, on the other hand, such as lieutenants, are typically hapless and routinely get men killed by not knowing how to command. The mission in this movie (march 6 miles inland down a farm road and destroy a farm house marked on a map) would be business as usual for any combat sergeant. These guys acted like it was the Manhattan Project!!!
2. In the middle of the movie, in a combat situation, a sergeant issues a direct order to a private to deliver a message to another soldier. The private replies, "Go tell him yourself!" Realism??? You've got to be kidding me!! Do you have any idea what would have happened both then (and now) if a soldier said this to a sergeant in combat?? It would start off with a really good beating, and end in the soldier having to walk point (suicide) for the rest of the mission.
3. Each and every soldier has the exact battle dress on, including carry bags and ammo belts, regardless of rank or weapons. Guys carrying little M-1 carbines are wearing ammo belts designed for the large Garand rifle ammo. Guys carrying Thompson submachine guns are wearing the same. Realism??? Only in Hollywood.
4. At the climax, 50 troops with rifles charge across an open field at a stone farmhouse containing three German machine guns. The machine guns blaze away, and only a few troops fall! Realism?? This charge would have been suicide, with all killed! The lone American machine gun (blazing away from a stone wall 200 yard away to "support" the charge) would have killed more Americans than Germans. What would they have really done in this scenario? They would have surrounded the farmhouse, pinned down the occupants, and then called for support. (Either air or armor.)
5. Fifty men are sent inland on a mission, and nobody has a radio? Since their landing was uncontested, they clearly didn't leave it with the dead in the surf. Geez, . . . I guess they just plain forgot to bring one!!!
When I see a movie like this, I just don't know what to think. The only people who would categorize this movie as realistic would be "Artsie" folks, who seem to know nothing about combat, firearms, or the military, and who seem to totally confuse the concept of "small-talk dialogue among privates" with realism. I am sorry, but they are not the same thing.
I am totally and utterly dumbfounded by the comments that say that this is a "realistic" war movie. I agree that it is very "different" (not much combat action, lots of small talk, off screen combat, on screen tension), but to say that the move is realistic is ridiculous. I could write forever about the unrealism, but here are just a few items.
1. The lieutenant gets killed at the outset, so command passes down to three battle-hardened combat sergeants,. . . who then spend the rest of the movie crying, confused, unable to lead, unable to read maps, uncertain what to do, uncertain how to command, and having existential anxiety. Indeed, this appears to be the fundamental theme of the entire movie! (They should rename it "The Crying Sergeants"). I've got big news for you. Combat platoons are run and commanded by the sergeants. They are the most competent men and leaders in combat. Young officers, on the other hand, such as lieutenants, are typically hapless and routinely get men killed by not knowing how to command. The mission in this movie (march 6 miles inland down a farm road and destroy a farm house marked on a map) would be business as usual for any combat sergeant. These guys acted like it was the Manhattan Project!!!
2. In the middle of the movie, in a combat situation, a sergeant issues a direct order to a private to deliver a message to another soldier. The private replies, "Go tell him yourself!" Realism??? You've got to be kidding me!! Do you have any idea what would have happened both then (and now) if a soldier said this to a sergeant in combat?? It would start off with a really good beating, and end in the soldier having to walk point (suicide) for the rest of the mission.
3. Each and every soldier has the exact battle dress on, including carry bags and ammo belts, regardless of rank or weapons. Guys carrying little M-1 carbines are wearing ammo belts designed for the large Garand rifle ammo. Guys carrying Thompson submachine guns are wearing the same. Realism??? Only in Hollywood.
4. At the climax, 50 troops with rifles charge across an open field at a stone farmhouse containing three German machine guns. The machine guns blaze away, and only a few troops fall! Realism?? This charge would have been suicide, with all killed! The lone American machine gun (blazing away from a stone wall 200 yard away to "support" the charge) would have killed more Americans than Germans. What would they have really done in this scenario? They would have surrounded the farmhouse, pinned down the occupants, and then called for support. (Either air or armor.)
5. Fifty men are sent inland on a mission, and nobody has a radio? Since their landing was uncontested, they clearly didn't leave it with the dead in the surf. Geez, . . . I guess they just plain forgot to bring one!!!
When I see a movie like this, I just don't know what to think. The only people who would categorize this movie as realistic would be "Artsie" folks, who seem to know nothing about combat, firearms, or the military, and who seem to totally confuse the concept of "small-talk dialogue among privates" with realism. I am sorry, but they are not the same thing.