Worst WW2 movie


i shall say that this movie is so loathsome that i have stopped watchin it after 15 mins. Except for cinematography the movie has nothing to offer. War actions seems decade old in execution and the characters sucked. Dont know how its so highly rated in imdb - 7.5, my foot.... yawk

reply

Just watched it for the first time. It's easily in the top-30 of the best WWII movies ever made. There are a ton of awful WWII films out there - calling it the "worst" is just plain stupid.

It's far better than the 2013 "Stalingrad" film (Thomas Kretschmann was in both).

I've read and seen a lot about the Battle of Stalingrad, and I say this 1993 version recreates the Wehrmacht experience quite well. There are many scenes that mirror eyewitness accounts with chilling accuracy.

They did leave out, or underplayed, some things that would have made the story even more realistic and gripping: the soldiers being riddled with lice; eating horses, dogs, cats, and even people to avoid starvation; von Manstein's nearly successful rescue; and Hitler's asinine blustering about fighting to the last man.

Also, I noticed that the English subtitles had a lot of inaccuracies (and I don't even speak German). I hear that the English dub version is really bad.

And, um, were German soldiers really always wired-up, as portrayed in this and many other WWII films, like they drank way too much coffee?

All that being said, it's a pretty good movie overall. It captures well the average German soldier's ordeal at Stalingrad - fighting, suffering, and dying - under the most extreme conditions.

reply

Just watched it for the first time. It's easily in the top-30 of the best WWII movies ever made. There are a ton of awful WWII films out there - calling it the "worst" is just plain stupid.

He claims to have watched only 15 minutes, they had not even been shipped to Stalingrad within those minutes yet.
OP is clearly a troll.

reply

Well ... This is the Worst WW2 movie comment ever made! LOL

reply

Dude, if you looking for shoot, shoot, bang, bang movie. This isn't the movie you need to watch. This movie is one of those worth mention. It showed how people react and survive the war. Those shallow movies that only depicts shooting and bombing, aren't suitable to amount feeling of those who live in WW2.

reply

Obvious bait by a troll, no way the OP can be serious or that clueless.

Man without relatives is man without troubles. Charlie Chan

reply

War actions seems decade old

Of course! The film was made in 1993. <LOL>
PS, even fr a guy like me, to whom English is a learned language, it causes pain to read such bad grammar as yours; it is "actions seem" (plural, get it?) not "actions seems". One should refrain from criticizing films not watched entirely, and this one is certainly not the "Worst WW2 movie". There are, oh so many, worse WWII films than this --mainly American, BTW.

reply

I gave it a 10 it's one of the most realistic infantry films out...

You said FMJ, Enemy at the gates, and SPR were good war films? You must not know much about history or infantry life.

Best WWII films:

-Stalingard 93'
-Come And See
-Bridge At Remagen
-Long Days Dying
-Beach Red
-Men Behind The Sun
-Thin Red Line

Getmey take your head out of Hollywood's ass

reply

[deleted]

you are that typical *beep* who only views a movie for its effects. Stalingrad is one of the best and moving war movies out there. go watch Fast and furious 12, i think that fits your intelligent level the best. forget about these movies man, you cant understand the soul in it

reply