Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Micitype Pretty Good

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Kirpianuscus far to be easy to write something reasonable about it. for the fans of war films, it is a must see. for the admirers of actors - a good stone for define the filmography. for the admirers of the films from the 6-7 decades, it is a film under each expectation. because it represents only a meet of cast, sketches of characters, the story as pretext for dialogues and humor not real inspired. a film who gives the portrait of brave American soldier only as an unfinished drawing. sure, this is an option. but, maybe, not the most inspired.

msprouse-7-431049 Alright, I concede that there are a few problems with this flick, but after reading the reviews I had to speak up. Taken just for pure entertainment value this 50 year old movie rocks!! Yes, there are lots of historically inaccurate scenes, details and yes wardrobe. My Father who was in the Battle of the Bulge was okay with this film. I think after we saved Private Ryan we are grading everything by that standard. Yes this lacks the gritty feel of war that many of today's war films capture. It's 1965, one star, two stars? You've got to be kidding. I mean "Monster a Go-Go" hit the screens the same year, that has 2.3 stars on IMDb. You have to measure it with a mid 1960's yardstick. Quint, I mean, Robert Shaw is worth 4 stars just by himself and Telly is interesting too.The music score, though dated is quality. Believe me I would like to see someone do the battle justice with a more accurate film, however even if that happens I'll still enjoy this film and I think most people who don't get bogged down in the details will too.

bowmanblue 'Battle of the Bulge' tells the story of the American army's final months of World War II. Just when they think that they've got the Germans beat and are trying to rest before the final attack on Germany and Berlin, a warmongering Panza tank commander is given an entire battalion of the formidable machines with which to wage a counter attack on the Americans.The first thing you'll notice about 'The Battle of the Bulge' is that a substantial amount of screen time is dedicated to the Germans, namely the tank commander Colonel Hessler. We see a lot of the film from his point of view, not that many people will be able to relate to the way that he only wants to keep the war going forever, simply so he can continue to fight forever. However, it's nice to have a 'face of the enemy' in a World War II film, rather than just having the Allies fighting endless waves of faceless Germans.However, even with Colonel Hessler occupying one of the main roles, the bulk of the film is – obviously – about the Americans and an (equally idealistic) Colonel Kiley, who is the only person who predicts the impending German counterattack. Unfortunately for his colleagues, he's labelled 'paranoid' and no one heeds his warnings until they're too late. These are the two main performances and they're played as well as you'd expect. Hessler is the more memorable character, but then that's because we always remember the 'baddie!' But, besides them, Telly Savalis and Charles Bronson are also worth a mention.What follows are some pretty epic – and memorable – tank battles between the Americans and German battalions. And the battles are particularly memorable, not to mention the general carnage to the local population caused by the constant battles.It's worth noting that the film shouldn't be taken as a 'historical document' – the closing statement on screen states that to condense as much information as possible, places and characters have been 'generalised.' But, the bottom line is that if you're into your war movies, you should enjoy this. If you're not, it probably won't change your mind on the subject matter.

Xjayhawker As reviews go, , I feel reluctant to offer anything to what has already been said..after all you can only say the same thing only a few thousand different ways..With that said, this movie is poorly conceived..Is it to depict the actual battle? No, it is not..Then what? The battle itself was a mish-mash of countless skirmishes of positions over-run and ground held..pockets of resistance..my family settled in Jamestown,Virginia in 1747 and has fought in every war or police action (take your pick) that this country has been engaged in and my father was in Gen. Patton's Third Army at that time..and I have been in Belgium in the same area as the battle ..this is a movie with a lot of actors that are excellent in other movies, however this movie is an excuse to put them all together to make money for the studio..Dwight D. Eisenhower criticized this film for its inaccuracies..Robert Ryan did it for the money..Fonda thought this movie was beneath him..acting-wise..go for Hans Christian Blech for his portrayal of Robert Shaw's enlisted aide tired of war..or George Montgomery as a Staff Sergeant who takes a naive young officer under his wing..Charles Bronson and Telly Savalas doing some fine work..Robert Shaw..not bad..but not that good, either..Bronson and Savalas would be together 2 years later in The Dirty Dozen and a Warner Brothers actor Clint Walker in that but another Warner's actor..Ty Hardin in this one..Dana Andrews sleep-walks through his role..so maybe he also just did it for the paycheck..one reviewer called this one of the best..Sadly..it is not..good cast..overall poor acting..highly inaccurate in the telling and geography..cinematography?Poor..at best..I have always considered this poorly done ..to follow the actions of so few to get a comprehensive view of what took place on an eighty-five mile "breach" in the Allied front lines in on of the worst winters in fifty years..is impossible to correctly convey..and I must agree how silly it looks when the model tanks get their turrets blown off..and how both sides are fighting with the same equipment(tanks) just painted differently..and yes..I served in the military also..for my 20..which includes Vietnam..sunny skies when they are supposed to be over-cast and heavy fog..but still bright and clear and flat (no forests) for the climactic tank battle..it's just very poorly staged and executed..will never suggest watching this unless you are strapped down and forced..but for the record for the person who said The Battle of the Bulge is accurate..Military unit citations were for the Ardennes Counteroffensive..not for participation in the Battle of the Bulge..just say in'...