Assault on Hill 400

I like war movies, not because I am a military person (on contrary, I don't like period when I served in army). This should be "Band of brothers" kind of movie, no? Not by a light year.

I can forgive bad script and unrealistic dialogs. I can forgive amateur-like camera, and music like someone is turning on some classical music radio station on and off. What really bothers me is very bad acting and the fact that actors look like nobody ever saw any army nor any arms in their entire life. Their moves during the battles, kids that play Counter Strike know much better. Germans stand upright in opened space and shoot? Who does it, really? Right na ded soldiers stay behind the tree and shoot from the left side of it??? And so on, and so on. I had no stomach for this. This movie is such a waste of time and energy. Not sure about talent, didn't see much of it there.

If you like war dramas, skip this one. Better watch Band Of Brothers, or "Saving..." or... simply choose any random decent war movie.

How to do a better job on this production?

First, hire a military consultant. That would get by the majority of the issues.

Next, hiring an acting coach. Not a really expensive one. Maybe a director from the Little Theater of east New Jersey.

Taking these two steps would great enhance the production value of this movie.

Then the next step would be to follow just a little of the historical facts associated with this battle.

This film is almost a disservice to the memory of the heroes that fought in this battle.

Dialogue is awful, could could have used a little polishing.

If nothing else I learned to never watch a film directed by this guy.

Best thing the producers did was use Eastern Costume for the wardrobe or this film would have a 2/10 rating. I would expect better from an Asylum movie by now. Just grabbing a couple veteran actors is not enough to overcome bland script and poor special effects. Set locations were also very bad along with camera work. Cinematography is almost non existent save for one scene opener showing the hills with some very dense low fog. As far as the "battle sequences", not in any way plausible. So much for the crack German troops that were mentioned by the general with his helmet on in the HQ. Only other + was shooting on Red Digital. Thumbs down!

So they send out a platoon of 5 guys and a war photographer and they take the best defended hill in the first 30 minutes. Stopped watching at 44 minutes. Utter dross.fight scenes laughable. 2 machine gun nests taken by 4 guys and mo with carbines making a frontal assault with no cover. These guys also forgot to take their rations of grenades with them. If they had any they could have saved themselves a lot of grief in the fire fights. This hill should just have been obliterated with artillery and then assaulted by 2 tanks. No trenches, no minefields and 1 pillbox. Monte casino it was not. Thank goodness the yanks joined the war or we would all be speaking German.

Bad acting for the most part with a weak plot. Michael Madsen and Billy Baldwin's performance is severely lacking. These actors (and I use that term loosely for this movie) need to hang it up, if you see their names in a movie, it's going to be one to avoid. The best acting came from the nurse, who has a minor part and Eric Roberts is underutilized; mainly just clicking a camera every few seconds.

Some of the gear and uniforms were okay, while others are really poor quality; you can see better at a reenactment. It's apparent that there was no technical advisor and the Germans are for the most part laughable.