Wolves of War

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 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.

This has to be one of the worst war movies ever created. I cannot remember the name of the worst one but it used plastic guns with rubber bayonets. You could see them wobbling when they ran. Wolves of War is almost as bad. Every gun shot sounded suppressed. The Allied forces were using handguns for most of the fighting and could hit every shot. The Nazi's were using rifles and missed just about everything. There was not attempt at any realism in the fight scenes.

Now the acting. It was absolutely terrible. There is not much more I can say except I wish I never watched it. I turned it off with ten minutes to go and should have done it much sooner. Don't waste your time.

The bad: this is just a cheap copy of a war story, that has already been told and filmed so many times before. Lots of war movies have similar storylines, but what is terrible about this movie is that everything is amateurishly done...

The actors are B-listed actors, who usually would only star in tv series, wherein acting quality isnt paramount. The photography is not terrible, but certainly not very good either.

But what is most annoying though is the fact that this story is NOT thrilling whatsoever. The few action scenes are almost laughably amateurish.

Wow. I really had to struggle not to start laughing. But in the end I really was struggling not to fall asleep.

Out of loyalty to Rupert Graves for "Room with a View" (1985) and "Maurice" (1987) I can't go lower than a five for this, but it's really not very good. Indeed, that star of stage and screen features for just about five minutes of this otherwise rather cheaply presented story of a group of British soldiers sent to retrieve this brilliant (American) scientist and his daughter from the hands of the Nazis. Led by "Norwood" (Matt "Busted" Willis) and assisted by a terribly wooden Ed Westwick ("Wallace"), Sam Gittins ("Deegan") and Jack Parr's "Owens" we have quite an easy-on-the-eye group of squaddies facing a tough task navigating the forest to find their target, all whilst the dastardly "Von Sachs" (Max Themax) - straight from "'Allo 'Allo" - is routinely slaughtering the locals and anyone who comes into contact with them. Their escape plans suggests "Roops" only had one spare filming day, or that he lives next door to a favour-owed director, so much of the film is actually about their duel with the enemy as they try to escape. The cameraman has probably had the best of it, placing his kit inside bushes and trees and at times that does help give this just a semblance of menace, but for the most part this just looks like what it is. An assembly of seriously mediocre talent trying to tell a serious story in the manner of an under-resourced pantomime. I really wouldn't bother.