User reviews

This was simply a long and boring story about pretty much nothing, with terrible directing and ridiculous faded dizzying flashbacks. The 95 minute runtime felt like 3 hours. There were so many plot and technical issues, a Cub Scout would have better evasive measures knowledge when someone is shooting at you. This film needed to be a short - no more than 30-40 mins, to make any impact. What little impact it had, was absorbed by the boredom and highly predictable story-line. The score was too much for this film, but thankfully not as overbearing and out of place than most B-grade films. Acting was decent, especially from Viking's Alexander Ludwig. The cinematography and colors were very impressive, and the only redeeming qualities of this film. It's a generous 4/10 from me.

Supposedly based somewhat on true events, Recon is a basic, low budget take about 4 soldiers who having just completed a mentally scarring mission are promptly sent back out to perform recon and report on enemy movements among the snow - capped Italian mountains during World War 2. The overarching theme is of soldiers already struggling with the consequences and psychological toll of previous actions, being thrust into another compromising situation. The movie is Robert Port's (an Oscar winning short filmmaker) feature debut and he is clearly less invested in military minutiae and more interested in seeing where these characters go from the film's harrowing opening scene, which unfortunately is also better than anything that follows.

Port in my opinion, needed to spend a little more of the film's production budget on getting more accurate technical military advice. Because although the acting is of an acceptable standard, the reconnaissance soldiers we see depicted, just behave so incongruously, it's just too much of an ask, that we viewers are expected to believe in and sympathise with them.

I've only had limited military training and experience, but seriously. Soldiers behind enemy lines wandering haphazardly, shouting and arguing constantly amongst themselves, grouping together to make easy targets, not searching people they come across properly, especially considering the aforementioned opening scenes? Absolutely nothing rings true. I mean I literally wanted to reach through the screen and throttle Private Asch myself. He just never shut up and was seemingly oblivious to the fact that a noisy, careless soldier such as himself would likely attract enemy attention to either himself, or his fellow soldiers. Simply confounding all around!

Recon looks good, for a small scale production. It's just a pity that after a compelling opening stanza, bizarre narrative set - ups and script decisions make the finished film so ineffective in conveying its worthy themes concerning post traumatic stress disorders among front line military personnel.

It's not a blow your socks off action war epic. It's a small, dialogue driven suspense story. Most of the performances are very well done. There are a few questionable editing choices and some drawn out sequences. But in my opinion it's not as bad as most of these reviewers are saying it is.

As a veteran I can honestly say that I have never seen a group of more undisciplined soldiers in my life.. They're in enemy territory, and they are screaming at each other, fist fighting, and comducting themselves like they were at a HS foot ball game.

It's a wonder any of then made it out alive!

It was hard to watch. I wasted $7.99 on Direct TV to watch this violation of military norms

This is most definitely not a soldier's movie. It's a movie written by someone who creates an unbelievable world of war and soldiers and is directed and produced by people with too few funds and not a whole lot of understanding about film making.

It's a movie where a reconnaissance patrol always walks down the middle of roads or fields all the while talking loudly or shouting. Oh, and with lit cigarettes. Stealth was not their long suit.

It's a movie where young men in 1943 constantly swear and use phrases from 2019. Where a commanding officer orders that an unarmed civilian be shot and orders it in front of about 20 witnesses.

It's all simply unbelievable. And it's poorly made and made on the cheap.

I won't waste any more or your time. Just a friendly warning, don't view this thing no matter how desperate you are for something to do. It's that bad.

Lots of people got killed in WWII. You don't have missions of 4 people going off like random goats scurrying through the tundra for no reason. It's bloody stupid. What's it got to do with WWII? Absolutely Nothing, Huh, say it again. War, good god ya'll.

Spend some money and hire some military historian, preferably specialized in WWII, or more specific Italy - Monte Cassino. I can assure you, they are a lot of them and more cheaper that any of those " seasoned reenactment specialists", or just spend some time researching, something like: List of United States divisions during World War II (on a very common website), and see that 5th Infantry Division, was nowhere Italy, ever, or that badge is also a fantasy, like parts of the uniforms, or the way they carry the rifle, just to name a few.

It looked like a decent film and decided to watch this first before checking the reviews here. Sometimes I don't want to be biased beforehand. But after loads of yapping and crying by 4 guys on a pointless mission I was starting to wonder if anything exciting was ever going to happen. Then I read the reviews and like one user said it's like the Blair Witch Project and he is absolutely correct. 10 star review from a one review account is par for the course now. Mostly this film is walk in the country and I'm sure not many viewers are going to be impressed by that. In short, the bad reviews are warranted, just a bad story to choose and bad directing and bad.... well you get the picture.

You probably have heardd of suspension of disbelief. This applies very much to this movie right here. I understand that those who have served in the military (even more so have been to places where discipline was important), might have issues with how the characters do conduct themselves here.

But this is also where the movie thrives - giving you people and characters who are not the best of examples. Rethinking and questioning every fatal decision you make - relaying what happened ... but especially being burdened and having issues with dealing what is happening to you and your mates ... moral decisions to make and all that. This may be flawed and feel removed from reality for some, but it also might make sense for a lot of other folk/viewers too.

What this movie suffers from is a lack of originality and lack of creativity. It very much took from the horror movie style of dragging out a scene and making the viewer think a jump scare is coming only to reward it like once in the entire film with a meaningful moment. The majority of the film creates a bunch of build up and somewhat artificial tension to try and make the audience feel the hopelessness and turmoil of the soldiers. But frankly, they just didn't go through enough in the film to justify their stress and internal mutiny.

The film was clearly trying to showcase the impact of war on these boys but didn't think how to make the audience really care about the characters going through it in the film. Hard to blame the actors because they had to keep raising the stakes with the somewhat mediocre material they were working with and everything just felt very forced. A lot of the typical ingredients of fear, hopelessness and internal fighting amongst the soldiers were present but again, forced. The main lead keeps getting flashbacks and reliving the trauma of seeing dead civilians amidst assignment. The whole thing is incredibly forced and overacted to a point that just takes you out of it. I'm sure it's just what he was directed to do but the whole thing is too much and really sums up the film unflatteringly. Seriously, the main character spends half the movie with his face in a scrunched, enraged and/or tearful manic episode and it just doesn't really work well for the guy who's gonna be taking up the most screen time. It's war, it's horrible and traumatizing, and we need those "moments" but we don't need to see the main character wearing it on his sleeve the entire movie. Imagine Tom Hanks singular crying moment in Saving Private Ryan but for pretty much half or more of the entire movie. Not gonna have the same impact is it? Somebody should've told this director.

If you're into the genre I think this is worth a watch because there are a couple of sequences where the suspense is drawn out engagingly and it's a great example of a pretty low budget, simple concept style film.

I wouldn't call this a terrible movie, it's just definitely not a good one and only worth your time when you're looking for something you haven't seen in the war film genre. If you enjoyed the more subdued pace of the classic Band Of Brothers, there might be a couple of gem moments in this film for you. But they're few, far between, and add up to nothing much.

I grew up watching the Combat series with Vic Morrow in the 60's and That's what this one reminded me of. Nice new twists on an old school ww2 story, though heavily borrows all the cliches... Still WW2 Fans will enjoy.

I don't understand Why people don't like it... it's a good film, i think they just expected a different movie type. Franco Nero was great. Music was great. The atmosphere remind me Uomini Contro, an italian movie about war of '70, a cult of the genre in Italy.

I've subscribed and downloaded IMDb app just to say that this is one of the most boring movies I've ever seen. Please give me back two hours of my life. No my mission will be to understand how can I post a similar review on Amazon prime.

...except I agree with all of the low reviews on this one. I do not recommend this film...don't waste your time/ money on it. None of the soldiers were likeable and they were ALL crybabies...really?? The constant swearing didn't help either. Please find something else to watch.

It's Italy in WW2. Four American soldiers witness their Sergeant killing a seemingly innocent civilian. The group encounters an old man pulling a cart who tells them about a group of nearby German soldiers. As they head off to recon their enemy, they fight among themselves and grow suspicious of the old man. It's a small war indie and it remains a small war indie. The characters feel small. The actors are small. The production is small. It's all very small.

The only thing about this movie that was good was the cinematography. The uniforms, settings and equipment all looked realistic. Other than that it was kind of boring. For this involved it may have been a big deal, but it was hardly worth making a movie. There are thousands and thousands of stories that occurred in World War II that are more interesting than this was. The poor discipline of the soldiers was off putting as well. I doubt that American soldiers walked around on patrols making that much noise because they never knew when they would encounter the Germans. The inexperienced cast and undoubtedly rookie director did not help either.

I am appalled by this revisionist version of life in a unit during WWII. This type of insubordination would never have been tolerated. I challenge the director and script writers to find a single World War 2 Veteran who concurs with this simplistic, IMMATURE take on life as a soldier in the second World War. I find it very telling that the director first directed the actors to be militant pacifists, and then suddenly directs the actors to blame the informant because the soldier ran into a field, and hit a landmine. You cannot have it both ways. Either the soldiers are trained properly in the chain of command, and what to do in the field. Really, how dare you put this forward. It's a nasty, childish fantasy.

Suspenseful throughout. Showing the confusion, pain, impenetrable context of war with young Americans facing carnage. All those men, on either side, came back - if they came back - with nightmarish memories forever fu***ing up their lives.

That ww2 happened a long time a go, and a clear sign it is that when making movies about these terrible years of striving and dirtdigging to feed family and friends, at least in europe, have the lack of one great resource namely war time survivorers, they are nearly all dead, and may they rest in peace, and they leave the warfilmakers of today produce movies thats made in an ambisious directors mind, and they leave the rest to the cast and crew to deliver. so when the plot is bad, youll get films like these, merely a bunch of boyscouts armed with weapons, doing pushups in the foothills of the montecassino.

so skip this one, go back to the past and praised ones for viewing this genre. its barely a weak three from the grumpy old man

To me, "Recon" is a masterfully crafted film with a deeply somber storyline that captures the essence of war's grim reality. Its deliberate pacing enhances the storytelling, allowing viewers to connect with the characters' emotional and physical struggles. The slow burn is intentional, reflecting the weight of war's toll. The ending is a stark reminder of the brutal mental and physical impact on soldiers, portraying a raw, unfiltered truth. This movie deserves far more credit than it receives, as it unflinchingly depicts the human cost of conflict, urging audiences to reflect on its lasting consequences.

Oh man what a waste of time. Stay away watch something else like moss grow on trees you would have spent better time. 20 minutes in and I wanted to shoot all of them myself. Don't waste your time.