Murder Company

A World War ll movie with no military discipline or courtesy. This movie is so amateurish it is horrible; it is also sloppy. Uniforms are wrong; military weapons are incorrect; story line is pathetic. This is a high school story which is nothing but dribble. How anyone should be happy to make this movie only indicates how desperate they are for the work. What a complete waste of my time. I wanted to like it, but I could not; I laughed in too many places that were funny to me, but the writer did not intend this. This is a movie the writer should return to college for a history of World War ll and learn how 6 June 1944 was accomplished. This to a movie that should languish on the shelf.

Watched the first 30 minutes, then quit.

The first.1 minute had a parachute drop with 101st, ok... yes that's accurate, but then the sergeant (first character) had a MP40 in has back. He meets a private with a Thompson. So if you are going to have one guy with a Thompson, why give the sergeant a German SMG?

That's where it started, and it didn't get any better. Tried to give characters a backstory, with some dialogue about 'what would you do if you weren't in the war" and answer was "well I wouldn't be here that's for sure!".

Come on... if you want to spend time on development, give them something the audience can relate to.

Retired 24 year veteran says... I really can't add much insight that many of the other reviews already offer. It's historically bad, costumes rate a "meh", and the weapons...oh, the weapons are CGI wonders of imagination. Imagined by someone with very little to ZERO weapons experience. Seriously, it's a war movie so at the very least they could have Googled, Wikipedia'd, watched a YouTube video or two about the weapons. This has the appearance of a "Call of duty" video game weapons expert with CGI muzzle flashes, zero recoil, and in many cuts, no expended brass being ejected. Hahahahaha!

Okay, all done with the nonsense stuff. I suspect we all know Kelsey Grammer, he's very good. The character he plays however, well, good thing they got Kelsey Grammer to play him. Joe Anderson is a pretty good as well. That said, I didn't think it was the acting that made this movie bad. Bad writing, check! Bad directing, yup! Bad military "stuff" across the board, yeah. The actors, familiar or not, did pretty well with the hands (or lines) they were dealt. I watched it through to the end and only mostly regretted the time spent.

It's D-day. American soldiers are scattered behind German lines. General Haskel (Kelsey Grammer) has a mission for five disparate soldiers from different companies. They have to rescue a French resistance fighter who would lead them to an important Nazi general in charge of transportation.

This is your basic war B-movie. I don't recognize any of the main actors except for Kelsey Grammer. Most of the budget was probably spent on him. He did some scenes with the main guys and then did a bunch of other scenes with a bunch of nobodies. It probably took him a week, five business days. The action ranges from passable to poorly staged. There are two big battles when around five good guys kill about fifty Nazis. They do throw in a couple of death scenes for the good guys. There is an evil Nazi at the end of road. This is not good.

I have thought about this for a long time and will share my thoughts. There are so many low-budget war films out there and they all share the same qualities: less than 10 soldiers on each side running around a forest which could be your backyard; no wide angle or crane camera shots - everything looks like it was filmed with an iPhone; and less than riveting acting and dialogue. There are occasionally actors familiar from the 80's like Toms Berringer or Sizemore. I'm sure it is the same in all genres but I notice it most in war films. They just don't cut it. Maybe there is the odd Blair Witch low budget gem out there but I haven't found it.