michaeljharrison2003
Please do not make the same mistake as me and buy this professionally packaged film, unless you want to watch 10 overweight Reenactors mess around with a video camera for a couple of hours. Personally I managed 20 minutes, and then had to stop watching.Do not buy , unless you are curious to see just how bad it is. I would welcome comments from anyone involved in this amateur dramatics to justify how it can be on the shelves of shops.I see on the film info page here that it has an estimated budget of $4000,000 .Don't make me laugh. The budget of the film looks like it wouldn't even have come to the price i paid for the DVD.
marriottjason
I was looking forward to seeing this movie based on its subject, but after watching it all I can say is was very disappointing. The movie from the beginning presented as poorly made and clearly lacking in detail as well as the character and texture of a war movie. In regards to the filming it looks a lot of the time over exposed and filmed on what seems to be a very sunny day. The consequence is a lot of the detail is "burnt" out. The trench setting the film is shot in is totally unconvincing and the set design lacks any character or feel of what one would imagine a WW1 trench to look and feel like. It certainly does not reflect any appearance of the old black and white photos of the era. In addition the trench is way too shallow with the soldiers walking around with their heads and upper torsos above the top of the trench. The sandbags look very new and trench set is without duck boards or any timber hoarding, which is not how trench walls would have been built. One of the soldiers gets trench foot, but the trench environment looks very dry and parched. Not the type of environment conducive to trench foot. In addition to the above most of the actors appear some what over-weight, again not typical of young physically fit fighting men of the first world war. This combined with very average acting added to the film being difficult to engage with.In summary give it a miss its boring, plain and seemingly low budget. Nothing like Passchendaele, Beneath Hill 60 and certainly nothing like All Quiet On The Western Front.
meglyons
This film is great - filming the entire film in one shot gives it a different angle and you are able to connect with the men in the trenches on a more personal level. Each character is able to deliver the emotions they are having while at war in their own personal manner. It really separates each character.Without battle scenes, this film differs from the average war film. However, despite the lack of battle, you are able to understand the hardship these men are going through. It worked.Great running time - if it were any longer it may have been hard to stay engaged but it ended at the right point.
foxinbc
I'm not a big fan of writing up 'reviews' as they are only people's opinions and should be taken as such. I certainly could not have produced a movie like this and I applaud these young guys in making a film with limited funds about a subject which defined Canada as a nation...Like our neighbours to the South, we should fly the flag a lot more.. However, if we are to portray in film the suffering and hardship of a Canadian Battalion at Courcelette on the Somme and the sheer hell of life in the trenches then an accurate depiction must be attempted in every way. Very clean uniforms/webbing, in-accurate trench system, the VERY heavy use of the word f..k (rarely said by soldiers in that day and age) The cliché'd depiction of a soldier with shell-shock escaping over the top only to be retrieved by his mates, just made me sigh. The Canadians fighting in September of 1916 at Courcelette did so in thick mud and heavy rains !! There was neither in this movie.. Sorry, but I just feel that if we claim to depict what our Great Grandfathers went through then we've got to get it right..
AD
