Re: Need help with movie

While not "new" movies, the same sort of scene figured in "The Battle of the Bulge." In "The Great Escape" IIRC the culprits were Wehrmacht troops controlled by the Gestapo.

Don McIntyre Clarksville, TN

No not out on dvd yet but it is showing in more places..it looks like it will be a good one

SPOLIER WARNING - if you intend to watch Saints and Soldiers, this might take a little bit away from the opening five minutes or so.

I thought I'd follow this post with a little commentary given a moment of Hollyweirdness in the film that is pissing me off the more time passes and I have to think about it. The film opens with the Malmedy massacre. You're going to love this setup on how the massacre occured. Everything is fairly calm as the Germans shake down the captured GIs (some even sharing smokes). Focus on one GI balling his eyes out - predictably he panics and makes a run for it. A fairly lame attempt at it to boot - he runs in front of the American line much like a duck in a shooting gallery with a similar result. Well after he begins warming the snow with his blood, some of the Germans fire their weapons in the air - I suppose we're meant to believe they attempted to restore order. Well this in turn makes the natives restless and the American ranks start to surge a little - ending with a shoving match between a guard and a GI. The GI disarms the German and shoots him dead. Alarmed - the Germans stop what they're doing (presumably building a winter home for the GIs) snap into action and begin shooting at the fleeing GIs - well them, and those that chose to comply with those humanitarian MP40 bursts into the air and remained in their tracks.

Unbelievable. That's right - Malmedy was the fault of the Americans and man did the US look good. Well repesented with first, the chicken liver and second, that Chicagoland gangster that gunned down poor Hans who was just doing his job. What's the word I'm looking for here - !#$%^&*%^)(#$!!!!

They did get one thing right - they show the Germans walking among the wounded afterwards and coldly finishing them off with their Walthers. For some reason they left the moaning, groaning, screaming, crying and pleading off the soundtrack. Must a been a bummer for the test audiences so they ditched it.

Aside from that it's an OK movie with a fairly predictable plot and resolution. On the upshot it does make for a very nice uniform reference though and on that alone worth the 5 bucks when it makes it to the Walmart DVD bins.

WmB

I read that this movie was paid for by the Mormon church, and shot in Utah or Colorado. Fyi.

Unlikely. That ain't the sort of movie we'd make. Someone involved in the production *may* be a member of the Church, but that's up to them. Doesn't make it official. Neither does the possibility of it being shot in Utah - as far as I know, the US is still a free country, and non-members well outweigh members, even in Utah.

RobG

Hi Rob, Here's a link to the article I read in the Seattle times.

Chris

You're right. While that link brings up a subscription page, Google reveals many others that describe S&S as a Mormon/LDS production. Some of the reviews even note the obvious Mormon undertones to the story. Well obvious if you're a Mormon I guess - 'cause I would have never figured that out on my own.

The criticism remains (on pulling their punches regarding Malmedy). It wasn't an accident and it sure as heck wasn't the fault of the GIs.

WmB

Sorry about the link. The stupid paper makes you use a login if you want to look at the archives. At least it doesn't cost money. I must have a cookie because it didn't make me sign in this time.

Chris

OK - I've done some digging and it seems that the papers have it a little wrong (surprise surprise...). This film is from what they're now calling 'LDS-genre films', meaning it's about LDS people, made with a crew and/or cast containing LDS church members but NOT using Church money, or having Church approval - like I said, it ain't our bag, baby. There's been quite a few made now - I've seen 'Brigham City" and while it's not bad, it certainly ain't that good - kinda like a rushed 'made for TV' movie, made on a budget. This one just seems to be the biggest one yet. Have a look here for a bit more info on the whole shebang. (c:

As far as the accuracy of the movie goes, I can't and won't comment - I know nothing about Malmedy and what happened there, and I've not seen the movie - probably won't, either. I didn't go and read the article yet (but I will).

Hope this helps the confusion.

RobG

OK, I went and did the whole create-an-account-to-read-one-article thing - whose silly idea was that? Anyway, I read the article. Not a bad review for the movie, as a movie. The journo does make one major assumption though -

'It is intended as a propaganda piece for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints'

Eh? Who told him? Maybe the producer/director/writer/whatever intended it to be so, but there's no evidence presented. Then the reviewer states-

'but the messages are very subtle' and

'As for the Mormon "message," the preaching is understated'

Not much propaganda value there then ... Make up your mind, fella - you can't have it both ways.

Whatever - he liked it as a movie, so it ain't all bad. As an LDS, I didn't feel any anti-Mormom sentiments coming through in the review - maybe my skin's a bit tough, though... (c:

Thanks for mentioning the whole thing though - it's been interesting. And I might make an effort to see it now, after reading a few reviews.

RobG

As an aside, for those who care to know, there's a lot of LDS doctrine in the original "Battlestar Galactica", too. Can't comment on the new one, as I can't be bothered watching it...