Mmacchiaroli Okay look if your going to be critical about every little detail than do yourself a favor and write your own movie. If your in the mood to watch a war movie that is 100 percent historically accurate than go write your own movie. Now to the real review I liked this movie because the General theme was of men doing what is right in the face of danger even if it costs them their lives. Their used to be a time when men did that but now a days men wine on comment boards about inaccuracies in war movies lol my father served I served and his father served and I can promise you they would watch this movie in a New York second and have not one bad word to say. Now if your a critical man who hasn't served your country than I don't think this is the movie for you. Either way that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it! Cheers!

dfarmer1279 I would say that Company of Heroes is probably the worst movie I have ever seen. It took me a month to actually get through this movie. I watched the first 15 minutes and the acting was awful. I knew immediately that I was watching a Hollywood film but when I finally finished, it had gotten even worse. Not only was the acting bad, the storyline w/love story and characters that are ridiculous. They also have the one-liners that just don't fit in a film about the Battle of the Bulge. I thought this was going to be a historical film but it absolutely was not. I am a history, documentary type and if you are as well, I definitely do not recommend you see this.

lakotta-354-343882 I came in with no expectations and not expecting historical accuracy. Just watching for the entertainment value. I am a WW2 buff by nature and could easily sit and pick the movie apart as others have but it had everything, tanks, planes, trains etc if your looking for a good movie with action and a WW2 story line give it a go if your looking for a documentary or band of brothers well better stick with themI liked the actors and thought they did a good job, yes some of it was cheesy but again entertaining so it was all good. the characters were believable and you actually got to liking them hoping they would make it through.

daniel-adler-2-170187 I surmised from the title and cast that this movie would be a stinker, and it certainly was, but it did have its redeeming qualities, few as they may be. Yes the plot was profoundly absurd from every possible military and behavioral angle, the reliance on boring German clichés was preposterous and gratuitously executed, and the acting was generally abysmal, but it was crudely entertaining enough to rate a 2 out of 10. However, even ascribing this movie to pure fiction cannot forgive the producer and director for having Tom Sizemore repeat verbatim dialogue from Saving Private Ryan, or having the cast act alongside manikins and shoot numerous faceless enemies even as their named compatriots fall to every 100th bullet or 10th tank shell. I did find the atheist and possibly homosexual protagonist Nate (Chad Michael Collins) to be a hugely refreshing twist on the standard WWII hero yarn, the "Polack" (Diatchenko) a fun but implausible character, and Vinnie Jones (RAF dude, Brent Willoughby) to be great. Unfortunately, Beimier (Richard Sammel), the main SS antagonist, had to have some sort bionic leg and titanium-handled cane to make him detestable when in reality such people required no more than a pen. This movie is pure fiction at its worst.