I watched the movie with my uncle, an infantry veteran who was a radioman during the Battle of the Bulge in the area the movie depicts. He was excited to see his unit's insignia, Indian head on a Star, and looked forward to the action. He came away disappointed. The story is fictional as explained in small print in a disclaimer by SONY in the rolling credits after the movie. The attention to detail was appreciated but missed a lot. He said tommy guns were a rarity to the infantryman. Eight shot M-1 was standard issue. The ease with which the enemy positions were penetrated was impossible. The weather conditions were brutal, not spring-like with melting snow and puddles on water. Troops sitting around with open jackets; really? No, in reality, the ground was so frozen, you couldn't dig a hole to hide from the incoming artillery! So, if you are looking for a Band of Brothers type of movie or Saving Private Ryan, you won't get it here. I am not totally dissing it; I appreciate the effort put into it. But it could have been so much better. The big question is "why not look for a plot based on factual context?" It is out there and other directors have had success with it.
Review of Company of Heroes
