Saints and Soldiers (2003) User Reviews

interesting, human, powerful.

[weedie · 7/10 · 5 October 2004]

Saints and Soldiers is a quite powerful movie. It has a very human side, although the idea is not very unique.

A movie about 5 brave allied soldiers fighting their way back to base from behind enemy lines, during WW II.

Each of the characters embodies a different human typology. There is a subtle religious side, also.

The movie has a good visual narrative construction. It is worth being seen.

The main idea is that, behind the soldier uniform there is a human being.

A gem of a film.

[sektor-1 · 8/10 · 8 August 2004]

Many films succeed outside the context of Hollywood hype. This one provides several messages competently executed by new talent, and without the special effects so commonly packaged by Tinseltown. Dialog and talent hold one's attention in a real-world interpretation of the Malmedy massacre and it's aftermath in WW2 Belgium. The tagline, 'A Time For Heroes' says much and it's more than appropriate for our time since the definition of 'hero' has been broadened by current events and uncommon courage. Lighting, sound, location, editing, and inventive writing make this a weekend wonder if you're seeking a story of principled men in desperate circumstances. Not unlike John Sturges' films.

Thrilling and enjoyable Warlike movie about a group of soldiers who after Malmedy massacre run for their lives

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 10 September 2020]

The award-winning "Saints and Soldiers" results to be a nice Wartime movie about a group of escaped American soldiers behind enemy lines and one of them has information enough that could save thousands of allied lives . Apart from the values of team spirit , cudgeled by the protagonists into his unfortunate team , the film is full of feats , suspense , battles and thrills . And set after D-Day , the 6th of June 1944 , when Western allied forces landed in Nazi-occupied France on a quest to liberate Europe by executing an enormous launch an all-out assault . Based on real events about the Malmedy massacre , it was a war crime committed by members of Kampfgruppe Peiper (part of the SS Division Leibstandarte), a German Waffen-SS unit led by Joachim Peiper, at Baugnez crossroads near Malmedy, Belgium, on 17 December 1944, during the Battle of the Bulge. Eighty-four American prisoners of war were massacred by their German captors . The prisoners were assembled in a field and shot with machine guns ; those still alive were killed by close-range shots to the head. The term Malmedy massacre also applies generally to the series of massacres committed by the same unit on the same day and following days, which were the subject of the Malmedy massacre trial, part of the Dachau Trials of 1946 . There is a time for heroes .Nothing's ever easy . Victory is the only option . Trapped behind enemy lines. All they have is their hope.

This is a competently conceived WWII with action filled , brief studio character , drama and moving fights . Action-filled movie set at end WWII , it follows the reckless adventures of five valiant soldiers , some courageous men who ran way from a Nazi slaughter during WWII in France . Based on actual WWII events, tells the dramatic story of a small band of Allied soldiers trapped behind enemy lines in mid-December 1944, when Hitler's Army charges through the Ardennes Forest in Belgium, initiating the offensive that will come to be known as the Battle of the Bulge . Medium budget European war film that packs frantic thrills , perilous as well as relentless feats , and buck-loads of explosive action and violence . The noisy action is uniformly well-made , especially deserving of mention the rip-roaring final scenes in which the motley group is really besieged , including some spectacular shootouts and pursuits when the Jeep is mercilessly chased by Nazis . This is a war movie in which predominates the stories and situations of the protagonists on the war itself made , so although there are moments of action and struggle there are also thought-provoking events. The picture is pretty well with actors giving acceptable acting , but being marred by an unknown cast as Corbin Allred ,Alexander Polinsky, Kirby Heyborne, Peter Holden , and Ethan Vincent . The motion picture was compellingly directed by Ryan Little . Ryan was presented with a Student Emmy at the 1999 Academy of Television Arts & Science College Television Awards, for "Best Dramatic Film": The Last Good War . Little has directed a few but decent movies such as ¨Outlaw Trail: The Treasure of Butch Cassidy¨ , ¨House of fears¨ , ¨Forever strong¨, ¨Age of the dragons¨ and ¨"Saints and Soldiers : Airbone creed" that is the sequel to the award-winning ¨Saints and soldiers¨ and the third part titled ¨Saints and soldiers : the void¨ .

The actual deeds are the following ones : Hitler's main objective for the Battle of the Bulge was for the 6th SS Panzer Army commanded by SS General Sepp Dietrich to break through the Allied front between Monschau and Losheimergraben, cross the Meuse River, and capture Antwerp.Kampfgruppe Peiper, named after and under the command of SS-Obersturmbannführer Joachim Peiper, was composed of armoured and motorised elements and was the spearhead of the left wing of the 6th SS Panzer Army. Once the infantry had breached the American lines, Peiper's role was to advance via Ligneuville, Stavelot, Trois-Ponts, and Werbomont and seize and secure the Meuse bridges around Huy.The best roads were reserved for the bulk of the SS Division Leibstandarte. Peiper was to use secondary roads, but these proved unsuitable for heavy armoured vehicles, especially the Tiger II tanks attached to the Kampfgruppen. The success of the operation depended on the swift capture of the bridges over the Meuse. This required a rapid advance through US positions, circumventing any points of resistance whenever possible. Another factor Peiper had to consider was the shortage of fuel.Hitler ordered the battle to be carried out with a brutality more common on the Eastern Front, in order to frighten the enemy.Sepp Dietrich confirmed this during the war crimes trial after the war ended. According to one source, during the briefings before the operation, Peiper stated that no quarter was to be granted, no prisoners taken, and no pity shown towards Belgian civilian.Between noon and 1 pm, the German spearhead approached the Baugnez crossroads, two miles south-east of Malmedy. An American convoy of about thirty vehicles, mainly elements of B Battery of the American 285th Field Artillery Observation Battalion, was negotiating the crossroads and turning right toward Ligneuville and St. Vith, where it had been ordered to join the 7th Armored Division. The spearhead of Peiper's group spotted the American convoy and opened fire, immobilising the first and last vehicles of the column and forcing it to halt. Armed with only rifles and other small arms, the Americans surrendered to the German tank force.The armoured column led by Peiper continued west toward Ligneuville. The German troops left behind assembled the American prisoners in a field along with other prisoners captured earlier in the day. Many of the survivors testified that about 120 troops were standing in the field when, for unknown reasons, the SS troops suddenly opened fire with machine guns on the prisoners.There was a first massacre at Büllingen and later Massacre at Baugnez crossroads . As soon as the SS machine gunners opened fire, the POWs panicked. Some tried to flee, but most were shot where they stood. Some dropped to the ground and pretended to be dead.SS troops walked among the bodies and shot any who appeared to be alive. A few sought shelter in a café at the crossroads. The SS soldiers set fire to the building and shot any who tried to escape.

Worthy of all the "Best Picture" awards

[smithfam548 · 11 October 2004]

This movie is worthy of the 14 "Best Picture" awards it has already won...I hope that it gets a bigger national release.

I live in the San Diego area and I just took my family to see this film tonight, and I have to say that this is one of the most moving films I have seen.

I felt like this was an appropriate movie for my 13 yr old daughter to view (I would not recommend for any younger). The story was told so well that I felt she understood the underlying messages. We were able to have a very long discussion afterward about war and accountability of those who unjustly cause wars. We talked about recognizing the humanity behind the "enemy" soldiers who are, for the most part, just doing their duty to country. These men have wives, children, fathers and mothers who love them just as much as the families of the soldiers on "our" side.

I literally was speechless at the end of the film. The "surprise" ending caught me a little off-guard with its VERY poignant and thought provoking message.

The characters were well developed and I really felt that i could empathize with each man's approach to the situation they were in.

The impact of the movie far exceeded its budget. I was very impressed with the actors (for example, the beautiful French woman...who WAS that?).

I think I was most impressed with the acting of the Medic (The exchange of looks between him and the German prisoner at the end of the movie was classic!).

I read a lot of the reviews prior to watching this film, so I had somewhat of a biased opinion about what I might see. I have to admit, I found myself feeling like the movie exceeded my expectations and was VERY much worth it. I don't buy many movies...this is one I definitely will buy for my private library.

Very strong, emotional ending after some slow marching

[davdecrane · 7/10 · 15 October 2004]

A very rewarding payoff comes to those willing to slog through the cold winter of 1944 with these soldiers. Like any march in the military, there's some "hurry up and wait" moments that tend to slow the plot down a little bit. And the "character" scenes aren't as professionally rendered as perhaps they could have been. Quibbles, though, because the story reaches a generally unexpected and very emotional payoff, and the trek is more than worthwhile. Film should play well on DVD, given decent but not spectacular use of big screen. Utah stands in pretty well for the Ardennes, but that winter was Europe's worst in 50 years and the dry cold of the US West doesn't really seem to convey the real misery the climate brought to the GIs. Acting generally strong all around with the squad leader, a kind of heavier Jeff Daniels type, particularly good and really evocative of a GI sixty years ago. Fine, moving film.

Combat Behind Enemy Lines

[Uriah43 · 7/10 · 8 September 2022]

This film essentially begins with several American soldiers being searched after surrendering to German troops during World War 2. Unfortunately, after one soldier is shot attempting to escape, things quickly spiral out-of-control which results in all but four Americans being killed. To that effect, after eluding recapture, they eventually meet up and plan their next course of action. It's during this time that they happen to stumble upon a British soldier named "Flight Sergeant Oberon Winley" (Kirby Heybourne) who informs them that he has top secret information that needs to be delivered to allied headquarters at once. The problem is that, not only are they behind enemy lines, but one of their soldiers named "Corporal 'Deacon' Greer" (Corbin Allred) is suffering from a severe case of combat fatigue and it soon becomes questionable whether he can any further stress without putting all of their lives in jeopardy. Now, rather than reveal any more, I will just say that I found this to be a fairly entertaining war movie which contained good elements of both drama and action. Admittedly, the history regarding the tragic incident known as the Malmedy Massacre isn't depicted accurately and the director (Ryan Little) should have known better. Yet despite this error on his part, the rest of the movie was quite exciting and I have rated it accordingly. Above average.

" Amid the ghosts of the Second World War, Snow Angels "

[thinker1691 · 7/10 · 2 March 2009]

They say after every massacre, there are always survivors. That is certainly true for this film which relates the story of four American soldiers who escaped the unwarranted and despicable atrocity, later called 'The Malmedy Massacre'. The movie is entitled " Saints and Soldiers " and is the saga of the men who, having survived the massacre, must now journey back to their own lines. In the middle of a winter storm, the tiny group must do so without food or supplies through enemy infested woods, all the while trying to stay alive. Though they escape, their ordeal is further hampered by suspicion, fear, freezing conditions and the discovery of a downed British airman. The officer has vital information which must reach communication lines to safeguard the lives of thousands of Allied soldiers. Amid the ivory snow-laden landscape, two soldiers, Cpl. Nathan 'Deacon' Greer (Corbin Allred) and Medic Steven Gould ((Alexander Niver) clash over personal ideologies, trying hard to fathom each others steadfast beliefs. Military situations change on both sides allowing the men to exchange trusts, doubts and suspicions. The result? A quite and sobering conclusion creating troubling emotions for both men and an equally poignant ending to the story. A good film and one which allows the audience to acquire ample food for thought. ****

A slow start to an emotionally charged finale.

[paulclaassen · 6/10 · 18 December 2020]

'Saints and Soldiers' is not your average war movie. Don't expect loads of action and warfare here. The film is a dramatic account of five men trying against all odds to get back to their people.

This is a very well made and realistic movie. In the beginning, the film gives us a taste of what's to come, and then go back in time a bit. The small cast is effective, as we really get to know the characters. There's great character development as well. The film really surprised me towards the end by becoming emotionally charged with excellent performances. The character bonding was fantastic, and - off course - by that time we really cared about the characters. It was an effective set-up for a nail-biting, emotional finale.

'Saints and Soldiers' might not be as action-packed as you'd expect from a war movie, but it excelled on other levels. This turned out to be an incredible movie.

Powerful war movie gem.

[remay1 · 10/10 · 21 January 2005]

Every once in a while a little movie will come along totally unheralded, unexpected, under budget, under promoted, but which really shouldn't be missed.

Saints and Soldiers is such a movie. If you like lots of big budget special effect -loud explosions, -crashing airplanes, -panoramic scenes with thousands of extras slogging through the mud, -if that's what you want in a war movie, skip this one. It doesn't have any of those things.

What it does have, however, is a very effective ensemble cast telling a very compelling story, -a true story, of the Battle of the Bulge. From the utter confusion and tragic consequences of the "Malmedy Masacre", depicted in this movie as more an accident of the fog of war rather than a cold calculated act, to the final climactic battle scenes, this movie shows world war II as it most likely really was. A very personal war for each soldier involved.

My uncle was a soldier who lost a leg in Europe during that time and as he related experiences of battle, he always made it perfectly clear that war was always a very personal thing. You were doing everything to survive. Your enemy was doing the same thing, and somehow battles were eventually won or lost. The average G.I. didn't know, or much care what was going on over the hill, or on a grand scale. He only knew he and a few of his buddies were being shot at by a few of the enemy and they had to shoot back or perish. It's all about living another day.

This movie conveys those sentiments very clearly. It is about daily survival without the grandiose trappings. You really wind up caring about each of these characters. It is well worth seeing. Especially if you were a soldier -or know a soldier, -or just want to know more about being a soldier. In my opinion it will go down in history as one of the more realistic war movies ever made.

Interesting...

[Thanos_Alfie · 7/10 · 30 January 2022]

"Saints and Soldiers" is a Drama - War movie in which we watch a group of people during World War II fighting in Europe and trying to return to an Allied territory. They separated from their forces during the Malmedy Massacre.

I liked this movie because it was interesting, it had a nice plot that contained plenty of action and drama, and it presented the true face of war. In addition to this, the direction which was made by Ryan Little was very good and he did an excellent job on the way that he presented both his main characters and what they have been through and the true but ugly face of war. The interpretations of Alexander Polinsky who played as Medic Steven Gould, Corbin Allred who played as Corporal 'Deacon' Greer, Larry Bagby who played as Private Shirl Kendrick and Kirby Heyborne who played as Flight Sergeant Oberon Winley were very good and helped the plot evolve. Finally, I have to say that "Saints and Soldiers" is a nice war movie and I recommend you to watch it.

6.8? How?

[jtaff99 · 3/10 · 11 October 2014]

I have seen that this movie did not cost much to make, and it is startlingly obvious from the get- go. I'm not saying that films have to cost £100 million to be good, of course not, but to say this film is good, just because it was cheap, is very misleading.

There is no conviction in any part. The acting is amateurish at best. The English "accent" is terrible and it feels like the actors hadn't met before the scenes were shot. The script is tired and unoriginal. You don't get a sense of togetherness or camaraderie and I have seen better acting in Home and Away. There is cliché after cliché, I was so disappointed. When the American says he can speak German, it is so funny. Bitte and danke with the biggest American accent you have ever heard. Then the "British" guy enters the fray. Wow. If this wasn't written by Americans who have never been to England, or met a British person, then I would be entirely surprised.

I like war movies, I really do, but this was tedious, contrived, clichéd and boring. How it even got one million dollars of funding is beneath me. I would have saved up and spent the money on a project that was much more worthwhile!

Outstanding in every sense

[123ray · 10/10 · 17 February 2005]

My wife and I go out to see a movie every Friday night. Some nights, I'll tell you, the Picken's Is Slim, as they were when we saw this film about six months ago (if memory serves). I'd never heard of it. She didn't want to see any more war films since that miserable, over-hyped "Pearl Harbor" with the lame love story thrown into the mix. (Cuba Gooding was the only good part in the movie, and, shock! His character's part really happened, too! Hollywood take note!) To tell you the truth, we nearly went to rent something to watch at home, but as we left, we heard a guy in line talking excitedly about how he'd seen it three times, and loved it. What the heck. We got back in line. Their popcorn is better than ours. We went in, not expecting much of anything.

I'll tell you, we were blown away. I came on this site tonight because I've been meaning to write and tell everybody to go see this little film that only ran a week in our local theater. (Buy the DVD!) I have read every comment on this site, and have to LOL at the comments about Mormons. What Mormons? I never even knew it was Mormons until I read it tonight on this site! And so what? It happened to a Mormon guy. It was his story. You expect Catholics to tell it? The other complaints about the story being predictable...what? It sure got us! It was a true story. Don't you get it? If it's true, you can't change what really happened--and what happened was humanity showing it's face. It was right winning out over allegiance.

I'm looking forward to the DVD coming out. I'm getting it and showing it to all my friends. This is film-making the way it should be done. We want to see it more of it.

Just watchable.

[nedlee · 6/10 · 10 March 2006]

I think this movie is not that great. Cinematography is fine, but as this is a very low-budgeted movie, combat scenes looks terrible. We already have BOBs and SPR and such movies, which set our standards sky high. Here on the boards peoples say you should not complain about the SFX considering the budget, but I think they did not utilized their budget to the enough extent. Maybe they could cut off the most of combat scenes and leave only the short, fierce last one, but I dunno.

Low budget doesn't make poor movie, and I don't consider this movie as an average one for that reason. What really makes me dislike this is the movie itself. Entire movie was very slow, and somewhat clichéd. Characters were shallow stereotypes which we have seen already in every other war movies, and entire plot was, too. I can't find something that is really impressive or creative from this one.

Quite possibly the cheesiest war movie ever made.

[count_me_out1983 · 1/10 · 23 November 2005]

About a week ago i watched a trailer for the war movie, Brotherhood and i liked what i saw.After renting the title, and thoroughly enjoying it i returned it to the store and whilst there saw an equally promising trailer running for Saints and Soldiers. Me and a friend of mine instantly rented the title and afterwards we felt our money was wasted. Firstly, as far as authenticity is concerned, it is flawed and these flaws are listed on the IMDb page. Secondly, in the first 10 minutes of the film i had nailed every character in the movie. The over questioning medic, the gung ho yokel(I just wanna shoot me some krauts), the honourable sergeant, the crazy religious marksman with a mental condition and last but not least, the stiff upper lipped British pilot which as a Brit extremely offends me. Most RAF pilots were local boys ranking as low as flight sergeant, not the pompous mustachioed lord types. The tongue in cheek conversational exchanges between the pilot and the yokel almost made me switch the film off, 'dammit i just need a cigarette'.Awful. The accompanying banjo music whenever he was on screen made me want to tear out my hair. The lack of combat in the film is a major weak point and in the few instances in which there is a war on, the scenes are literally unbelievable, for example the American infantryman firing a bazooka at German soldiers (video game style) when there is a perfectly good perimeter set up with machine guns overlooking the field. Grenades seem so over used, is this a James Bond movie? It was obvious that Sarge was going to die, maybe he would be more fitting in Starship Troopers, i dunno. A film of this calibre would have been accepted as 'good' back in the 1950s but come on, this is 2005! The film obviously had a decent budget, it could have done a lot better with the resources it had, people want to see realism. You can badmouth special effects all you like but that is what the people want.The whole story was fit for post midnight television. Seriously, if you want a good laugh, rent this movie, its funnier that Sergeant Bilko, but if you want a seriously good example of winter conflict just watch Band of Brothers, or to give you a low budget example, When Trumpets Fade.

A simple story told with great skill. Very satisfying

[Jacko44 · 27 September 2004]

This is a very simple story, told in a very simple way.A group of soldiers escape capture and fight their way to rejoin friendly forces. Nothing new or unusual there. However Ryan Little has managed to tell this simple story with a great sense of compassion and feeling. So much so that at times I had to remind myself that this was a story of war. Little manages to do what many others have failed in the modern war movie, let the story take preference over special effects and shock tactics.

The largely unheralded cast turn in steady, rather than spectacular, performances. Yet they work well within the over all feel of the movie, showing that war is fought by, in the most part, ordinary people under extraordinary circumstances. At times the pace was a little labored, particularly at the farmhouse. The relationship with the mother and child seemed to develop too quickly, somehow become pivotal almost instantly. This aside, character development occurs at a natural and easy pace. All these men are people we will meet in our own lives, bringing the story even closer to the audience.

This is one of the most satisfying war movies that I have seen for a long while. Without the big budgets and extreme violence, this little gem delivers a fantastic reward for those who take the time to watch.

8.5/10

Great intentions, some harsh realism, but uneven writing and a few avoidable clichés

[secondtake · 7/10 · 4 June 2010]

Saints and Soldiers (2003)

A World War II movie made in the 21st Century has to have something new to say, and this one attempts to do that with gritty, intimate realism. It succeeds in that, to some extent, but it also has some familiar clichés in the dialog and the general plot details which cover familiar ground.

The scenario starts with some fast cutting that creates a sense of danger and drama with some sacrifice of logic. We just know things go badly for the Americans. Then it follows some stragglers who have survived, and things grow gradually more coherent. As the men come to know, and not completely like, each other, they form bonds that get tested, and there is heartbreak and hardship enough for anyone.

What holds all of this up is a modern sense of full color, in your face hell. Not the hell of bloody conflict (there is a little of that here and there) but of fighting the snow and the cold and the fear of not making it, of dying. Some of the clichés really are a drag, however, such as a little cabin in the middle of nowhere where a bombshell of a French beauty is making bread by hand, a 78 record playing in the background, and she welcomes them (after a brief knife-wielding hesitation) with a kiss on each cheek. It's super sweet, but it's exactly what turns this movie into a fantasy now and then. Great intentions overrun with wishful daydreams.

Pretty good

[raypdaley182 · 7/10 · 4 April 2007]

Don't expect to see anyone you know in this.

It's a complete cast of no-namers. And that's a good thing. When you have unknowns, you aren't sitting there thinking "Are the famous stars going to die?" Basically this a group of men who escaped from execution from the Germans and were trying to get to the Allied lines.

They overhear Germans talking about a downed Allied plane and reach the airman first. He tells them he is carrying vital intelligence that could prevent the Germans from over powering an Allied position.

So the film then becomes their journey to help him to the closest Allied Command post.

We have Deacon, haunted by the memory of killing civilians. Sarge, from Chicago who holds them all together. Kendrick who will do anything for a cigarette.

One by one the guys are injured or killed but they do manage to help the RAF Airman back to an American position by disguising themselves as Germans.

The film looks excellent and the characters are well played by all the actors. We even see the human side of war, that Germans are just people. Even to the point of helping the Americans get past German positions.

Very good movie, but slightly overrated (and its low budget definitely shows)

[ANDREWEHUNT · 7/10 · 27 July 2005]

Saints and Soldiers (S&S) was a powerful film with some unforgettable moments, but it wasn't quite the masterpiece that some of its more devoted fans claim it is. The 1992 film A Midnight Clear was similar, in many respects, to S&S, but better, in my view. The acting in S&S, for the most part, was solid. The real standout performance was delivered by Peter Alse Holden as Gordon Gunderson, who managed to convey warmth, pathos and humor in a way that was vaguely reminiscent of Jeff Daniels. Corbin Allred was also fine as the tormented, deeply religious corporal who served an LDS mission to Germany years earlier and has at least one major skeleton in his closet. One warning: Kirby Heyborne's British accent was absolutely appalling--not believable for one second. He almost ruined the film, though he probably gave it his best shot. This film is not, repeat NOT, a Mormon propaganda film, as some of its detractors have suggested. I'm *not* a Mormon, although many of my friends and family are, and I watched it with my brother, who is LDS. S&S, in fact, depicts an ongoing argument about the afterlife (or lack thereof) between the religious Deacon and the atheistic Gould, yet at no point does the film attempt to answer the questions raised in their exchanges, which is the indication of a compelling movie. Moreover, the debate was convincing and effectively handled. Not for a moment did the film preach. Ultimately, S&S is a deeply humanistic antiwar film that conveys a crucial message about the importance of maintaining compassion and not vilifying or objectifying one's enemies (in this case, of course, the Germans) during a time of war. Viewers would do well to apply its timeless lessons to the war in Iraq right now. The film was definitely hampered by a low budget. Not all of the European characters were particularly believable or portrayed very effectively. And some of the main actors performed more admirably than others. It won't stand up alongside Hollywood's finest war films (e.g., Saving Private Ryan, All Quiet on the Western Front, Platoon, etc.). But it's a worthwhile attempt that will, with time, hold its own among the better war films.

Realistic

[thomas-379 · 7/10 · 19 October 2011]

I thought this film was very good. What I particularly liked was that this is almost the very first film I have seen where the weapons for each side were accurate. Not M-60 tanks dressed up as Panzers etc. They even had one German soldier with a StG44. Half tracks were correct on the respective sides too. My only minor gripe was that although the guy who played the British Pilot put in a great performance, why didn't they use a real Englishman? The acting was excellent. I saw it for the first time on Neflix. If you are a WW2 buff you will like this film. I'm surprised I never heard of it....maybe I'm not as up on films as I thought!

A triumph in war movies

[slinkydog · 10/10 · 30 August 2004]

In my own opinion, this is a triumph for war movies. It's just as intense as any war movie, but doesn't contain all the blood and guts our society today gives us. It has enough to convince the audience that it's all real and then brings you into the atmosphere by the fantastic acting. (Kudos to all actors involved) This is also a low-budget film, which helps you appreciate it even more because there are no signs of that small budget. This is just as intense as pretty much any war movie you will ever see, but you don't have to worry about it being too violent or bloody. It's just as compelling because it puts you inside the eyes of the soldiers themselves. I hope that all who have access to see this movie take advantage of it because this is a side of cinema that isn't seen often.

Impressive for its budget

[Joker-26 · 6/10 · 31 March 2006]

I could not believe this was made for under a million dollars. A good group of actors who aren't all preening pretty boys and who certainly have a degree of on-screen chemistry. Perhaps the most interesting aspect to this film is the depiction of the Malmedy 'massacre'. This scene has been done before, most notably in 'Battle of the Bulge' where the Germans basically are depicted rounding up the American PoWs, trucking in heavy MGs and mowing nearly all of them down. In S and S, the writers/director portray it as a confused situation where by a bungled escape attempt by one of US troops leads to panic on both sides. When the guard searches the prisoners before the killing, he respects 'Deacon's' bible and picture of his wife and lets him keep them. Hollywood doesn't do things like that. A Hollywood production would have shown the German ripping up the bible and rifle butting the American! So the film's depiction of this scene I believe is more accurate historically in that it was a combination of unfortunate events rather than 'zee evil Nazis lining up zee innocent Americans and firing'.

Although I found the religious theme/debate to it quite interesting, there were some very clichéd moments. It's been mentioned by other posters the Allies killing 30-odd Germans before losing one of their own. I think that the producers/director/writers wanted to 'make up' for the numbers of Americans killed in the 'massacre' scene, which does tend to happen in US war films quite often. It's sort of a 'revenge' thing which just makes the film seem more unrealistic, even though it claims it's 'based on true events'. And how come in modern war films there's good Germans and bad Germans but there's never any bad Americans?? The US forces committed many atrocities against German troops as well but these are never shown on film. Anyway, these are just some criticisms of what overall is a good film. Some have compared it to 'a Midnight Clear' which is fair in some ways but in other ways S and S is superior. Better direction, better shots, better script (though not necessarily better acting I believe) make it a more watchable affair compared to Midnight Clear. Even though the film obviously has big Mormon backing, their beliefs are never even mentioned (apart from the title maybe?) which again impressed me.

Bad acting, predictable story.

[ingvar-10 · 3/10 · 6 January 2006]

I'll keep this "rewiev" simple.

The plot about different people finding and helping each other is good enough, but it fails to deliver.

I liked the beginning of the movie. It gave me hopes for a good story. But after the initial slaughter and the escape of a few gi's it declined. You feel that u have seen this a thousand times before, you always knew what would happened next. At least a surprise or 2 would be nice. (The part where the "missonary" capture a German soldier that shows out to be an old pupil from Berlin was just plain silly).

Every time the soldiers where "bonding" it felt like a cliché, done a million times before. The actors are non-convincing. When the soldiers where talking it seldom felt natural, especially the British pilot was awful. It feels like they just want to get the scene done and go home.

The scenes portraying bad weather where laughable. It sounded stormy, but the trees around never moved. And the snow was falling straight to ground, not being forced by the wind that was supposed to be there.

This is one of the worst war-movies I have ever seen.

Probably the best made film under $1 Million

[droopfozz · 10/10 · 6 August 2004]

The comment posted on the main page link certainly had an axe to grind against mormons. In fact the film itself never at all mentions the LDS church and for all we know Deacon could have been a baptist. That is all besides the point. The film takes us where a war film has never been before, the religious implications. And it is not overtly preachy. Somehow with under $1 million dollars the director has made a film that looks like an epic hollywood war film, complete with handheld cameras and a few war buddy cliche's. But what seperates this film from the pack is its main character, a devout religious sharpshooter, shellshocked from a raid gone bad, trying to make moral sense of what is going on. The film is also a great war film, and impecably accurate historically. The only sign that the film is low budget is its musical score, which at some times is a bit obtruse, but the acting is superb, and the directions is excellent. 9/10

Well Made But Not A Lot Of Action

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 23 June 2013]

In December 1944 German soldiers shot 80 American POWs during the Ardennes offensive at Melmedy in Belgium . In terms of murder this was relatively minuscule compared to the crimes committed by the Nazi regime but it was widely quoted at the time because it gave the Western allies the impression the Germans weren't taking any prisoners during this offensive . It should also be remembered the Western allies hadn't come across the numerous Nazi camps on German soil such as Belsen and Dachau . On a similar note and with hindsight it's not just the victors who write history but also Hollywood and the Malmedy massacre has featured occasionally in Hollywood movies with SAINTS AND SOLDIERS being one of them

The massacre at Malmedy sets up the story where four survivors escape the mass murder and find themselves on the run behind enemy lines . Made in 2003 you get the distinct impression this was produced to cash in on the massive success of BAND OF BROTHERS , That said SAINTS AND SOLDIERS holds up in its own right though are some flaws

As a Briton what will rankle with a lot of compatriots is that a British pilot Flt Sgt Oberon Winley is introduced to the story who is an American-centric caricature of the British . First of all if someone in the RAF was a flight sergeant they would have been working class . Only pilot officers and very posh people would be called Oberon . It's also painfully obvious that the posh upper class character is played by someone who is obviously an American actor . It's nice to see an American film acknowledge that the Yanks didn't win the war single handed but couldn't the producers have contacted British Equity ? Mind you half of Easy company were played by British actors in BAND OF BROTHERS so I suppose the serve is returned

Something that might disappoint a lot of people is the fact that there is very little in the film . After the massacre in the start of SAINTS AND SOLDIERS two thirds of the film is taken up by the characters hiding from the Germans with characters talking to one another . It is somewhat refreshing to see a war film that doesn't concern itself with spectacle and incident but anyone tuning in to see bloody big battles will be seriously disappointed since this is a more thoughtful war film

Boring, Shallow Story, Low Budget, Hypocritical, Awful!

[nidaros · 1/10 · 10 January 2011]

This movie sucks in all respects:

It has a dull, boring and predictable story.

Its low budget becomes apparent throughout the movie and does not allow to make up the deficits of the story by means of good action.

One of it's anchors is hypocritical, religious nonsense.

The characters are either stereotypic or totally unrealistic in order to serve the religiously influenced storyline.

It is full of errors - related to the movie itself as well as the "real events" it is supposed to be based on.

Anyone, who speaks decent German, will hardly be able to stand the horrible language skills of the German figures without bursting into laughter, which isn't quite a desirable mood for a wannabe serious and emotionally moving movie.