Battle of the Bulge(in Hollywood Movies) Battle of the Bulge (1965) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream Battle of the Bulge on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: In the winter of 1944, the Allied Armies stand ready to invade Germany at the coming of a New Year. To prevent this occurrence, Hitler orders an all out offensive to re-take French territory and capture the major port city of Antwerp. "The Battle of the Bulge" shows this conflict from the… Runtime: 167 min Release Date: 16 Dec 1965
I don't understand why so many critics bashed this movie. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, especially the characters that Robert Shaw and Henry Fonda portrayed. I thought Telly Savalis was excellent playing the merchandise peddlin' tanker. This movie didn't concentrate on any one actor like so many new releases do now in the style of the latest "Titanic" and "Pearl Harbor" --take an event and focus on 2-3 actors and throw in a love story. It seems like any movie that doesn't do this is not popular. I for one, think that this new wave of moviemaking is <more>
poor and "Battle of the Bulge" did not fall into that same trap although it was made back in the 60's This movie does not have a lot of fancy special effects but does have several tank battle scenes that were good considering that the special effects of that time period was limited. The storyline is followed better than most war films of today and I consider this film well done for its day. This is a war classic film in my view! 9.5/10
One of the best war movies ever made! (by angelvides)
I just wanted to say that this movie is one of the best war movies ever made. it is quite interesting and it keeps the viewer attached to the plot as it develops. very raw, very realistic, it sticks to the events that really happened during the battle of the bulge, in WWII's France.The most raw and saddest moment of the movie is when the Americans that had been taken as prisoners of war, are led to a field and then murder by the fire of German machine guns. Justice is made when the evil German officer, Colonel Hessler, is blown up in his own tank by a barrel of fuel.Great performances by <more>
Henry Fonda, Charles Bronson, James MacArthur, and everybody's favorite, Telly Savalas.I highly recommend this movie to anybody who likes WWII movies.Hopefully this film might come some day in DVD format.
Too much criticism from the 'thick glasses' brigade. (by bigkeeko)
Just scanning through the reviews of this movie there and cannot believe the amount of tank top wearing, nerdy "it's not historically accurate" comments.If you're looking for history read a book.Do the same reviewers complain about 'Terminators' lack of mechanical realism? Nowhere was it stated that Robert Shaw and co were making a documentary. The film is a bit corny here and there. The story is basic and the acting a little wooden here and there but it's entertaining. Isn't that what films are supposed to be? Entertainment? If it was that bad a show it <more>
would be dead and buried.People wouldn't be buying the DVD and talking about it forty odd years later.
The only reasons not to give this film a "10" are the aforementioned inaccuracies concerning armored vehicles and subbing the Central Texas terrain for the Ardennes.When Shaw eschews the "Lady of the Evening" provided for his comfort before battle, you know that this is one serious war movie!!!!!! Robert Shaw, Chuck Bronson, Telly Savalas, Henry Fonda....all fantastic.Much more believable than Bronson and Savalas later work in the "Dirty Dozen". A true paean to the end of the Reich!!!
Histroy recreated or rewritten? (by fasulo)
A great war movie if you ignore the fact that much of the story was rewritten for Hollywood.I have the 2005 DVD version of this 1965 movie. This version include a movie trailer, and two short subjects, "History Recreated," and "The Filming of the Battle of the Bulge." One shows film shot of the cast during the filming and starts off by showing "actual" combat photography of the battle. Although I had not seen this movie for some time I immediately recognized some of the "combat photography" as just scenes from the film that were converted to black and <more>
white.The other shows what must be British TV interviews with the director and Robert Shaw. The director, who was an American combat photographer in the Pacific during WW II, must have been hoping for a sizable British audience as he twice credited British Gen. Montgommary and the British army with coming in to destroy the German forces at the Battle of the Bulge after the American held them up. There were NO British forces involved in this battle, proving once again that for Hollywood profit is more desirable than truth.I really enjoy this film despite its historical shortcomings, especially since I was able to buy it at a discount store with four other great WW II movies for a little less than $20.
Good movie, if you ignore the title (by Baron-von-Brunk)
Let's pretend this movie has nothing to do with the battle in Belgium, winter 1944. The movie is only bad if you associate it too much with the real life events, but if you focus on the amazing line-up of actors, special effects, soundtrack, and battle sequences, it becomes a very interesting and entertaining World War II movie. Although compared to more realistic war movies like Patton, this film serves no real educational value. To me it seems like a WWII fan-fiction of some sort, like a "what-if" scenario. The movie would have probably been ridiculed a lot less if it was <more>
titled something different anything but The Battle of the Bulge , therefore people would just assume it's some sort of war sci-fi movie.Don't let the title fool you; There's only a few things in the whole movie which actually relate to the Ardennes 1944 i.e., the snow battles, unexpected German spearheads, General McAuliffe & the "nuts" letter, locations in Malmedy, etc. , meanwhile there's no mention of Patton's relief of Bastogne, which was the the event most people associate with the real battle of the bulge in the first place.Check this movie out if you'd like to see something different from factual movies. It's a small break from reality, and portrayed in a seemingly fictional but real, technically campaign in WWII. It's also a great movie if you like all-star casts and A list actors.
I love this movie. Great actors, great scenes. The song the panzer commanders sing is a great moment in movie history.I read other reviews and many of them I don't understand. Some of them give one star because they say the movie is so historically inaccurate. Was the TV show Combat accurate? Was the popular movie Dirty Dozen accurate? If you want accuracy, stick to the History channel, and even then there will be debates. If you want an entertaining war flick, watch this one! There are none much better.Another gripe I have with reviews on this movie is with those that question its title. <more>
There actually was a Battle of the Bulge in military history. But there never was a "Longest Day" battle. Titles of movies are meant to bring people to the theater, not teach history.Lest you think I am not an educated reviewer, you should know I was an enlisted Marine, then an Officer of Marines 30 years ago. My family goes back to the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WW1, WW2, the Korean War, Vietnam, and afterwards.Even if I was a fly on the wall watching one of my ancestors participate in the Battle of the Bulge, that would not qualify me to comment on the entire battle. Watch the movie, you will like it for entertainment. Then read a book afterwards if you worry you have not been sufficiently educated.
Mostly fictitious, but action-filled war movie (by SimonJack)
"Battle of the Bulge" opens with a scripted prologue that says that the fictitious account of the last major battle of World War II is intended to honor all the men who took part in the battle. Several reviewers have decried the film for that very reason. Most have noted the historical record available, and said the film is a disservice for not using some real characters and following the historical event. I agree with that sentiment to a point. For instance, Robert Ryan's General Grey might have been one of the real generals in command of the American sector at the time. Yet, <more>
fictitious characters could be some of the main action people as they are here in the film.But I suspect that Warner Brothers decided it might be more ludicrous to include the names of a few real people when the story is so fictitious in its action accounts. For instance, Henry Fonda is Lt. Col. Dan Kiley, an intelligence officer who flies reconnaissance planes to take photos behind enemy lines, and then winds up all over the place wherever there's action. Not only was there no such person, but those very actions and incidents are unbelievable, if not impossible.Then there is the fictitious account of the German Panzer leader, Col. Hessler, played superbly by Robert Shaw. The film has him making a run for the Allied fuel depot and being killed in his tank when it explodes. Col. Meinred von Lauchert, was a real decorated Panzer leader who spearheaded the German assault. His unit penetrated the deepest through the Allied lines during the battle, but he was not killed. He was promoted to general and fell back when they ran out of fuel and the Allies counterattack beat the Germans back. He lost most of his tank force and with no place to cross the Rhine River, he swam across and then quit the war and walked back to his home at Bamberg.The film title is the popular name that this operation received from press reports about it. The Germans called their offensive "Operation Watch on the Rhine." The French called it the "Battle of the Ardennes;" and the Allies called it the "Ardennes Counteroffensive." One plus of this film is that it shows the German infiltration of the American forces. As part of Operation Watch on the Rhine, the Germans had some smaller operations. For Operation Grief, they recruited English speaking Germans to go behind Allied lines. Their mission was to capture one or more of the bridges over the Meuse River before the Allies could destroy them. They wore captured British and American uniforms and used captured Allied vehicles. The movie shows them holding a bridge, and later having taken a huge fuel depot. In reality, they never achieved the goal of securing any bridges. They were able to cause some confusion and hamper Allied communication for a while, as the film shows.Another true event that the film includes is the Malmedy massacre. Here it shows about 80 American POWs being murdered. The Malmedy massacre consisted of several such incidents with a total of about 750 American soldiers and 111 Belgian civilians being killed. In July 1946, 73 members of the SS Panzer group were tried for war crimes in the Malmedy massacre. The trial took place at Dachau Concentration Camp. Of those tried, 43 were hanged and 30 were given prison sentences of from five years to life.Perhaps the biggest negative of the film is the tank battle. While it's one of the biggest action scenes, it almost detracts from the film because of the setting. The fact that almost everyone notices this about the film, says that the studio goofed in not staging it more realistically. The tank battle was filmed in the open, barren fields of the central arid region of Spain. But the Battle of the Bulge took place in the heavily forested areas of the Ardennes in Belgium, Luxembourg and France. I suspect that this bit of glaring unreality hurt this film more than anything in the minds of most viewers. This is a clear example of when a studio chooses to go for action in a fictitious setting – thinking that that will appeal most to people, instead of going for reality.All of these matters considered, I give the film eight stars for its cast, its action, the accurate things it does show, and the reality of some of the gritty fighting. The defense of the town as the headquarters pulls out is especially good combat action. Rather than having the Panzer commander killed, I think the film would have had much more appeal showing him quitting at the end and walking away to his home.All of the cast are very good in their roles. Others not mentioned already are Charles Bronson as Major Wolenski, George Montgomery as Sgt. Duquesne, Telly Savalas as Sgt. Guffy, James MacArthur is Lt. Weaver, Ty Hardin as the German MP in disguise – Schumacher, Dana Andrews as Col. Pritchard, and Hans Blech as Conrad.This is a good combat action film that most people should enjoy. But, I think it's important for one to know that it's a fictitious account that looks at some real events within the Battle of the Bulge.