So let's cut to the chase. This entire film from the opening title to the end credits, has no business with the name of 'Battle of the Bulge' unless you refer to the screenwriter's head. There was not even the remotest hint of historical accuracy. It was along the lines of 'They Died with their Boots On,' the supposed true story of Custer's Last Stand. But BOTB is fantasy. What bugs me, among other things, is this: they had a decent budget for the film, and the real battle, while on an immense scale, quite beyond the production's scope, could have been recreated with some degree of accuracy without lessening the drama. In other words, they COULD have done better and made a great film along the lines of 'Longest Day.' But they didn't, choosing instead to make Gen. McCauliffe's famous "NUTS!" comment into a minor footnote, and the desperate struggle of the 101st Airborne troops in the forests around Bastogne into an afterthought. The men who fought at Bastogne and its environs consider it to be one of the most horrifying experiences of the entire time from D-Day to the surrender of Germany. The massacre at Malmedy was portrayed with some realism, but the circumstances were very different. But why list them? The film is made and long passed into Hollywood past. Let's just hope that someday someone will redo it with the drama and accuracy, and most importantly, the respect that was given to 'Band of Brothers.' A further note: I realize that it was difficult to recreate real-looking Tiger tanks and Shermans, but is a forest so hard to come by? Or snow? What's with the Ardenne Forest being shot on a Spanish plain with patches of flour scattered around?
Review of Battle of the Bulge
