Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

evanston_dad In 1945, director William A. Wellman gave audiences "The Story of G.I. Joe," an episodic day-in-the-life film about U.S. infantry soldiers in WWII. In that film, an ensemble of actors showed us what war was typically like for the common soldier -- the tediousness of wandering aimlessly around, the dark absurdity of discussing mundanities one moment while dodging bullets and bombs the next. It was an odd, haunting little film, and in its own way quite unlike any other WWII movie from the time period.If I hadn't already seen that movie, I might have been more impressed with "Battleground." But though I thought "Battleground" was quite good in its own right, the impact of it was somewhat diluted by the fact that I saw Wellman borrowing from himself to make yet another ensemble combat movie. This one is about a more specific campaign than "G.I. Joe," namely the Battle of the Bulge. It also stars an ensemble of mostly character actors, Van Johnson serving as the closest thing the film has to a star. It features a young Ricardo Montalban, John Hodiak, George Murphy, and the Oscar-nominated James Whitmore, though why he was singled out for a nomination for this movie is unclear to me.In addition to Whitmore's nomination, the film was among the five nominees for Best Picture in 1949, and Wellman received his second nomination for directing. Robert Pirosh won the Oscar for his story and screenplay, and Paul C. Vogel won for his stark black and white cinematography, indeed one of the film's biggest assets. John Dunning rounded out the film's nominations for his editing. I read after watching "Battleground" that the entire thing was filmed on the MGM studio lot, which is absolutely remarkable given how realistic the settings are. The art directors were robbed of an Oscar nomination.Grade: A-

jsk32870 Many reviews here mention the seeming tragedy that this film has been 'forgotten' or 'underappreciated' by the public...and I have to say...'it's forgotten for a reason'...and the reason is, it's just not that good. As another reviewer mentioned, there is much discussion in the film about frivolous things like homemade pie, the token southern guy with the twang/accent and various minutia from the home front. And....that's about 90% of this colossal bore. It's one thing to develop the characters, it's another to devote the entire film to said 'development' (which, I have to say, was ineffective anyway. Who really cares about the guy constantly chattering with his false teeth? This is supposed to be funny? Try tedious and juvenile)."Battleground" trades as a war film (read the film's title again), but it's as much a war film as "Macbeth" is a murder mystery. It's not a war film. It's more like "A day in the life" drama that happens to be set in Bastogne in December '44. And they picked a rather sappy group of schleps to profile, unfortunately. I found almost none of these characters interesting in the least; no heroes, no villains, almost no one with whom I can relate, or even sympathize; just a bunch of lackluster stiffs. The character played by Ricardo Montalban was really the only one I found to be genuine, personable or relatable.The film won an Oscar for B&W cinematography, which was quite good I have to say. But did anyone else notice the 'snow' often looked more like white sand than it did snow? As this was filmed on a sound stage, I'm sure it was sand. Anyone who has walked in both snow and sand knows the difference in textures, and this was not snow. Also, if it is so bitterly cold, where is the condensation when the men breathe? It was not there, for the scenes either indoors or out, which gives the film another serious hit on the 'realism' front.The film is not all bad, it has some moments. It reminded me of "Destination Tokyo," another 'war film' heavy on character development at the expense of plot that bordered on criminal. And like "Tokyo," it's not terrible but it's certainly not memorable. I can safely put it on the 'don't care to ever see this again' list. 6/10.

classicsoncall Writer Robert Pirosh drew on his own real life experience as a soldier during the Battle of the Bulge, while director Robert Wellman brought in a couple dozen veterans of that campaign to lend further authenticity to the dialog and on screen drama for this film. The result is a compelling World War II movie that relies more on character driven vignettes than on epic battlefield action. More so than most war films, this one puts you right in the bunkers and foxholes, and you can almost feel the unbearable discomfort of freezing in the mud and snow as enemy fire punctures the stillness of the battlefield. The picture honors it's heroes, the 'Battered Bastards of Bastogne' as fighting forces intent on stopping the Nazi war machine. In a thoughtful scene, Army chaplain Leon Ames attempts to answer the question 'Is this trip necessary'? Generations of Americans to follow owe their freedom to men like the soldiers who fought in the Battle of the Bulge, screaming eagles who valued their patriotism and were willing to die to prove it.

writers_reign Several of the reviews posted here are written by people who were actually active in the Infantry and without exception they attest to its authenticity. I'm happy to take their word. One of director Wellman's main achievements is to create, on an MGM sound-stage, the feel of winter on the French-Belgian border in 1944. The cast work extremely well as an ensemble and although Van Johnson - basically the only big 'name' at the time gets both a top credit and the lion's share of screen time everyone, including Leon Ames who, as a chaplain in the last couple of reels, has probably less screen time than Ricardo Montalban, George Murphy, James Whitmore et al, pulls his weight and honours are evenly divided. A fine addition to the canon of war movies.