Anyone here seen: Pathfinders: in the company of strangers?

[history-buff1944]

I had heard of the movie before but quickly forgot about it till this morning and I bought it on DvD as an impulse buy. If anyone has seen it? please let me know your opinions on it. It LOOKS good to me but want to wait to see what those more knowledgable then I--think of it?

 

I wish they would make a movie featuring the exploits of Sergeant Jake McNiece (SP?) who was a Pathfinder in the Screaming Eagles. I read the book about him and some fo the stuff in it is absolutely worthy of having in a Bob Hope and Bing Crosby sketch. :lol:

[Sabrejet]

Pretty poor stuff IMHO!! Budget movie-making.

[history-buff1944]

Pretty poor stuff IMHO!! Budget movie-making.

 

 

Criminey, twas what I was afraid of. Ill watch it anyway then see if its worthy of being in the movies library.

[history-buff1944]

Just watched this movie last night and found it was OK--not worth paying $10 bucks for but--still not too badly done. Now if they would make a version of the story featuring Sgt. Jake McNiece (SP?) and his "Filthy Thirteen" and using more money on it and a known cast--id be more than willing to spend mor emoney on it. This movie I thought was a very well made effort from those who made the movie.

[MAW]

I think it's worth the 10 bucks......make some popcorn and chillax some night.

 

Is it "Band of Brothers" quality?...........no, of course not.......but it's way better than a 1960's or 70's WW2 flick as far as how it looks. A cheap, respectable "B" grade film......keep your expectations realistic and you'll like it OK.

[history-buff1944]

I think it's worth the 10 bucks......make some popcorn and chillax some night.

 

Is it "Band of Brothers" quality?...........no, of course not.......but it's way better than a 1960's or 70's WW2 flick as far as how it looks. A cheap, respectable "B" grade film......keep your expectations realistic and you'll like it OK.

 

 

Heh heh, the good news is im keeping my copy BUT--will be buying The Filthy Thirteen for reading. ;-))

[Sparty On]

Best part about this movie was that I only spent $1.25 to rent it. Didn't particularly care for it. Typical B movie with very poor acting. And what was with all the "in your face" camera shots?

[willysmb44]

And what was with all the "in your face" camera shots?

I haven't seen the movie yet, but those shots must be what they're teaching at some of the lower quality film schools these days. Almost all the low-budget war movies now have them for some reason...

[Paul70]

Bad acting and weak plot. Gear was great. I would say typical reenactor movie, full of cliques and stuff we think is cool, but I doubt an English family would be discussing B-17's at every meal.

Paul

[hardheaded]

I watch a lot of movies ( to many ) and I enjoy military type movies the most. I hate not watching the whole movie after I paid to rent it but I took this one out of the player about half way through.

 

hardheaded

[willysmb44]

The reviews here really echo what's been posted at Netflix:

http://dvd.netflix.com/Movie/Pathfinders-In-The-Company-Of-Strangers/70257895?trkid=191776

[history-buff1944]

Looks like--at least here--a possible 80/20 split? Ill tell you one thing--it beats the heck out of war movie turkeys like: Battle For the Last Panzer--which starred klaus kinski. Wanna struggle through a bad movie? try that one on for size. :lol: Honorable mentions for bad movies include: Ski Troop Attack and Beach Red.

[willysmb44]

I tried watching it from netflix tonight. Mostly to see if I could spot the five people I knew that were in the film (I never spotted any of them). OH MY GOD, it's so painful to watch!

When you guys complained of the close-ups, you weren't kidding. The person with the greatest responsibility in this film was whoever had to trim nose hairs. So many scenes where only saw a face so close up that the chins and foreheads were out of the frame!

I wanted to like this movie. Small budget I can live with (for example, I thought "saints and soldiers" wasn't half bad. But this movie was horrible. Terrible script, worse acting. The re-enactors should be commended for much of the grea and uniforms looking good, but that's all the film has going for it.

[history-buff1944]

I tried watching it from netflix tonight. Mostly to see if I could spot the five people I knew that were in the film (I never spotted any of them). OH MY GOD, it's so painful to watch!

When you guys complained of the close-ups, you weren't kidding. The person with the greatest responsibility in this film was whoever had to trim nose hairs. So many scenes where only saw a face so close up that the chins and foreheads were out of the frame!

I wanted to like this movie. Small budget I can live with (for example, I thought "saints and soldiers" wasn't half bad. But this movie was horrible. Terrible script, worse acting. The re-enactors should be commended for much of the grea and uniforms looking good, but that's all the film has going for it.

 

 

Heh heh, maybe they should have used the actors that were used in that WWII Coca Cola commercial. :lol:

[sgmjsh3]

Hey Lee-you know who did the uniforms and gear, right? He was still working on it about the time I left, was really frustrated with some of it.

[willysmb44]

I talked with several people who were in the film over the weekend at a show. I was told by all of them that one guy pretty much called all the shots, ignored all the advice of people who knew better and always went with what he thought looked cool. He supposedly also picked his buddies for all the main roles as well (which probably explains the horrible acting).

Hey Lee-you know who did the uniforms and gear, right? He was still working on it about the time I left, was really frustrated with some of it.

You mean Butch, right? I felt so bad for the guy once I saw the film, I remember how excited he was after coming back from the first shoots, he was so stoked about a pathfinder movie. And to do all that work for a piece of... stuff like this.