CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Bereamic Awesome Movie

SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Spike Neil I'm laughing a lot. Not because the film is funny in any way but at the lack of acting in this film. I'm not an actor, I am a musician...But quite honestly, if I played my guitar as badly as these actors play their roles then I would expect to starve to death!! I think the director must have been working in the porn industry at some point as the level of direction is strangely similar!! I will persevere to the end though.....Cos I like a laugh

Menri11433 Good movie, some electric acting and action scenes, but drifts into the arena of silly on more than a handful of occasions.Gotta disagree with some of "historynut"'s points....for one, I think the TV Guide review of this film hit the nail on the head with regards to the acting: "the performances have the subtlety of sports broadcasting". And that excludes Jan Triska's performance as Captain Wirtz, which I think stole the film along with William Sanderson and Freddy Coffin. All three are over-the-top performances, but each actor knew how to pull it off. The main group of "heroes", however, played up everything they could to IMAX-scale proportions. Oftn to the point where sometimes....well, cartoonish wouldn't too far off in describing it.And as far as the use of reenactors, Frankenheimer does use them very well here, as mentioned by historynut. Where it slips away from him seem to be the stunts...check out the prisoner v.s. raider brawl, led by Limber Jim. There's some play-fighting going on that has not been seen since my high school production of West Side Story.And as far as past reenactor usage in film...I agree they were used well in Glory. I also agree that reenactors were used not-so-well in "Gettysburg". However, for all its instrinsic faults, Maxwell seemed to have learned his lesson when using reenactors in "Gods and Generals". There was a FAR more strict screening process in the casting of onscrean reenactors than in "Gettysburg" (I, too, participated in that film). As well, and perhaps most importantly, Maxwell did not let ANY reenactor attempt his own "death" or even "maiming" in any of the major battle shots without prior expressed permission by him, his A.D. or his stunt coordinator. When reenactors were chosen to "get hit", they were then properly coached in how to take a death fall, and placed strategically away from the actors and stuntmen. "Gods and Generals" also had a much higher production value than here, but that goes with the huge budget the film had.

Tilla-2 As a Civil War buff, this is one of my favorite films. If you enjoy romantic war stories, don't rent this. There are no romantic plot lines or even women in the movie. The closest thing to a romantic plot line would be when Martin speaks of his wife and asks Josiah to send her his wedding ring.If you enjoy war films that are not cluttered with cliche romantic plots and are more like buddy films this one is for you. The acting is amazing, and the story if fresh look at a little known part of Civil War history. The only problem with the film is time spent watching the men weaken and starve. Those scenes could have been cut a bit, but overall they are needed in order to feel the despair of the men.The story and characters are completely enthralling and I recommend this film to everyone. Just be prepared to cry.

Quinn-5 "Andersonville" is John Frankenheimer's most pivotal step in his quest to regain a perch on Hollywood's "A" list of directors, and he is in true Frankenheimer form in this latest of TNT, Civil War-oriented mini-series. Quite simply, it's about a group of Union soldiers and their span of a year doing hard time in the most infamous of Southern prison camps, and one of the most infamous of prison camps in recorded history, Andersonville, Georgia. Andersonville the prison is literally a fenced-in cesspool of humanity: it's grossly overcrowded, there's not enough food to go around, there's no shelter from the heat or cold, the creek used for drinking water is the same used as a latrine by the camp's entire population, and, on top of all this, there's a vicious gang of marauding prisoner's that prey on their weaker counterparts, taking their clothing and what little food they may have for themselves. I began watching this film expecting a smaller, tamer, less original version of "The Shawshank Redemption", and at several points you'll think likewise: we witness acts of both harsh brutality and stirring compassion, and follow our hero's as they decline physically and struggle to succeed morally. But the period setting and the freshness of the subject make it appealing more often than not. What's interesting about this big-budget, well-hyped production, though, is that the entire cast are relative unknowns, the lead role being held by a young Broadway actor named Jarrod Emick, who's acting demonstrates he is just that: a Broadway actor. He projects his voice and over-emphasizes words as though onstage, and when a dramatic monologue is in order, his facial contortions rival the worst case of constipation one can imagine. The length of "Andersonville" is a problem, as after awhile it just runs out of stuff to say, and appears to be chipping away at the minutes until the conclusion. After all, how many scenes can one sit through of watching deteriorating men rot away in sheets of rain or stifling holes in the ground . . . look for a deliciously vicious role by Frederick Coffin as the evil prison gang's leader, and William Sanderson as his cowardly right hand man. There's also a small role by William H. Macy as a Confederate prison inspector who discovers the camp's horrors and condemns it . . . great score by Gary Chang.