Not as good as I had heard

Rating: 6/10 (24 October 2014)

I agree with peterh-140, this movie did not deliver. I thought the script was bland, Pitt's portrayal was pretty bad, which is surprising because he has potential and I like him in a few others; in this movie he didn't seem to embody the character. The Mexican Pena guy's lines during the lull in the lady's kitchen was not scripted well; I know he was drunk, but it wasn't emotionally heavy enough talking about Normandy and horses. Shia's character seemed authentic. I've read over 60 WWII memoirs and non-fiction books and there were a lot, and I mean a lot, of religious people in the ranks during that time. The writer did get a character right. Shia's portrayal was a little over the top though; it seemed he was crying in every scene he was in, am I right? Think back. When the new guy tries to go back and check on Emma after the bombing and the ugly guy stops him, the new guy throws a slap at him; what was that? I though the director made the actor take actual punches? That's what Pena and Shia said on Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon. The Tiger tank should have hit the lead tank or second in line; that way the ones following would be blocked going forward. Shia peeing in the ammo box was uncalled for; there was a bottom hatch or he could have gone outside: I mean how much more conspicuous could he have been? There was a tank in the middle of a tank battle, Pitt had already taken care of the lookout on the horse. Okay movie, overall; marginally better than Monuments Men, which was another awfully written movie that deserved a better script; like this one. The tank battles were pretty good, points for that. I'm glad it didn't show sex and nudity; only implied it. That was tasteful and went with the flow of the movie well.