Soldier isn't a great movie, and everyone that hated it has plenty of good reasons. But I liked Soldier alot, partly because my expectations were so low that what I saw surprised me.
First, the art direction is tight and well executed. As far as science fiction backdrops go, Soldier was doing things with more design then 90% the genre. The sets, costumes and props were all consistent and competently executed; I didn't love all of their future military style, but I was impressed with the effort. For me, this made the movie worth the time it took to watch.
Second, I'm a Kurt Russell fan. I grew up watching this guy in some of the most memorable movies of my youth ... The Barefoot Executive and his John Carpenter films. Soldier is essentially an action movie, and the role of Sergeant Todd is an essential action hero. It's not an award winning role, but Kurt musters up convincing emotion with VERY little dialog.
Third, the fight scenes and battles are well choreographed. This isn't iron monkey, or even the matrix, but once again, it far exceeds the average level of quality in the genre.
If you haven't seen it, and you like sci-fi action films, pick it up if you pass at your rental depot of choice. Just don't expect the next Bladerunner.

It's interesting that all who (so far) seemed to like this film had no expectations--I guess that's the trick. In contrast with them, I had optimistic expectations, and that was a mistake. As soon as I saw how close to the faces the camera always was, I knew we were in the hands of an extremely amateur director--that's always a clear sign of them, they think it is arty or effective or intense to hold the camera about two inches away from the actors. The actors in this film, though, had only one facial expression each.
If the close camera wasn't enough, the lack of light in the film killed it. The film seemed to be entirely filmed in the dark. So now we know that the cinematographer was a rank amateur, as well. "Ooh ooh, we're going to light the set with a flashlight! That will make it all seem intimate!" No, that made it all seem invisible.
On top of the serious technical flaws, there was absolutely no story beyond the barest hint of an idea that was never developed, and nothing new about this kind of relationship was illuminated. (Perhaps this is a new kind of film for Germany, but in Los Angeles, forget about it.)
The fact that this film won a couple of film festival awards doesn't indicate the quality of the film, but besmirches the quality of these particular festivals. I can assure you that this film won't win anything in the festival where I saw it. In fact, two times during the film it seemed that it was finally over and people started to get up to leave (this was one of the side effects of the cinematographer's "total darkness" technique). But when the film shuddered on, instead, there were moans coming from the audience. And once the movie finally DID end, it was clear that it hadn't mattered if it actually had ended at either of the two earlier points. An earlier ending would have saved the audience from yet more monotonous scenes of domesticity (folding sheets, cutting vegetables, spreading honey on bread). Yeah, we get it, the life of the lonely old man was boring-- but we figured that one out at the very beginning.
I recommend that audiences miss this one, it has absolutely nothing to offer sophisticated movie-goers.