French and Indian War movie,

[Zonie]

For those interested:

[youtube]BWVyVMbSzM4[/youtube]

Film trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1h3w7TQ99I

Behind the scenes video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrgflqwmjtY

 

[tecum-tha]

I have no idea why a movie with this kind of harsh topic must be made suitable for children to watch. All the trailers, all the advertisements...
Instead of cinema they should have chosen the mini series format, which is much easier on time restrictions and thus what scenes you cut away.
Same with LOTM, directors cut far superior to regular movie cut.The same is true for "
Kingdom of Heaven", where the director's cut is far superior because key scenes which cause the action of characters where not deleted.
Language:
Hardly any german or other non english speaking immigrants spoke english despite very crude words. In their everyday life they would have still spoken german.
I know, adjustment to the american audience...
Budget:
No-one expected any serious mass scenes from a low budget movie, but why then choose an arrival scene in an harbor that must be seriously busy and not something different like seeing them leave a colonial settlement into the "wilderness" and put the arrival in "the story telling beginning"?
This movie was on the level of "The Broken Chain" without the "now" stars..

Anyways, I look forward to "Michiel de Ryuter" in October.....for more period correct action...

 

[Snakebite]

I watched it last night, IMO, not great but not bad. And based on a true story. Certainly not sorry I bought it.

 

[lowcsp]

I was entertained buy this movie that's all anyone should expect. But it only cost me $3.00 to rent on vudu.

 

[Alden]

Yeah, I'd still recommend it.



Did I mention how distractingly pretty the star is? Um, no, not the gun fellas...
:shake:

 

[Flint62Smoothie]

Boy, but her sister to the right is downright ugly ...

 

[Alden]

LOL!

 

[brubincam]

her right or our right

 

[Alden]

Either way, they're both men. Not that there's anything wrong with that...

...they were both kinda purty in their wigs and makeup.

:wink:

 

[Zonie]

After reading folks cussin and discussin the movie I went out and bought a copy.

Although the story line seemed to jump around a bit and I think viewers who aren't aware of the events that were happening at the time will have a hard time understanding why some scenes showing the military and lawmakers were suddenly on the screen, I thought the movie was pretty good.

Being produced by a Christian film industry, I fully expected to see a great deal of Christian doctrine expressed but I was pleased to see the religious aspects were very fitting for the time, people and place the film represents.

In fact, there was a lot less praying in the film than I suspect really would have been happening.

(For those wondering, I am a Christian but I don't like to have other peoples Christian ideals pounded on my head.)

All in all I would rate the movie as a 7 out of 10.

You folks back in the Eastern areas sure do have a lot of trees! :shocked2:

 

[Alden]

Being produced by a Christian film industry, I fully expected to see a great deal of Christian doctrine expressed but I was pleased to see the religious aspects were very fitting for the time, people and place the film represents.

In fact, there was a lot less praying in the film than I suspect really would have been happening.

That's exactly what I thought. There was no proselytizing. Nothing was crowbarred in or seemed out of place. For the time-frame the film is set in religion was played down in my opinion for modern, more secular, audiences. Again, in this movie it seems to me people's faith just wasn't completely ignored.

I'm glad someone posted the trailer here -- I hadn't seen it -- and I have to say it oddly plays up the religious angle that just doesn't manifest itself in the movie. It's almost false advertising to a fundy target audience I guess. They should have been advertising on the Traditional Muzzleloading Forum if they wanted to make their investment back!

 

[misher]

One of the few things I miss from the East are the big old trees,...that and maybe crickets.
No crickets here.

 

[Nativearizonan]

There's crickets all around and in my house, and I can't hear them anyway. Too much misguided youth around noisy, fun stuff.

 

[Grumpa]

You folks back in the Eastern areas sure do have a lot of trees! :shocked2:

:haha: But nothing like they had back then!

(When my California born (Ventura) sister-in-law first came east for a visit, she remarked that we had a lot of beautiful scenery, but she couldn't see it for all the trees!)

 

[Nativearizonan]

I hadn't been back east for a number of years when my wife and I drove back on I-40. When we got a few miles into TN, I remarked to her "This country is so green it hurts my eyes." Then I thought of that line in the Ballad of Davy Crockett.

 

[No Deer]

Just watched the movie. I found it to be entertaining. I agree that the religious aspect, while the basis of the story, was not in your face sermonizing. As the others said, it fit the time, place and people.

I am no expert on guns and clothing of the period, but everything looked good to me. Of course I watch these movies for the entertainment because they are about the time period that I like, not to critique the weapons and dress.

If you can watch the end of this movie without a lump in your throat, I will be surprised. Although it was predictable enough that I knew what the ending was, it still brought tears to my eyes.

 

[Alden]

It may have been the impetus to make the film but I didn't see the religious aspect as the basis of the story; rather, I saw the story as the basis for the wholly, if not holy, appropriate religious aspect. Now that's a well crafted line right there my forum brethren...

In any case you have, of course, hit upon the second scene of the film (the other being an insight into Braddock's massacre) which I alluded to that was most poignant (for me) -- the end.

 

[hermdog]

Well, I really enjoy reading posts on this website and I very seldom post a reply but I feel compelled to post a reply to this one. My wife and I bought the DVD after seeing all the good reviews. I am always amazed how people find so many things wrong with something that was made as entertainment. I don't expect everything to be totally historically correct. History can be pretty boring and often needs to be fancied up to hold people's attention and maintain entertainment value. When Hollywood makes something they are looking for profit. With all that being said, this movie sucks. While the picture quality was good and some of the scenery was great the acting and the writing were terrible. I really liked the improved road leading up to the homestead. Looked to be graded and well maintained. Whoever did the casting for the Native Americans needs to try again. They all appeared to be "white guys" in makeup. Our local high school drama club does a better job of makeup and casting. The dialog was nasty bad, "girl run away, must burn", I doubt if they would have spoken to each other in broken english so just let them talk. I suggested this movie to my wife and now I owe her bigtime. 10 minutes in to the movie she said this is worse than the Hallmark movies I make fun of and I had to agree! I understand this is a low budget film but I would give it a 3 on a scale of 1 to 10.
Just my opinion.

 

[vtbuck223]

Hermdog...I was literally laughing out loud when I read your post. Also very funny to me...is that of all the threads...this is the one that drew you out of your shell! I agree with your criticisms but really want to like this movie and am trying to see the powder horn half full instead of half empty. I applaud them for even trying...and did see some very nice aspects of this film. I very much agree with whoever suggested scaling the scenes down to something that was more manageable to the production. Some of the recently well done Civil War movies are a good example of this...like "The Colt" and "Pharoah's Army". All of the scenes were small scale and yet somehow it still felt connected to the bigger picture. They were very careful not to try and shoot something that they couldn't portray.

Question: Is this actually your very first post or can people change their profile name or do something else to go back to 0? I've wondered that before in reading posts...where the writer was obviously a veteran of the forum but the post read #1? Just curious about that...if anyone can answer my question.

 

[Alden]

As I said one had to choose to be offended.

...and offended to make their very first post here about this movie.

:shake:

Still, it is only rated a 3.9 on IMDB and 3.4 on Rotten Tomatoes, however, 64% of people at the latter liked it. I did too and believe members here will as well.