Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Borgarkeri A bit overrated, but still an amazing film

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

joekwiatkowski I haven't read the other reviews, so I don't know if anybody else has touched on this point, BUT...have you ever seen a movie where it seemed that the parts were written specifically for the actors that played them? This movie seems that way to me. I get the idea, right or wrong, that the screenwriter had Telly Savalas in mind, for instance, for the role of 'Big Joe' before he inserted the first sheet of paper into his typewriter. Ditto for Don Rickles, Clint Eastwood, Donald Sutherland, and all the rest. Personality-wise, they all fit into their roles perfectly.With regard to the idea of making a comedy movie set in the midst of war, I suspect that soldiers involved in combat develop their own bitter sense of humor in their attempts to cope with the tragedy all around them.I would have been more offended with the early sub-plot involving 'Big Joe' (Sevalas) and his concern with securing willing French girls for his men to have sex with. What do feminists have to say about that? I'm no expert, but I suspect that soldiers are even more concerned with sex than the 'average man' since they don't know if they'll have the opportunity for one more intimate encounter before they get killed in action.One minor aspect I was very pleased to see was the selection of which unit the characters came from. The script placed them in an outfit that was actually in that part of France in the late summer of 1944. I would have to suspect that the movie was set in September of 1944, since the Americans hadn't yet taken Nancy and there was one sequence where the men are siting around in their t-shorts, apparently quite comfortable.All in all always a lot of fun to watch, whenever it's on TV.

Charlie Wilson Perry Lopez' character name in the movie is not Petuko. it is 'Pachuco'! An inferred slant as to Lopez' ethnicity in associating him with the Mexican subculture, 'Pachucos': one can clearly hear 'Big Joe'call Lopez 'Pachuco'. I know, I'm a South Texan, born in El Paso and raised in Corpus Christi; I had to fight-off such during my Jr High years. I am sure that the LA based mega studio did not want to inadvertently incite racial tensions in denigrating such ethnic groups thereby the intentional misspelling in the credits. A subliminal twist on pronunciation I guess; as to what is printed vs what is heard. It is quite obvious that screen writing decided to base character names on trait: Big Joe/Little Joe (obvious), Crapgame (grifter or con artist), Oddball (obvious), Cowboy (Texan), Mulligan (bad shot), Babra (Barbara) and Petuko (Mexican: audibly, Pachuco). Wikipedia: PachucoPachuco refers to a particular old school subculture of Chicanos and Mexican-Americans associated with Zoot suits, street gangs, nightlife, and flamboyant public behavior. The idea of the Pachuco – a Zoot-suited, well-dressed, street-connected flamboyant playboy of Hispanic/Latino heritage – originated in El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, had moved north, following the line of migration of Mexican railroad workers ("traqueros") into Los Angeles, where it developed further.The origin of the term "Pachuco" is uncertain, but one theory connects it to the city of El Paso, Texas, which was sometimes referred to as "Chuco Town" or "El Chuco". People migrating to El Paso would say, in Spanish, that they were going "pa' El Chuco". These migrants became known as Pachucos. The name "Pachuco" is quite possibly derived from the name of the city of Pachuca, the capital of Mexico's Hidalgo state. There have long been migrants from Hidalgo state living in Texas.

Leofwine_draca One of those old-fashioned all-star movies, this is a film which is very easy viewing, amiable throughout, and one which provides good-natured laughs at regular intervals. In the days of modern blockbusters which contain snappy one-liners, frenetic pacing, and more, it's refreshing to see an older movie like this which is content to take things more slowly and build up the plot before getting to the action.The story of a plan to make a daring raid on a bank in occupied France is a fresh and interesting one, while the budget of the production is high enough to give the war and battle scenes a realistic look; you never for one second aren't convinced of the authenticity of the situation. As the scale of the journey grows, so do the laughs, one particularly good moment arising when the US General mistakenly believes that the men are advancing the lines instead of going out on a limb to get themselves some rewards instead. The ending of this film is highly suspenseful, consisting of a minutely-planned raid on the bank which is unfortunately guarded by Germans complete with three tiger tanks.The cast is one to die for, containing heavyweight turns from the reliable Clint Eastwood and Telly Savalas, a comic performance from Don Rickles as a bumbling and greedy companion, plus one memorably kooky performance from Donald Sutherland as a whacked-out hippy who is definitely before his time; his warped character is disturbingly strange while being frequently funny at the same time. Savalas is the gruff sergeant who chews the scenery, Eastwood the somewhat bland and heroic leader who doesn't have many memorable characteristics about him.The best thing about this film is the fine mix between war movie and comedy. One minute we're laughing along at the jokes, the next feeling down about a man who gets blown up in a minefield. The skillful mix is what makes this film watchable, as on the one hand you get to enjoy the thrills and spills of a war film, and on the other you get to laugh at some fine comedy and have a good time while you're watching as well. Good music and photography complement the film on either side, and although the running time is long, the time goes by pretty quickly and never outstays its welcome. Recommended, light-hearted fun with just the right balance of action and laughs.

ronsbhs What STONED 60's writer wrote "Oddball's" dialog? absolutely nobody talked like that in WWII. Were they only trying to appeal to the 60's "peace-nik"crowd when this was written (After all, it had to be written in the 60's since it was released in 1970)Terrible writing, story shot full of too many holes, without the many stars carrying this it would never have made any money.Clint Eastwood surely must have needed the money to make this one as it surely wasn't up to the story lines of his most successful films.I'm wondering if what we're seeing today is the original or the many re-writes that were rampant during the selling-off of all of MGM's assets.