Spoils of War (2009) Poster

(2009)

User Reviews

Review this title
18 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Disappointing War Drama about Counterfeit Money in WW2
mrcibubur7 November 2010
This is one of the most disappointing war drama which I have seen in the last few years. I saw 'Counterfeit' last year which I think was nominated for Oscar 2009; this is not anywhere in the same league as that.

Besides all that, the sleeve of the DVD is entirely misleading, talking about Operation Bernhard and Major Falconer involved in a love affair with the young wife of Count Maldorais in the Adriennes Forest.

There are NO women in this movie at all and the sole concentration of the movie is on a group of soldiers crossing German lines and doing a lot of shooting, a little bit like cowboy and Indians with the Germans. If it was made on a low budget, the overall production reflects that.

this is essentially a movie about a soldiers greed for money when he realises that there is chance for the 'spoils of war' while in the course of doing his duty on a somewhat bizarre mission.

The dialogue throughout, although informative, seemed extremely contrived and I felt the acting was below average standard for a movie of this kind, perhaps not a reflection on the actors involved but on the production direction and screenplay.

Very little to commend though the real life shots at the beginning and end of the film almost gave the film some meaning.

Sorry folks, this just didn't deliver!
19 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bad Bad Script.
rjsguitar12 January 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Even with limited funds, this movie could have been much better. Whoever wrote the story could have at least tried to make it seem to make sense.

Example: Germans searching for the heroes everywhere and yet the heroes decide to go back to the bunker to pick up counterfeit cash. They still decide to go one after blowing a machine gun nest, alerting anyone within earshot.

It's supposed to be 1944, both sides used silencers when needed. Here everyone uses non-suppressed weapons and pretends that the Germans won't hear them. Just Dumb

Allowing a prisoner to have hands free? Seriously?
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Why Spoils of War is By Far One of the Worst War Movies Ever Made
hur-328-63720715 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I will begin by saying that the opening was impressive...but that was literally the best part - even though there was a date-typo. Ladies and gentlemen, this is supposed to be a WWII movie. Dates. Are. Important. As soon as we get into the true beginning of the film, it is painfully obvious that this movie suffers from a) horrible, stiff scripting b) lackluster directing or both. I will now outline a few things that made me shake my head and mouth "what the f**k?!"

  • None of the actors have any chemistry. All dialogue between them is clearly forced.


  • They plan to go undercover as SS but can't even pronounce a German name properly (redemption: the British soldier saves their asses by showing that he can actually speak perfect German when they take out the gatekeeper. This was a neat scene, and the only one of the entire movie I actually liked).


  • Lines are over acted, laughter is fake, facial expressions make them look like mimes and military hand-signals made unnecessarily dramatic (the guy is right in front of you, you don't need to shake your fist five times. He gets it).


  • None of the actors act like soldiers. They hold their weapons like they've never held a gun in their lives and there's no unity. I'm not talking about personal like or dislike of each other, I'm talking about the group as a whole. This unit has been working together for at least a while, and yet they move like they're not a team. This is drilled into even the worst rookie in Basic Training and is only further reinforced as a soldier moves forward in their military career.


  • What. Was. That. Blood. Blood does not whoosh in a thin steam like that from a gut wound. It pools. Come on. I'm assuming this was a low budget movie but so was Boys Don't Cry and it did fine.


  • Aside from the music in the opening, all other background music was painfully obvious. Instead of contributing to the scene, it just stood out.


In conclusion, I felt very let down by this movie. I've seen bad war movies but this really takes the cake. It made me feel better when I came on IMDb and saw that it was only given a 3 out of 10. Bravo, Spoils of War. You've earned it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The most bad War movie ever made...
Baphomet196628 January 2011
I have no words for describe this movie....

The actors are very bad, the script is awful, the music was made with a Bontempi keyboard and recorded in the toilet.. Not or very bad special effect made with a Commodore 64...

Historically, this absolutely does not hold the road, they are supposed to be SS soldiers and to them uniforms are a mixture of Wermacht and of anything, the leader carries shoulder pads of Russian uniforms..

The German Soldiers are stupid and fat, not very the type of the Aryan Race..

the movie is stuffed with useless stock shoot, put only to fill and give a semblance of realism..

if you want to waste your time and your money, it is the film which you need..

The film director would better make to go back on the benches of a school of cinema before taking out another horror of this type. How is possible it to spend 500'000 dollars to make such a bad film, it is really to do the money by the window..

This film is a complete s***...

Greeting of Fulci
20 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Beyond words....
samson_andrew26 September 2011
I heard that the way they got the Chimpanzee's to look like they were talking in the PG Tips advert was to give them Peanut Butter...I'm convinced the same tactic was used with these 'Actors'.

I have never seen such a ridiculous film in my life. The DVD case gives it the look of a fairly average film priced at £8 when I bought it. Now I feel like I've funded terrorism or organised crime by purchasing such a dodgy film. If I went out by myself into the woods with a phone camera and a toy gun I would still make a better film than this...

Even when me and a friend was drunk and put this film on we could only bare the first 5 minutes. It made me want to take a rusty spoon to remove my eyes.

Whoever was responsible for this film, I hope you feel ashamed and consider another career, possibly rice picking in Cambodia far far away...

your pal Andy
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Rubbish
kelvinryan16 May 2011
This has to be the "Cr*p" (not even going to call it a film!) that you use to judge a films ratings when your getting near the bottom....this is the very bottom!! Man I watched it for free and even then after the first few moments I was looking for the off switch. I'm just so glad I'd not eaten prior to watching otherwise ....well you can guess! The few props used must have been borrowed from some WW2 club which had insisted they not get dirty or damaged....and the uniforms, well looked to me like the wardrobe had hit the local Jumble sales..awful! I don't know any of the actors personally or what work they've been doing previous to this but all I can assume is they were all skint and needed the money (if there was any??)... I am serious now, I really have seen better acting from 10 year olds with spud guns down the woods!!! I have tried so hard to find even the smallest thing about this film that could merit anything near 1 star and all I could come up with was the trees in the landscape, they were the only thing living in this mess. So Best actor go's to the Oak tree behind the cabin and best supporting go's to the pine by the track, well done guys! How you stood for so long while this was going on around you God knows!!
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Spoils of low budget
jimlacy200327 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I'd like to tell you what I thought of this movie, but honestly I could not sit through the first 20 minutes of it, let alone ten..

One can tell in the first few minutes that this was quite a low budget movie. From the title screens there are vintage war clips that appears as if it was thrown together with an home computer complete with fake film grain applied. (I can picture the producers of this movie laughing now.. "man you are spot on! Spiff used premier at home to get that title out!")

The whole production stank from low budget. The acting, directing, cinematography (I use the term loosely), all horrible. Being a WW2 history buff I have seen a lot of war movies and documentaries. This is not even made for TV bad, it's just b.a.d - BAD! It should be arrested for impersonating a film.

Not that low budget is always bad. There have been some that have pulled it off and made great and successful low budget movies. Maybe that's what they were thinking here. It was probably way more movie then should have been attempted with such a low budget. IMHO guys, it would have been better to concentrate on a much smaller story with a few talented (but affordable) actors on a smaller scale. Chew off a piece of something interesting from WW2, and make an story of it. Try to make some epic with such a low budget is epic fail.

The poster is the best thing about this movie. It makes it look like a movie that you might want to watch. And if you do, don't tell me I didn't warn you first.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Deplorable Knock-Off of "Where Eagles Dare" and "Kelly's Heroes"
zardoz-1330 November 2011
Warning: Spoilers
The execrable, low-budget World War II thriller takes place during the twilight of the Third Reich when a squad of U.S. Army soldiers and a lone British soldier masquerading as Germans are parachuted behind enemy lines. Ostensibly, they have been dropped into Austria to kidnap a high-ranking S.S. officer who is actually a double-agent. At the same time, our heroes are ordered to destroy of a stash of counterfeit cash that Hitler's boys have printed. This money is so real that it fools our heroes when they eyeball it for the first time. Initially, our heroes have no problem eliminating the German soldiers and taking the S.S. officer. Indeed, they have it too easy, but one of them--the Englishman--spots several crates of funny money and cannot get it out of his mind. He hates fighting for the peanuts that he is getting and dreams of going home wealthy. During combat, U.S. Army Captain Eberhart (Preston James Hillier)catches a bullet in his side, and our men retire to a house in the snow-swept woods so they can bandage his wound and he can recuperate. The Englishman (Russell Whaley) convinces two other guys to go back to the German bunker and liberate the cash. Predictably, things go awry for them and the Germans outnumber them and capture them. Meanwhile, S.S. Officer Von Weschler (Christopher Karl Johnson of "Atlas Shrugged, Part 1") decides to help them out. He takes one G.I. and they wind up rescuing our guys and the Englishman from a Nazi firing squad. Von Weschler and the three soldiers rendezvous with the transport plane sent to retrieve them. Everybody gets away but most have acquired keepsake wounds for their efforts.

"The Spoils of War" combines elements of two Clint Eastwood classics: "Where Eagles Dare" and the top secret mission behind enemy lines to rescue a high ranking officer and expose a cabal of double-agents and "Kelly's Heroes" about a bunch of G.I. who disobey orders, plunge behind enemy lines and steal a fortune in gold bars. Unfortunately, while the premise isn't entirely awful, "The Spoils of War" lacks everything: the acting is abysmal, the special effects are grade-Z, and the plot unravels when the three Allied soldiers go back to get the money. It is difficult to imagine what the filmmakers were trying to do. The only thing that looks authentic is the snowy landscape. The Nazi adversaries are push-overs from fade in to fade out and the characters are one-dimensional nobodies.

Unless you love World War II movies and plan to suffer through the good, the bad, and the ugly, you should skip "The Spoils of War." Worse than anything else, our heroes don't take home any of the loot.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Uber Bad
mfbickford15 January 2012
Bad acting, bad everything. They must've had 2 dollars to make this movie and everyone in it worked for free. The so called English soldier in the group had an awful fake English accent. Every now and then you could hear his American accent fall in. The German's spoke horrible German. We turned it off after watching for about 20 minutes. Don't even talk about the special effects. Cartoon like fires when bombs went off. During a close quarter gun battle, thousands of shots were fired, but no one is hit. We were surprised that it took twenty minutes for us to realize how bad this movie was. I guess we hoped it would get better and go somewhere.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Forget about it
depaolis27 November 2011
This film is not good period. I thought the premise of the film sounded quite good, little did I realize how poorly this film would be put together. The production value was awful in every department. I've seen better acting by small town theatre groups. The portrayal of the era was poorly sourced. The phrase FUBAR was not a term used in WW2, that came along during the Viet Nam war era. SNAFU was used in WW2. I cannot believe anyone would fund this film, wonders never cease I guess. I'd really like to know at the end of the credits what the film makers were saying. If you watch the film make sure you watch right to the end and you will know what I mean. Crazy. To sum this review up the movie was FUBARed.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Very weak movie - couldn't finish it.
ArneArdvark25 April 2012
Most of what I would say has been said by other members in their comments.

Only thing I would add is the huge oversights in the sets. The barracks high in the Austrian alps in 1940's have metal frame windows.... possibly aluminium. I would imagine that they would have been wood frame back then.

In one scene, you can see two large propane tanks in the background. I am betting the barracks set is a summer camp, resort, or roadside motel.

In one scene, a barrack has a #2 on the door. In another scene, presumably at a cabin at a distance from the barracks, there is a #3 on the door. Again, indication of a resort or motel.

There is also in the cabin scene, what appears to be a steel-insulated door commonly used in residential construction in the modern day... the standard 6-panel design. Would a cabin in the alps have such a thing?

Effects were so incredibly weak.

Do yourself a favour, skip this one. I don't know what the producers were thinking.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Almost as bad as Transmorphers
maxtheactor11 January 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Great movie if you want something to laugh at. I jumped a way through while my dad was watching it and we had the same consensus right off the bat. At first I thought he was watching a comedy sketch on youtube, but alas, we weren't so lucky.

Yes, it is low budget. Yes, it is definitely bad acting. But the thing that got me was the utter ridiculousness of the military strategies. From dodging 50 caliber machine guns to dropping your weapon on a box of money in enemy territory. Apparently if you run half a mile away from soldiers chasing you, its OK to hide behind a log and scream at each other. And if you find yourself a high ranking official taken captive, don't worry! Just tell a convincing backstory and claim you're a double agent. They'll be takin' orders from you in no time.

Anyways, yeah, while all the reviews say this "isn't worth wasting your time" and "just skip it", I found that I enjoyed my time watching it, not in the way they were probably going for, but its still good fun!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Fair Attempt Given The Budget
TheLastHobo13 November 2011
When I was young I bought my first car which was very inexpensive. The purpose of this car was to get me to my destination. On my journey I didn't have much money for food, gas and motels. I ate cheap and slept cheap and certainly didn't drive a Cadillac, but I did get where I wanted to go.

The same can be said of this picture. With a limited budget, there were not the magnificent sets as seen in 'Saving Private Ryan' or mega star actors like Brad Pitt or Tom Hanks, and certainly the script could have been better written.

Having said that, the film maker did arrive at his destination also. No, not in the style to which we are accustomed. We should evaluate each film based on the story and budget and not base our criticisms on comparisons to benchmark mega-budget films.

This artist painted a fair portrait given a limited pallet of colors.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
The Most Amazing Airplane in One of the Worst Films Ever Made
ETO_Buff11 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
The story of the airplane is below, so please read on...

There seems to be a trend right now with independent films about both world wars of the last century that has been going on for seven or eight years. The half-dozen or so indie films that I have seen in the last few years about the First World War have been surprisingly high quality in every way, with strict attention to period detail and realism, great acting, and gripping stories. On the other hand, most indie films about World War II tend to have no attention to detail, bad scripts, poor direction, incorrect wardrobes, low-budget sets, and cast actors with below average acting ability. I don't know the reason for the trend, but since I'm not a professional film critic that gets paid to watch bad films, I'm almost getting to the point where I don't want to watch any more indie WWII films because I just don't enjoy them. In fact, the carelessness with which they portray such a monumental and calamitous period in world history is kind of offensive.

"Spoils of War" is no exception to the bad WWII film trend, though I have to say that at least with this film, I knew during the opening credits that it was going to be bad. The viewer is shown a timeline of events from the Nazi Party formation in 1921 through the Invasion of Normandy in 1944. During this timeline, a New York Times front page is shown with "HILTER MADE NAZI PARTY LEADER" superimposed by the filmmakers over the original headline (if you didn't notice what I'm referring to, Hitler's name is misspelled). Unlike news stories today on the Internet, news sources in the 20th century employed editors, so mistakes like that would not have made the front page of any newspaper.

The film takes place in October 1944 and starts with an U.S. Army Infantry colonel on a beach in Normandy (even though France had been liberated in August and all U.S. forces were fighting in Holland, Belgium, and the France-Germany border by October) ordering a five-man group to kidnap the head of a German counterfeiting operation near Salzburg, Austria. The viewer is not told that the group is part of the OSS (Office of Strategic Services, the forerunner of today's CIA) until the end credits, but knowing that makes some of the plot elements even more ridiculous, so I want to point it out now. One of the men on this team is a British corporal, but we're not told why he is part of the American OSS. Maybe it's because (as we learn) that he's the only one that speaks German and they couldn't find an American that speaks German. That's logical, right? He can also determine the authenticity of British currency with the naked eye, as we learn during the mission briefing. We're also not told why the commander of an infantry regiment has the responsibility of tasking OSS personnel with neutralizing counterfeiting operations. I'm trying very hard to resist going off on a tangent about the absurdity of that concept.

After that assignment is made, we learn in the next scene that the corporal is very constipated, and then he becomes quite disgruntled that the team is not going to be given a day off as a reward for executing their last mission so well. I should emphasize at this point that the OSS was an elite, cohesive organization, and the agents in it were volunteers who were highly trained, disciplined, and motivated. The anger that the corporal develops over not getting a day off becomes a sub-plot in the film. I should also mention that we don't know he is a corporal until the end credits because only the two officers in the film wear rank insignia on their infantry uniforms. Apparently the wardrobe department doesn't supply enlisted uniforms with any rank or division insignia. The men are given a vague briefing on their objective and told to be at the plane ready to go at 0530 the following day.

The star of this film should have been the Junkers Ju-52 transport plane that flew the team from Normandy to the mountains near Salzburg. The distance of that flight is about 1,050 km (652 miles). After the team parachutes from the plane in German paratrooper uniforms, we see them walking away from the drop zone changed into German infantry uniforms, with the screen caption giving the time "0630". As I mentioned, they boarded the aircraft at 0530 hours. A normal Ju-52 had a range of 870 km (540 miles) and a maximum speed of 265 km/hr (165 mi/hr). This particular propeller-driven plane with a fixed landing gear (meaning that the wheels don't go up into the plane during flight) that was designed in 1931 went 650 miles, landing somewhere en route in enemy territory to refuel (or the fuel consumption was just as incredible as its airspeed), in less than one hour! The plane had to have been flying at about twice the speed of sound to do that, which I previously thought was not achieved until the 1970s, and only by jet fighter planes. That airplane should have its own feature film or television series!

That's an introduction to the plot. If you want to watch this film and don't want to know how the story develops before you see it, do not read any further.

After the team gets their man at a house where the counterfeit money is being stored and is making their way to the pickup point, they come across a German machine gun position. Why there is a random German machine gun position in a mountain forest of Austria several hundred kilometers from any Allied forces or active fighting is one of the many elements of the film that are not explained. Nor is there any reason given as to why they open fire on the Germans from a distance, even though they are wearing German uniforms and could have walked up and killed the Germans without engaging in a firefight. Nonetheless, that's exactly what they do. They survive the firefight, and although the captain incurs an abdominal wound, it only starts shooting blood when they reach a small, conveniently empty house and he removes his jacket. The sudden loss of a couple of ounces of blood causes him to lose consciousness.

This is what the corporal has been waiting for since before the firefight (apparently knowing that the captain was going to lose consciousness for some reason or another when they reached their destination) in order to execute his plan. He talks one of the other soldiers into going back to get some of the counterfeit money so they can be rich after the war as payback to the Army for not getting a day off after their previous mission. He tries to convince the sergeant also, but the sarge is against the idea. For those of you that may not know, a sergeant outranks a corporal, and the sergeant in this group is second-in-command, next to the captain. Evidently, this sergeant's leadership technique involves trying to convince the men under him that something they are doing wrong is a bad idea and trying to talk them out of it, instead of simply ordering them to stand down and shut up. The corporal will not be deterred, which is no surprise, considering the fact that earlier in the film he had already told the sergeant to "Go to Hell" and to "Put a sock in it" on their way to the first objective. Remember what I said about OSS personnel being cohesive and disciplined? These guys ostensibly missed that class during training.

It was not my intention to summarize the entire film, and I don't want to spoil the film for anyone that might still want to waste the time that it will take to watch it, so to wrap up this very long review, I will say that after this point in the story, it doesn't get any more ridiculous than what I've already described, except for the very last part of the mission: When Super Plane picks up the team to take them back, it makes a 180° turn in the forest clearing and accelerates about 12 meters (40 feet) and takes off.

I'm telling ya... That plane though!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Spoils of War (Spoils of 87 minutes)
hdgev8 July 2013
The movie should have been directed by Ed Wood and could be the worst war movie of all time. The only reason to watch the acting, is you my know the people in the movie and can convince them to go into comedy. The movie must have been a weekend bet between five beer drinkers because the actors they play are all way to heavy to be average infantry military soldiers at the end of four grueling years or war, not four years of buffets. I think the movie should be watched just for laughs and the commercial for lucky strike cigarettes which almost by mistake finds its way into the movie. I think the only mistake since the movie was wrong by one year for the invasion of Poland is the final scene should have the soldiers take off in a helicopter no... make it a spacecraft.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Ridiculous movie - do not rent or buy
jjquinn12 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
If you see this in the video store, walk on by! Horrible movie! Bad acting. Absolutely weird and jarring editing. Commandoes? No! They are just a bunch of inept regular soldiers.

The movie uses old WWII footage to build a back story throughout movie as filler! Even spells Hitler wrong on a newspaper article in beginning (spelled as Hilter). They must have gotten a tax credit for passing 85 minutes or something.

Ridiculous plot - the amount of phony money shown would not damage a major Allied economy, but might have helped make this movie better if they had spent some of it!

After the credits (why I finished the movie, I don't know) you are treated to a Sad Sack-like cartoon (voiced by Mel Blanc of Bugs Bunny fame, which was cool) about keeping secrets so the enemy (in this case, the Nazis and Japanese) will not find out.

Do not rent or buy.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Indie dud
Leofwine_draca5 July 2018
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILS OF WAR is another indie dud set during the Second World War. A small group of American soldiers head into Germany to kidnap a Nazi, but the whole thing amounts to a bunch of characters running around in the woods while the camera shakes a lot in an attempt to hide the non-existent budget. With amateur actors, rubbish direction and a severe lack of plot, this is patience-testing in the extreme, and comes up so short that part of it is padded out with stock footage.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The Worst film ever!
jasonqprwiegand3 July 2011
(This is the forth time I've tried to add a review for this and have dubbed it down on each occasion, please find it in your hearts to finally allow this to be posted as a warning to the masses)

The worst film I have ever bought (on holiday no access to internet to review). I cannot believe the overall rating is so high, on further investigation find that of the 27 people who voted 11, yes 11 (close family friends and actual actors in said film no doubt) gave this pile a 10. These people must be found and their IMDb accounts closed.

The costume department must of had a frenzied afternoon on ebay getting all the uniforms together and the script seems to have been written by a 10 year old who still plays war using a finger for a gun running around in his back garden making machine gun sounds and flinging his arms out pretending to be an aeroplane.

The only credit I can give to the "actors" is that they're obvious internal cringing was very well hidden whilst having to actually deliver that drivel.

I feel a better film could of been made by burning $499,800 of the budget, buy a cheap camera for $100 spend the rest on strong lager and film yourself mucking around with some mates for a couple of hours.

Regards and don't watch,,,,, you have been warned.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed