The Lost Battalion

2001 "Caught between two lines of fire, the Germans gave them two options: surrender or die. They chose a third."
7| 1h32m| en| More Info
Released: 02 December 2001 Released
Producted By:
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Fact-based war drama about an American battalion of over 500 men which gets trapped behind enemy lines in the Argonne Forest in October 1918 France during the closing weeks of World War I.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.
Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.
Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
wattsnc A Battalion is lost in the Argonne in this amazing movie with action and wits. With everyone falling in love with the soldiers and seeing World War 1 for what it really is. This is an all around great movie that should go down as one of the best movies of the 2000s that everyone should watch.
zkonedog I first watched "The Lost Battalion" in the early 2000s and had remembered it as being an excellent World War I film. After a recent viewing, however, I came to discover that this movie has not aged very well at all.For a basic plot summary, "Lost Battalion" tells the story of Major Charles Whittlesey (Rick Schroder), who finds his WWI battalion trapped behind enemy lines in the Argonne Forest of France, 1918, during the first World War. Despite being lied to by his commanding officers and under constant German pressure, Whittlesey must find a way to keep his men together and hold their ground until reinforcements can arrive.There are three easily-identifiable problems with "Lost Battalion" that prevent it from being a true cinematic classic:The first is just sheer production value. It was pretty good for A&E 20 years ago, but it has very much of a low-budget feel now. Perhaps if it were to be converted to Blu Ray that would help. I know that it can't help the time in which it was made, but because the characters aren't all that great (see below), it really has nothing else to stand on except visuals.Secondly, it really tries to copy "Saving Private Ryan" in terms of that battle scenes. Once again, I get it...that was the "thing to do" for war films of that era, but there's a reason "Ryan" lives on while others fade away. It's because that was a great all-around movie. Too many people just remember the Omaha Beach scenes and forget that it truly was a cinematic masterpiece. "Lost Battalion" needed to take a different direction to distinguish itself.Finally, the major problem with this film is that it doesn't spend nearly enough time (or any time, really), delving into character development or "bigger concept" issues. It is content to just kind of walk through the key events and only pay lip service to some great opportunities, like Schroder's character, the diversity of the platoon, and the potentially corruption of the upper military brass. All those concepts "get a look", so to speak, but only "a look". Nothing to really make you think or feel invested in the proceedings.Simply put, "The Lost Battalion" is very much a paint-by-numbers war action flick. It contains very little real drama...only relying on the tried and true "brutality of combat" trope to pull it through. In a post-"Private Ryan" cinematic environment, however, combined with low production values, that just isn't going to cut it anymore. I won't quite drop it down to a bottom- feeding 1 star, but I would give it 1.5 stars if able. It's a product of its times and very little else.
jesseaa330 well first of all who ever said that uniforms weren't accurate wow! you are a genius!! they can't be correct, it is a chargeable offense. impersonating military officer!!!! so the movie can never be 100% because who remembers what exactly is said and done in battle? and people standing up during fire...it looks like squad rushes to me which is still used in todays military so you really are an uneducated person. the movie is as accurate as law allows it to be. i believe it was a pretty good movie, the actors did a decent job, there are some inaccuracies ( a private yells at a captain, that would not happen in almost any situation, at least not in the us armed forces) and they did take a little dramatic liberties with conversations and personalities but overall it is a good movie and gives a good picture of the military abilities during WWI
robo8 I want to say the acting is bad, but I think it was the directing that made it so. I never thought much of Highlander (same director) but that one could be blamed on the 80s.This one however, has no excuses. People get shot while exiting trenches with a man in front of him!? Those kind of mistakes, along with an unclear time line, weird battle tactics, sub-par cutting and poor visual effects, makes this one a sub-par film over all.Then like so many other have commented, all this American bullshit. The German general being practically scared of his captured American private. Be prepared to swallow a lot of it, although in small doses.To sum it up, a not horrible but still definitely sub-par war movie in all aspects.