Field Post (2022) User Reviews

Amateurish attempt

[evatozos · 4/10 · 1 March 2023]

I am sorry to have to put this honest try at making a WWII film down. Unfortunately everything about this film except the authentic vehicles,is amateurish. Most of the actors,try as they may,cannot compete. The script is childish,often you strain to understand what the characters say,the cinematography is at least average. On the whole, this seems as a first attempt by a film student. On top of it all is the obvious lack of money as even the explosions seem a bit like firecrackers.

Gentlemen, you cannot present such a film to the public of 2022. Maybe this film could have a chance as a B movie in the 80s However I have to admit that this is an honest try.

Another adventure in the 1940's

[Flak36 · 9/10 · 13 October 2022]

Heintje Peter once again captures the authentic tone of the second world war. The film does an excellent job at depicting the survival of ordinary soldiers on the Eastern Front, but also their valour and friendship that endures even after the end of hostilities.

Expect to see authentic vehicles, uniforms and equipment of the second world war, used on locations that have been transformed into Eastern Front battlefields with trenches, shelters, field hospitals, machine gun nests, barbed wire and mine fields, and the very first (to my knowledge) depiction of a German Goliath tank in action!

It is a mesmerising history film for all fans of the genre.

Outdated special effect meet subpar acting

[fifibertl-15449 · 1/10 · 7 March 2023]

Other than that, it's pretty bad!

"Field Post" appears to be a poorly made movie with subpar acting, outdated special effects, and lackluster cinematography. The acting in "Field Post" is not the best. The actors struggle with some of the more emotional scenes, and the dialogue can be clunky at times. The special effects in "Field Post" are outdated and sometimes laughable. The explosions look like they were created using cheap computer software, and the gunfire sounds unrealistic. In conclusion, "Field Post" is not a great movie, but at least it has received some bogus awards to make it look better than it actually is!

Quite ordinary

[leipzigente · 4/10 · 30 October 2022]

The film begins very promising, unfortunately it's quite embarassing to have these saxonian dialogues until the end.

Definitely not as professional and not as good as made belief by previous commentaries. Sorry.

There are several characters known from other films quite made well, but this time it's a pity. The music as well as the actors don't get the point, the title "Feldpost" is a mere filmtitle without relation to the action. Very bad, I'm sorry.

The film begins very promising, unfortunately it's quite embarassing to have these saxonian dialogues until the end.

The best ancient films about the 2nd world war I think date from the 40s and 50s.

Bad from the beginning to the end.

[ralfbormann · 1/10 · 10 December 2023]

I don´t know where to start here. The title has quiet the promising start but as soon, as the first lines are spoken, one can hear that this movie was ill-prepared. As the action goes along, one starts to wonder why this movie is called "Feldpost" because there is no connection between the title and the action. Actual "Feldpost"-letters are used on only three occasions in the movie, one being an absolute detailed description of frontlines, advances and so on. I highly doubt that the authorities responsible for the censorship would have let it shipped. Then, there´s the absolute bad action. There is no logic in this movie; it merely seems completely improvised without a sustaining script or crafted dialogues. The amateurish actors babble somekind of inkoherent nonsense, mostly in their native dialect coming from Saxony, Hessia, Brandenburg and Westphalia which could add somekind of authenticity but ruins the movie because of bad intonation, bad acting and even worse lines. The "doctor" in the beginning of the field-hospital scene is especially bad, bursting out in an absoutely failed attempt to sound upset. The battle-scene beforehand is equally as bad; the Wehrmacht-troops are lying out in the open, 30 somewhat meters on front of a russian position without being shot to pieces. Then, there´s an equally bad sequence, where one of the main"actors" steals a christmas-tree and reports to his superior with the tree in hand. Seriously: What was the author thinking? This is the most ridiculous and embarrassing scene you can imagine. On top of that, the quality of the sound is amazingly bad. Most of the lines seem to be re-spoken in somekind of room (I highly doubt there was a recording-studio) and then editied (badly edited) into the film. The music is off, too. Of course, this movie has earned some bogus awards by some movie-festivals nobody has ever heared of; most likely set up by the author´s friends; otherwise nobody in their right mind would award an atrocity like this anything but a hot dumpster-fire. The one-star is given because of the nice equipment and vehicles and one particularly funny scene in which the supply-officer denies the two main actors tobacco because he claims to have nothing left while smoking a big cigar and having severals boxes of tobacco and cigars on the shelf behind him.