I have to say I do not feel the rough critique of this film justified. Sure it is an Indie film and not of a million dollar budget. but they put a lot of effort into it, a lot of historic facts and nice war scenes, The tanks and guns were real not a lot of fake CGI and they made a serious effort here. Seriously give them some credit for all the tanks planes and guns they put together. I truly enjoyed it and watched it several times, there are some really good points to it, and the acting was solid on all parts. And as film fans we should acknowledge those of smaller budgets not just run them over because they did not have a studio budget.

As far as World War II movies go, then "Red Rose of Normandy" is definitely not amongst the best. This movie was really bad in many ways, and still there was something good to be found here as well.The good part was that there was a lot of action in the movie, almost non-stop throughout the entire movie. And also there was a good touch to the costumes, uniforms, weapons and such.But the bad things in the movie outweighed the good by far. And as such, it was a rather bad movie experience. For starters, both the Russians and Germans speak English. At times you had the Germans speaking English with the stereotypical Hollywood-induced German accent, and other times they spoke English with thick American accents. Then suddenly out of nowhere some would speak a line or two in German. Wow, are you kidding me? Pick one style and stick with it. It was such a messy result with all the accents and languages.Also, I didn't know that they had plastic / corrective surgery back in the 1940's. What was going on with Kladia's lips? It was an atrocity to look at. And it just didn't fit into the movie one bit.Given all the shooting and firing of various firearms throughout the movie, most of the time you had no indication at what people were shooting at, and it seemed like they were shooting weapons just to shoot weapons, so the director had something to put into the movie. Most of the scenes were devoid of any sense of combat, where people were just running around shooting here and there.I wonder why no vehicles exploded, even though several were hit by tank firing at them. The explosions would always occur at the wheels or underneath the vehicle. Not a single car exploded in a plume of fire and smoke. That was sort of weak. I guess it was too expensive to blow up an actual vehicle.Finally, as the bad things go, then the whole scene with the landing at the Normandy beach. Wow, it was so bad. There was no sense of panic, or massive warfare there, and there were less than 20 or 30 people on the beach. It was just out of scale and totally didn't work out as it was planned to.The acting in the movie was wooden and forced, and no one really stood out here in any way."Red Rose of Normandy" seems to be a B-movie in every aspect. But thumbs up to director Tino Struckmann for trying to make a World War II movie, just a shame that it failed utterly and miserably.If you enjoy World War II movies, then stay well clear of this movie, because it simply isn't worth the effort. The movie does no credit to tell neither the good or bad things that took place during World War II. At best, it seemed like a theatrical rehearsal of a World War II re-enactment.I am rating "Red Rose of Normandy" a 3 out of 10 rating, simply because of all the action and at least they had the uniforms and weapons right.

I streamed this awful movie from Sony's "Video Unlimited" service. To say that I was speechless after just ten minutes of watching this movie would be an understatement. The trailer, of course, looked good. Lots of action and nice soundtrack so I streamed it for $3.99! As stated by another reviewer, I would have been better off renting it for a dollar at RedBox, but who knew it would be so bad. The acting was so bad I thought maybe it was supposed to sound that way. You know...everyone shell-shocked from the war or something! Yikes! I could barely finish it. There was no character development. That is to say, you couldn't feel anything for anyone being portrayed in this movie. Total trash. Don't even waste a dollar.

As a WWII reenactor and history enthusiast, I tend to be rather harsh on movies, but in this case I think a low rating is justifiable. I can appreciate Mr. Struckmann's enthusiasm for working with reenactors in film, but it is simply not working out for him. He seems to bite off more than he can chew in this movie, given his roles as lead actor, producer, executive producer, director, and writer. The plot was barely discernible, and even though I did sit through the whole movie, I'm still not exactly sure what happened. Perhaps if Tino decided to stick with one role, be it acting, directing, or whatever, and practiced it a great deal, then he might have more success. In addition to the flaws with the story, the historical inaccuracies are so glaring that they seriously made me contemplate shooting my television. Many of the "top of the line" troops are overweight and middle-aged, and the wide variety of individual reenactors with different impressions means that you have many people with different gear congregating where they shouldn't be (E.G. Heer, SS, Fallschirmjäger, and Luftwaffe troops guarding a Gestapo prison). While I appreciate that working with reenactors allows the movie access to plenty of period vehicles, weapons, and pieces of equipment for a minuscule price, it doesn't make the movie very convincing at all thanks to their often unprofessional appearance and actions. Overall, I can appreciate the amount of work put in my Mr. Struckmann, but I think that this movie spends too much time trying to be an epic with hundreds of troops on screen and not enough working out the many kinks in the story to be worth more than a laugh.