Not even bad in a good way

Absolutely the worst movie.

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

As far as a movie goes, it was fairly entertaining. Many times the script seemed cliche at best and cheesy at worst. The romantic element of the movie seemed rather overplayed, and as far as a war movie goes, the plot should have relied more heavily on the war and the politics and less on the romance. Frankly, a movie about a bloody battle in the bloodiest war in American history was no place for a romeo and juliet story. The reenactors did an excellent job, the uniforms, weapons, and battlefield effects were very accurate, and the battle itself did a good job of showcasing American military tactics at the time (specifically, the way the tactics resulted in a high death count, something the US learned from very quickly after the war.) Overall, worth the watch.

RELEASED IN 2015 and directed by Sean McNamara, "Field of Lost Shoes" (aka "Battlefield of Lost Souls") chronicles the Civil War Battle of New Market wherein the Confederates were forced to enlist the aid of cadets from the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) to stave off Union forces in the Shenandoah Valley. While the story properly focuses on the young'uns, notable actors like Jason Isaacs, David Arquette, Keith David, Lauren Holly and Tom Skerritt are also on hand. This particular occasion in history is pretty famous and I even remember reading about it in war comics when I was a kid, so it's interesting to finally see a cinematic depiction of it. The no-name youths are up to the challenge and, thankfully, they throw in some females to keep things interesting (e.g. Mary Mouser). Practically all the main characters are based on real-life people, including David as "Old Judge," who continued working for the VMI after attaining his freedom. Speaking of the VMI, the institute is still in use today and the movie was partially shot there.One of the worst things about slavery is that it broke up families when a buyer would purchase one member of a family, but not the others. This is powerfully depicted in the opening."Field of Lost Shoes" is mostly a drama about the preparations for war during the Civil War, but when the action comes at almost the hour mark it's pretty effective and thrilling. The biggest downside of Civil War combat was that officers on both sides used outdated military tactics, which they learned from West Point & other academies. These tactics hailed from the Napoleonic wars of the early 1800s. Yet technological advances produced rifles with superior aim, which resulted in ridiculously long casualty lists. Soldiers had no recourse but to stoically march in formation right into friggin rifle and canon fire. Sure, I'd be willing to do this, but only if the Presidents, politicians, generals and colonels marched ahead of me. You get my drift.So the movie's well done, as far as cast, costumes, locations and battle scenes go (despite a couple of clichés, like one guy utterly stopping to blow precious time emoting over a wounded comrade. Why Sure!). The CGI is less effective, but it gets the job done. The story, however, needed some kinks worked out to make it more compelling in the manner of the great "Glory" (1989). Still, I'd watch "Field of Lost Shoes" any day above the relatively dull, sappy and laboriously overlong "Gettysburg" (1993). To offer balance, I love the prequel "Gods and Generals" (2003). THE FILM RUNS 95 minutes and was shot entirely in Virginia (Lexington, Charles City, Powhatan & Richmond). WRITERS: Thomas Farrell & David M. Kennedy. GRADE: B/B- (6.5/10)

Overall, I enjoyed this movie. What I specifically enjoyed was how the producers made the movie about more than just battles, the President, or the government in general. I liked how they introduced the movie with character development, which further developed into friendship- another aspect I liked. Another enjoyable aspect was that the watcher received the viewpoint of slaves, generals, the President, soldiers, people outside of the war, everybody. This movie brought in a lot about slavery. The slaves involved in the movie were intelligent, eloquent-speaking, kind-hearted people that didn't seem to have any resentment towards whites. I found this odd because in this time period, many of these slaves weren't educated- which these people seemed to be. In addition, there were no "pro- slavery" people, which I found odd because the movie took place in the Confederacy. The teenagers in the movie seemed overly compassionate towards slaves, especially ones that weren't their own. One last odd thing about the slaves was how Old Judge stood over the dead bodies of people fighting for slavery while crying at the end of the movie. I was fond of the fact that they developed the Confederate soldier characters as they did- that they were more than just slavery-protecting people that were in the wrong. This movie revealed the sides of some of these people, especially when the soldiers took the blame for the food mishap with Old Judge, a slave, and helped an apparent slave woman when she had a structure fall on her leg- while marching to combat Union forces. They also showed how other things in life, such as religion, were important to them. I liked this because it showed that these soldiers were more than soldiers- they were people. It was eye-opening. I like how the movie exposed "relationships" as a soldier- that they were nice, yet fleeting. Oftentimes, I don't see many war movies that show true friendship, or the beginnings of flirtation- this movie provoked feelings, something that even people that aren't history-buffs can relate to. This movie definitely pulled heartstrings as the main characters throughout the whole movie were teenagers and even a young boy, yet it was pretty predictable towards the end of the movie when the battle was occurring. Another setback of this movie is how unrealistic it seems, the special effects aren't the best, and the settings aren't what one would expect from a tip-top Civil War movie. In addition, for the movie's description declaring that the movie was about this one battle, it took an awful long time to get to the battle. The battle part however though, was a good one. The friendship theme continues throughout and lasts. This movie exposed the emotions during and after a battle, and continued to last afterwards despite revealed religious differences. This movie brought in a community aspect, how after the battle the community gathered and worked to help nurse the wounded back to health. However, the one "relationship" in the movie was kind of cheesy and seemed as if it was built and destroyed just for the purpose of tearing people up. Overall, I thought this movie was relatively good and I would watch it for my own enjoyment and not for a US History assignment.

This film had some positives and some negatives. The battle scenes and costumes seemed realistic rather than cheesy. However, the love story was a complete cliché. Libby and Sam claimed they were in love but they barely knew each other and she didn't seem very upset when he died. Although, the ending was surprising which is a plus. It was surprising to see which boys died and which ones did not. The title was sadly fitting. All the boys lost their shoes in the mud. Then there was the heartbreaking scene at the end where Sir Rat and Judge cried over the shoes and the cruelties of war. This movie depicted the negative aspects of war and how it affected the soldiers that bravely fought it.