This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

"The trench" is a missed opportunity.Life in the trenches in WW1,as depicted by the many letters the soldiers sent to their families,was really a living Hell,so it was possible to make a fantasy and horror movie from this subject.That's what Abel Gance did with his masterpiece "J'accuse" (1918 and 1938) when he showed the victims rise from the dead."The trench" succeeds in recreating a gloomy nightmarish blue-green atmosphere ,but is short on screenplay.The story is never really interesting and there is worse: the director is incapable of creating characters we could care for,which is a shame,when it deals with martyrs of WW1 .

When looking at this movie, it becomes obvious that it didn't had a very high budget. Not only its settings are kept cheap and simple but also the overall style and atmosphere of the movie. Nevertheless the movie is good enough and also serves its purpose well enough.In my opinion it's always interesting to watch a movie about WW I, since it's a subject that doesn't get much lighted in movies too often. It usually are small European productions like this one that handle the subject. It in my opinion makes WW I an underused part of history in the movie making business.It's a slowly told movie, set purely in British trench during WW I, in France, in the days before the battle of the Somme. One of the bloodiest battles in human history, with over one million casualties. Because the story is slow and set mainly at one location, it allows the movie to deepen its characters out and allow the actors to do their job and carry the movie.It's however definitely true that the movie is filled with far too many characters to put in a 100 minutes short movie. I'm sure the story and all of its characters would had worked out fine in a mini-series but it's a bit too much to put in a movie. It has as a result that none of the characters ever get really interesting- or fleshed out good enough to care about them. It makes the movie emotionally flat and even also quite boring at certain points, also since not really that much interesting is happening in the movie.The dialog and situations are also far too cliché to consider them good or original. The movie offers very little surprises and it makes "The Trench" perhaps a bit of an obsolete movie to watch.The actors still do their very best to carry the movie to an higher level. Daniel Craig is really superb in his role and he provides the movie still with some much needed emotions. It was also fun to see Cillian Murphy in a small and early role. Obviously too small to really make a lasting impression though.And than about the end battle. Well, when looking at this movie you should know better than to expect a big spectacular ending. If you already watched the first 90 minutes of this movie, you just know you're plain wrong to expect suddenly something big and spectacular. So in my opinion the ending just felt right and it was suiting with the rest of the movie. But obviously, it doesn't do much justice to the real battle of the Somme that was one of the biggest of WW I and also one of the bloodiest in human history. This obviously really doesn't show on screen however.Good enough to kill some time with. Just don't expect anything spectacular or emotionally powerful.6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

It's heart might be in the right place, but this tepid misfire looks like a bad TV schools production in every way. The 'exteriors' are obviously interior studio sets, and not very convincing ones. It's so badly lit that when the film finally goes outdoors to rip off the end of Gallipoli (which it does incredibly badly, like everything else) the change of film stock is so jarring it hurts.The characters are childish stereotypes talking in unbelievable clichés and the film is frequently just plain wrong about details and attitudes of the average WW1 Tommy: politically correct, maybe, but historically it's a travesty (no Mr Boyd, officers DID go over the top: the highest percentage of casualties was officers, and even many generals died in battle).But more than being badly directed, looking cheap, getting its facts wrong and going with every cliché Boyd can find, it's biggest sin is that it's just so bloody boring. Bad on every level.WW1 was a terrible tragedy, and those who died in it deserve better than this terrible, terrible film.

.... because the opening title sequence is very bland . Compare it to the shocking title sequence of the 1960s BBC documentary THE GREAT WAR . As the film goes on we`re introduced to the characters and I couldn`t help noticing that one is Southern English , a couple are Northern English , a couple are Jocks , a couple are Irish while the sarge is a scouser . I`m sorry but I was convinced that British army infantry regiments of the period were composed of " Pals battalions " , that is battalions composed entirely of men from the same home town . Take for instance the 16th battalion of The Royal Scots which was formed in one week and was called " The Hearts battalion " because it was composed mainly of supporters of Hearts football club . The 16th Royal Scots even had 16 Hearts players in its ranks so I don`t believe for a moment that any British army infantry platoon was as regionally mixed as the one here The more THE TRENCH goes on the more I found myself questioning the accuracy of the movie especially its mood and its sense of time and place . A British made trench in France in 1916 . Since when did the Brits build trenches like the one seen here ? It even has a concrete floor that the Germans would have been proud of which seems to go against I`ve seen in photographic evidence . The film also has an anachronistic cynical air , what on the eve of the Somme ? The British troops had witnessed day upon day of hellish bombardment of the German positions and a lot of British soldiers had begun to feel rather sorry for Jerry , and no one but no one in the British lines had any reason to doubt anything less than a swift , spectacular British victory . Of course one day and 20,000 dead British soldiers later changed these thoughts , in fact some historians describe the date 1st of July 1916 " The day British idealism died " . One final point - As at least one other commentator mentioned THE TRENCH contains a large amount of swear words . It has been documented that one criticism by the real life survivors of BAND OF BROTHERS was that the HBO/BBC drama contained too much swearing and that people in the 1940s used far less profane words than people use nowadays . I`m inclined to believe them and I`m also inclined to believe people in 1916 probably swore less than people in the 1940s so I doubt if the men in the trenches used the " F " word in every sentence Unfortunately who German bullets didn`t claim on that grim day have been killed by the passing of time so the chances of someone who was there writing into this site and telling us their opinion of THE TRENCH are very remote . A pity because I`d be very interested what they thought of it . As for myself I found the ending moving ( How could it not be ? ) but the rest is rather poor history and a rather poor film that seems to have homo erotic undertones