[macfreak]

Originally Posted by fotno

Allowing for the fact that Audie was not a great actor, I do love this movie.

I figure if the truth be told, I doubt it actually did the man justice.

I am no expert, but I deduce that any man, say again, any man, who wins a battlefield commission is most probably a hell of a fighter and a "true" leader whose officer's status was born out combat, a claim that few can make.

Recently, Murphy was left out of an encyclopedia of famous Texans. Few complained. Sic transit gloria.

To get back to the thread, can a movie be great if the star gives up a poor performance? Well, maybe. Can actors, who never saw combat provide a memorable performance that contributes to a great movie? You decide, but I say yes.

Btw, the contributors to this thread deserve a great thank you for providing me at least a dozen great war flicks to watch when time provides. In a while, I would like to post the 5 best WWII flicks I failed to post cuz I forgot about them. But fortunately many of you didn't. So as a reward, you have my blessing to go out and buy that two grand set of speakers, or vintage electronics you have been looking at for more than a week. Just tell your wife some dotty old guy on the internet said it was the right thing to do--before the piece(s) got away to some truly undeserving character.

Who wants to start a petition for a weekly WWII flick on the cable Military Channel? Or on Turner Movies Channel?