Buffalo Soldiers
User Score
6.9 out of 10

Generally favorable reviews- based on 15 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 15
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 15
  3. Negative: 2 out of 15

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. BillT.
    Nov 10, 2003
    0
    Just wondering how many of the people who gave glowing reviews to "Buffalo Soldiers" have ever served in the United States Army. I can answer that. None. The people who made this film and 99 percent of those who reviewed it know squat about the United States Army. I served from the 1960's to the 1990's, with four assignments in West Germany totaling ten years. The middle part of my last assignment to West Germany was in 1989, the year this unfortunate film is supposed to take place. I can tell you for a fact that the average American soldier at that time was honest, drug-free, and much more educated than any film critic. We did not sit around the barracks getting stoned. We worked hard, both in garrison and in frequent field training exercises sometimes lasting months. I was proud to lead and train these fine young Americans. To list everything that is historically and technically wrong about this film would take pages upon pages. The most glaring visual error is the absence of female soldiers. For many years female soldiers have proudly served in the United States Army in large numbers, doing many different jobs. In a combat service support unit such as that so poorly depicted by the makers of this film, female soldiers would be very much in evidence. This film was produced by a German who hates Americans. I can't figure why he would hate Americans, since it was the large American presence in West Germany that kept the Warsaw Pact forces at bay for fifty years until the end of the Cold War. It sure wasn't the "mighty" West German army keeping his butt safe. The West German army was a joke, and the reunified German army is probably a bigger joke. The film was directed by an Australian whose biggest claim to military knowledge is that his father served in the Royal Australian Air Force. The writers based their screenplay on a novel that has about as much truth as a deposition by Saddam Hussein. The American actors who were included for the right accents have thirty pieces of foreign silver jingling in their pockets. The film failed at the box office in the United States, because most Americans saw this piece of garbage for what it was -- garbage. Did I pay my hard-earned money to see this film? No. I saw enough of it in a promo film on the Sundance Channel. As a child I spent summers on my grandfather's farm, and I quickly learned that one does not have to get up close and personal with manure to know what it is. I hope the failure of this film serves as a cautionary tale the next time someone takes it into their head to trash the United States and its military forces with lies worthy of Josef Goebbels.… Expand
  2. GregT.
    Feb 2, 2004
    1
    We took this off the DVD player after 1/2 hour. It was nonsense which included a bunch of unlikeable beat out, drugged up American soldiers in 1989. There were odd and unrealistic scenes in which drugged up solders driving tanks trashed entire villages and laughed about it. What is so funny about drug addiction and destruction? This is a non-redeeming film.

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
56 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 35
  2. Mixed: 13 out of 35
  3. Negative: 4 out of 35
  1. Chicago Sun-Times
    Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    75
    The film is filled with spot-on performances, by Harris, Glenn, Phoenix, and by Paquin, who has grown up after her debut in "The Piano" to become one of the most gifted actresses of her generation--particularly in tricky, emotion-straddling roles like this one.
    Read full review
  2. The New York Times
    Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    40
    Sloppy when it should be incisive, indulgent when it should be astringent, and ultimately unsure of what it is mocking and in what spirit.
    Read full review
  3. San Francisco Chronicle
    Reviewed by: Edward Guthmann
    50
    Ultimately, it's a cold, caustic film that doesn't take a strong point of view but seems to offer up its numerous set pieces.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »