Er, no, it was directed by this guy:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Rostotsky

I have read that even when bridges were taken intact, the Tigers, I and II's, were too heavy to cross them, and had to pull off the road to let smaller tanks and infantry cross to make a bridgehead. Thus allowing engineers to either add support to the existing bridge or even build a new bridge next to it in order for the Tigers get across the river.

I had seen the movie The battle Of The Bulge, and the tank battle at the end confused me, it seems to be set in a desert type locale, I don't believe there is a desert in the Ardennes forest.

Global warming...

It was also very difficult to transport them by rail. The Tigers needed their tracks swapped out for narrower transport tracks to fit onto the wagons. Once they arrived the tracks had to be swapped back. There is a tank museum at Munster which has a Sherman and a King Tiger (unfortunately not a "normal" Tiger) and the difference in size is enormous and I fully believe that the Sherman was hard pressed to knock them out while being very vulnerable to their firepower.
Here is a (almost 20 years old) picture of me next to the King Tiger just to show how big it is (I'm average sized: 1,80m (~5ft 10'):
http://foto.arcor-online.net/palb/al...3339336538.jpg

The movie was shot in the Guadarrama Mountains near Madrid in Spain, I believe. Most of the extras provided were Spanish recruits and so was the armor used. I'm not sure why they shot it there. Maybe Spain put in the best bid for using their equipment. It may have been shot in Europe, but a lot of the principal locations sure didn't resemble the Ardennes.

Other errors abound. The conflation of von der Heydte's paratroopers and Skorzeny's commandos. Colonel Hessler's weird halftrack-towed HQ caravan. German planners referring to mist and cloudy conditions negating the Allied air superiority, only to have most of the movie take place under blue skies and sunshine. Yeah, the movie is a hoot. So much so that former Allied Supreme Commander Eisenhower even came of retirement to denounce it.

Having the Germans defeated because the principle German commander (a mere colonel) got his column of tanks destroyed is silly. Having the entire Ardennes offensive come to a grinding halt by rolling drums of fuel at advancing tanks (while great cinema when I was a 10 year old) is laughable for an adult. But in the end it probably made money and that always was the principal objective.

Spain have a lot of tradition in films being shot there, due to the production costs. It was more cheap. Look at very european (western spaghetti) western movies!

Not to mention the fantasy genre. The original Conan the Barbarian was filmed in Spain back in 1981. But then Battle of the Bulge is kinda fantasy too. :D

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/g...ps34b0de7e.jpg

I was thinking of this film.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073488/?ref_=nm_flmg_dr_7

Different film, though I really do like the human tragedy of the Dawns are Quiet here.

Come And See: brilliant film. I also prefer to watch with the original soundtrack.

Watch the dubbed version of Troll Hunter (not a war film, sure) and then the original: you'll see what I mean...

Unsere mütter, unsere väter was pretty good. :yep:

Would that be a German Film about the Russo-Finnish war?

I liked the film Die Brucke (The Bridge). I have both the 1960s version and the remake on DVD.

No, it is yet another WW2 eastern front series.

Yes it is a pretty good film.

Nope, but speaking of the Russo-Finnish War, Talvisota is a good finnish movie about the Winter War. :yep:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVE5XBYESuQ