Guns of Navarone (1 Viewer)

[gk5717]

I just watched this movie last night. I believe at the time it was released it was considered a great movie.
This was sillyist war movie I think I have ever seen!
There was no attempt what so ever of any accuracy, I believe every German vehicle was a U.S. with a German Cross on it. The story line was so far fetched I could not believe. I think the goofiest scene in the movie was the German tanks, artillary, etc lined up next to one another right on the bech waiting for the Alied invasion.
My point here is how far we have come in makeing war movies.
Ever since Pvt. Ryan my standards are so high that it sorta ruins my attempt to enjoy other movies.
Gary

 

[desk11desk12]

I just watched this movie last night. I believe at the time it was released it was considered a great movie.
This was sillyist war movie I think I have ever seen!
There was no attempt what so ever of any accuracy, I believe every German vehicle was a U.S. with a German Cross on it. The story line was so far fetched I could not believe. I think the goofiest scene in the movie was the German tanks, artillary, etc lined up next to one another right on the bech waiting for the Alied invasion.
My point here is how far we have come in makeing war movies.
Ever since Pvt. Ryan my standards are so high that it sorta ruins my attempt to enjoy other movies.
Gary

Gary,

I saw it too yesterday and you're right. This movie along with Patton, Battle of the Bulge and other movies made it there time were great. Now, they seem so inaccurate and especially the German armor and vehicles including many of the trucks. About the only thing they got right is the autos (command cars, Kubelwagens, Horsches, etc.). Gees, I love those German camo painted M24 Chaffey's and M8 Greyhounds in this movie.

Carlos

 

[Alexdakar]

I remember I had the Navarone playset with its bright neon yellow guns and I thought it was the coolest thing.

 

[Spitfrnd]

I just watched this movie last night. I believe at the time it was released it was considered a great movie.
This was sillyist war movie I think I have ever seen!
There was no attempt what so ever of any accuracy, I believe every German vehicle was a U.S. with a German Cross on it. The story line was so far fetched I could not believe. I think the goofiest scene in the movie was the German tanks, artillary, etc lined up next to one another right on the bech waiting for the Alied invasion.
My point here is how far we have come in makeing war movies.
Ever since Pvt. Ryan my standards are so high that it sorta ruins my attempt to enjoy other movies.
Gary

I have and continue to enjoy watching the Guns of Navarone. Yes it has those technical flaws but it is a classic nonetheless. I frankly prefer Force 10 from Navarone, with all its obvious flaws. No question Pvt. Ryan is a tough act to follow but I enjoy each movie for what it is, not what it is not.

 

[skeeterbuck]

IMHO Saving Pvt. Ryan starts out pretty good with the landing scenes but then it goes down hill from there. The thing that really seemed bogus to me was the fact that when they find Ryan , his unit is guarding this bridge to stop the germans from crossing. The bridge is over this stream for pete's sake. It's not like the Rhine River or something. Any army that couldn't get accross that small of a river needs to just surrender.

I've also heard somewhere that some of the soldiers that were actually involved in the D-day Landing said that it was alot more intense that the movie portrays.

Some of my favorite war movies are "The Great Escape", "Das Boot" (the original with the subtitles) and "The Charge of the Light Brigade" version with Trevor Howard.

 

[gk5717]

Skeeterbuck, not to start an argument, but how in the world can you compare Charge of the Light Brigade with SPR?
I watched the Light Brigade recently with Errol Flynn, with their tailord uniforms, not an ounce of dirt on them, oh well I think you get the picture.
Sure Hollywood takes liberties on certain things, but my only fault with SPR is there was no sequel.
Besides I hated the pencil thin mustache on Errol Flynn!
Gary

 

[Harrytheheid]

Skeeterbuck, not to start an argument, but how in the world can you compare Charge of the Light Brigade with SPR?
I watched the Light Brigade recently with Errol Flynn, with their tailord uniforms, not an ounce of dirt on them, oh well I think you get the picture.
Sure Hollywood takes liberties on certain things, but my only fault with SPR is there was no sequel.
Besides I hated the pencil thin mustache on Errol Flynn!
Gary

Gary,
Skeeterbuck is referring to the 1970's version of Charge of the Light Brigade with Trevor Howard, not the Errol Flynn version.
Of course modern war movies tend to be more accurate than those made in the 50's and 60's. But ultimately, surely a movie stands or falls because it's a good story..??

Cheers
H

 

[OzDigger]

I've always liked Guns of Navarone, and SPR is my favourite war movie so I can see both sides of this discussion. All movies are going to have errors due to oversights and budget restraints and SPR certainly isn't exempt from errors.

After the landings SPR was pretty much all fiction including the Tiger tanks which I believe were only used against the British and Canadians at that early stage of the invasion. The inclusion of Waffen SS was also an historical error, and they even gave them modern skinhead style haircuts to make them look even more like nasty Nazi's rather than Heer troops.

 

[damian]

I don't think anyone made Guns of Navarone out to be an accurate historical recreation of events type movie. It is a rip roaring yarn of high adventure. SPR on the other hand deliberatley tries to be as accurate as possible. It is a war is hell type movie. SO I would not really compare them. Similarly old Erol Flyn in Charge of the Light Brigade is not supposed to be an accurate recreation of events. I enjoy all these movies. I just look for different things in each of them
Regards
Damian

 

[UKReb]

Apart from you rivet counters and serious FAV military experts how many of the millions of ordinary movie going public do you think would know the difference between a German and American tank apart from the decals? Come on guys wake up at the back! Of course these old war films viewed today and compared to more modern releases are corny-it's called progress!

When I first watched SPR on a boy's night out especially the first 20 minutes of the Omaha landings- all of us to a man were almost breathless and the closest I've been from diverting my eyes since I watched "Frankenstein" for the first time somewhere around the age of eight - if you are honest five will get me ten that the majority of you were affected the same way. It was a first for me to start to begin to really understand the absolute hell on earth those young guys faced as their baptism of fire.

You simply cannot equate The Guns of Navarone/Patton/Battle of the Bulge et al with that film. Having said that here we are 10 years on from SPR's release, which in my opinion was and still is a masterpiece, and posters are now criticising the German's haircuts. Jeeez!!!!

Old movies have got to be viewed today in the era they were produced and being a movie-buff I can tell you there were literally hundreds of films released in 1961 (release year of TGON) that were absolutely dreadful and a whole lot worse than the Peck & Niven escapade. In fact apart from all it's obvious flaws it contains one of the most classic lines ever written for a war film when Peck firmly states "........and remember... I speak German.....Perfect! My chums and I still quote that line today 40 odd years on especially when vacationing in Europe.
Sure logic, authenticity and sensible reasoning are the first casualties in any Hollywood war movie as they are in any genre film they release. It's called Show Business for the masses and also has something to do with Box Office return.
Reb

 

[OzDigger]

As I said, SPR is still my favourite war movie and it's visual impact is still amongst the best, even after ten years. The point I was making is that despite the progress in film making techniques Hollywood hyperbole is still as evident now as it ever was. You are correct that the vast majority of the public wouldn't know what tank was what. However imo that doesn't absolve film makers from claiming a movie is historically accurate when it wasn't. And I'm sure the veterans of the 82nd Airborne (not the 101st) who actually attacked the bridge would agree with me.

 

[Spitfrnd]

Apart from you rivet counters and serious FAV military experts how many of the millions of ordinary movie going public do you think would know the difference between a German and American tank apart from the decals? Come on guys wake up at the back! Of course these old war films viewed today and compared to more modern releases are corny-it's called progress!

When I first watched SPR on a boy's night out especially the first 20 minutes of the Omaha landings- all of us to a man were almost breathless and the closest I've been from diverting my eyes since I watched "Frankenstein" for the first time somewhere around the age of eight - if you are honest five will get me ten that the majority of you were affected the same way. It was a first for me to start to begin to really understand the absolute hell on earth those young guys faced as their baptism of fire.

You simply cannot equate The Guns of Navarone/Patton/Battle of the Bulge et al with that film. Having said that here we are 10 years on from SPR's release, which in my opinion was and still is a masterpiece, and posters are now criticising the German's haircuts. Jeeez!!!!

Old movies have got to be viewed today in the era they were produced and being a movie-buff I can tell you there were literally hundreds of films released in 1961 (release year of TGON) that were absolutely dreadful and a whole lot worse than the Peck & Niven escapade. In fact apart from all it's obvious flaws it contains one of the most classic lines ever written for a war film when Peck firmly states "........and remember... I speak German.....Perfect! My chums and I still quote that line today 40 odd years on especially when vacationing in Europe.
Sure logic, authenticity and sensible reasoning are the first casualties in any Hollywood war movie as they are in any genre film they release. It's called Show Business for the masses and also has something to do with Box Office return.
Reb

Well said Reb. Whenever someone complains about accuracy in movies, they should remember that (especially for pre-digital effects releases) more accuracy equals more cost; more scarcity equals more cost; more cost without more receipts equals less return. The lack of accurate equipment in a film will simply not matter to a sufficient number to equal more receipts. It's simple math, nothing more.

I appreciate the accuracy but I will accept less for the story, acting and overall impact. "Piece of Cake" used Spitfires for the Battle of France but it is still one of my favorites. Of course, I do love Spitfires, even though it is fortunate for many of us that they were kept home for that "phony war."

 

[Capitolron]

I remember I had the Navarone playset with its bright neon yellow guns and I thought it was the coolest thing.

I had the same set and loved every minute playing with that "BIG GUN ON THE MOUNTAIN"

 

[The Lt.]

The movie being one of my favorites and the performances of Gregory Peck, Anthony Quinn and David Nevins where far superior than any of the cast from Private Ryan. That being said I thought the rivet counters of the forum may fine this interesting seeing what the members of the British Armed Services from around the world selected for their choice of their all time favorite movies. The following is from http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1111

Once again UKReb I agree with your comments.....The Lt.

 

[Warrior]

I find that whenever the movie Saving Private Ryan comes up, there are two camps; those that love the movie, those that hate it, put me in the former camp.

When I go to a movie, any movie really, I want to be affected in some way, either scared, touched, horrified, etc; SPR works on so many levels for me. No movie ever captured the chaos of combat like that one did, at least for me anyway.

As UK Reb so superbly stated, no movie has EVER affected me like the first 20 minutes of SPR did and none ever will again. I felt like I was on that beach, just an incredibly powerful scene. TV Guide a few years ago ranked that scene as the #1 movie scene of all time; all time.

I will never ever forget the sight I saw the first time I viewed the movie; while exiting the theatre, the front row was full of WWII veterans who were crying their eyes out. I doubt any of them were concerned with haircuts, streams (it was a canal by the way, not a stream FWIW), Tigers not being there, etc................

 

[skeeterbuck]

UK Reb,
It's not about being rivit counters, but about making a reasonable believeable movie.
If the director wants to make up a story like "Gone with the Wind" that's fine...It's Hollywood, artist license whatever you want to call it. It's set during the American Civil War and if they change some historical facts to fit the story, well no problem because it's a love story, not a recreation of the Battle of Atlanta.

But for instance, if you make a movie about a historical battle, I expect it to follow the battle accurrately.

In the end, I guess that I just use different standards to judge the movies.

 

[damian]

I would rather watch Gone with the Wind than GFettysburg or Gods and Generals. I found the acting in the latter two cases to be a bit unconvincing. Now Scarlett and Rett well that is something else
Regards
Damian

 

[Harrytheheid]

Apart from you rivet counters and serious FAV military experts how many of the millions of ordinary movie going public do you think would know the difference between a German and American tank apart from the decals? Come on guys wake up at the back! Of course these old war films viewed today and compared to more modern releases are corny-it's called progress!

When I first watched SPR on a boy's night out especially the first 20 minutes of the Omaha landings- all of us to a man were almost breathless and the closest I've been from diverting my eyes since I watched "Frankenstein" for the first time somewhere around the age of eight - if you are honest five will get me ten that the majority of you were affected the same way. It was a first for me to start to begin to really understand the absolute hell on earth those young guys faced as their baptism of fire.

You simply cannot equate The Guns of Navarone/Patton/Battle of the Bulge et al with that film. Having said that here we are 10 years on from SPR's release, which in my opinion was and still is a masterpiece, and posters are now criticising the German's haircuts. Jeeez!!!!

Old movies have got to be viewed today in the era they were produced and being a movie-buff I can tell you there were literally hundreds of films released in 1961 (release year of TGON) that were absolutely dreadful and a whole lot worse than the Peck & Niven escapade. In fact apart from all it's obvious flaws it contains one of the most classic lines ever written for a war film when Peck firmly states "........and remember... I speak German.....Perfect! My chums and I still quote that line today 40 odd years on especially when vacationing in Europe.
Sure logic, authenticity and sensible reasoning are the first casualties in any Hollywood war movie as they are in any genre film they release. It's called Show Business for the masses and also has something to do with Box Office return.
Reb

Reb,
I couldn't agree more. I watched SPR in a movie theatre in Tulsa when it was first released. By the looks on the faces coming out of the cinema after the show, I don't think anyone was concerned about skinhead haircuts, 82nd/101st, or Tiger tanks, et al. But you could certainly see how the story and how it was depicted had affected people. Some were actually shaking and quite a few had tears on their eyes......that is cinema..!!

Cheers
H

 

[UKReb]

UK Reb,
It's not about being rivit counters, but about making a reasonable believeable movie.
If the director wants to make up a story like "Gone with the Wind" that's fine...It's Hollywood, artist license whatever you want to call it. It's set during the American Civil War and if they change some historical facts to fit the story, well no problem because it's a love story, not a recreation of the Battle of Atlanta.

But for instance, if you make a movie about a historical battle, I expect it to follow the battle accurrately.

In the end, I guess that I just use different standards to judge the movies.

Sorry you've completely lost me somewhere between historical battle and the title of this thread Guns of Navarone
Do you know I had absolutely no idea that was a historical depiction ......well I'll go to the top of our stairs!!!!!!! and there was me believing all these years it was just a piece of fiction.
Crikey! I had better get back to reading my history books before I post here again.
Reb

 

[damian]

Sorry you've completely lost me somewhere between historical battle and Guns of Navarone
I had absolutely no idea that was a historical depiction ......well I'll go to the top of our stairs!!!!!!! there was me believing all these years it was just a piece of fiction.
I had better get back to reading my history books again.
Reb

Next you will betrying to say the agent 007 is fiction and not real