Rating: 
Summary: The best depiction of this films shortcomings. See below:
Review: This review says it ALL:This is probably the worst war film that I have ever seen. In light of the generally poor performance of the Anglo-American troops in WWII, this film which was made in the 50s has a very important role to play as propangada together with films like "The Dirty Dozen I & II", "Kelly's Heroes", "Saving Private Ryan" etc, showing the heroic "superman" fighting abilities of their troops and commandoes against the Nazis bad guys. In Hollywood made war films, they (the Anglo-American soldiers) are always at the right place at the right time. They can always silence a German sentry with a knife stab with ease. All of them are sharpshooters and can always cause maximum casualties of the Germans from a single grenade throw and a burst of submachine gun fire. A handful of them can easily hold up and destroy an entire platoon if not a company of Krauts with tanks. If any one of them does die in a film, he does a heroic death with piles of German corpes around his position. It is commonplace that German soldiers are always shown to be so stupid, clumsy and vulnerable in films produced in Hollywood. They cannot think and react like a soldier. They have no sense of alertness in battle. All or nearly all of them are armed with MP 40 submachine guns (I doubt if there can be such high proportion of MP 40 used by the German troops at front line let alone for those of the garrison units in occupied countries), and all of them can neither shoot their guns and throw the grenades accurately. All of them ride on American made jeeps and tanks. Having seen that film and other similar films, I wonder whether the German soldiers in the story received any basic military training and possessed any military thinking. I think it is probably a good idea for any Hollywood war film producers to read some more about German military history in WWII, and to study the fighting abilities of men like Jochen Peiper, Kurt Meyer, Michael Wittmann, Hyazinth Graf Strachwitz, Vincent Kaiser, Otto Skorzeny to name but a few. This film was entirely based on fiction and not on similar historical event. The story was all the same, i.e., how a handful of Allied soldiers or commandoes was up against the odds facing and beating the Germans. But in truth it was the German solders who were mostly up against the odds facing the Allied soldiers both on the Eastern and Western front in WWII. Please give the German soldiers in WWII a fair account of their performance in battle, their fighting power was no less, if not higher or much higher, than the Anglo-American's. Please stop producing any such stupid so-called war film.
Rating: 
Summary: Its okay for that time, 1961
Review: This was one of the best war movies around during its time. It would now be labeled slow and not much action when compared to movies after it. Like all movies, we expect the next movie of its type to be better. After 30 some years, there are better movies which knocked it down on the ratings. The movie I would have put on dvd based on a Maclean book would have been Where Eagles Dare. Guns of Navarone has an excellent story line, excellent acting. the picture is grainy, the sound is well...lets just say the best home theater system couldn't do much with it. This is another one of those example whichs show that not everything can be improved on dvd. Rent it first then decide about buying or not to buy.
Rating: 
Summary: Solid Action Film with Some Flaws
Review: Though I enjoyed this film immensely, I have to agree with some of the criticisms people have made in previous reviews. The Guns of Navarone is a very exciting, well made action movie. The cast is first rate. There are terrific moments of suspense, such as when Gregory Peck is hanging on a cliff holding onto Anthony Quinn, the one man who swore to kill him after the war was over. The explosions at the end are very spectacular. And David Niven's scene where he links together clues to discover the hidden motives of Gia Scala being a traitor is very well done, acting and writing wise. Still, there are flaws I noticed along with other viewers, such as the ease of their escape from Walter Gotell's capture, or the phoniness of the battling towards the end. Not only do the heroes have any easy time battling the German forces, but it's their own clumsiness and stupidity that eventually kills them, such as James Darren's and Stanley Baker's deaths. One scene that particularly bothered me: Why did David Niven get so upset at Gregory Peck for leaving Anthony Quayle with the Germans with the wrong information. As mentioned earlier in the film, they had 3 options: Take him with them (in that case he'll die), leave him with the Germans (in that case he gives away details of the whole plan), or kill him. Peck came up with the perfect solution, and Niven's overreaction("You're rather a ruthless character, Captain Mallory!") seemed an unnecessary excuse to start the pretentious, philosophical arguing. The conflict between Anthony Quinn and Peck is much better handled and resolved. However, excusing these flaws still makes this one of the more solid, satisfying entertainments on war. I agree 100% with the previous reviewer about the end. The shots of Niven and Peck looking on, combined with the scenic shots of the Greek isles and Dimitri Tiomkin's music make a very aesthetic, moving ending.
Rating: 
Summary: Exaggerating, Outrageous and Purely Hollywood Style Rubbish.
Review: This is probably the worst war film that I have ever seen. In light of the generally poor performance of the Anglo-American troops in WWII, this film which was made in the 50s has a very important role to play as propangada together with films like "The Dirty Dozen I & II", "Kelly's Heroes", "Saving Private Ryan" etc, showing the heroic "superman" fighting abilities of their troops and commandoes against the Nazis bad guys. In Hollywood made war films, they (the Anglo-American soldiers) are always at the right place at the right time. They can always silence a German sentry with a knife stab with ease. All of them are sharpshooters and can always cause maximum casualties of the Germans from a single grenade throw and a burst of submachine gun fire. A handful of them can easily hold up and destroy an entire platoon if not a company of Krauts with tanks. If any one of them does die in a film, he does a heroic death with piles of German corpes around his position. It is commonplace that German soldiers are always shown to be so stupid, clumsy and vulnerable in films produced in Hollywood. They cannot think and react like a soldier. They have no sense of alertness in battle. All or nearly all of them are armed with MP 40 submachine guns (I doubt if there can be such high proportion of MP 40 used by the German troops at front line let alone for those of the garrison units in occupied countries), and all of them can neither shoot their guns and throw the grenades accurately. All of them ride on American made jeeps and tanks. Having seen that film and other similar films, I wonder whether the German soldiers in the story received any basic military training and possessed any military thinking. I think it is probably a good idea for any Hollywood war film producers to read some more about German military history in WWII, and to study the fighting abilities of men like Jochen Peiper, Kurt Meyer, Michael Wittmann, Hyazinth Graf Strachwitz, Vincent Kaiser, Otto Skorzeny to name but a few. This film was entirely based on fiction and not on similar historical event. The story was all the same, i.e., how a handful of Allied soldiers or commandoes was up against the odds facing and beating the Germans. But in truth it was the German solders who were mostly up against the odds facing the Allied soldiers both on the Eastern and Western front in WWII. Please give the German soldiers in WWII a fair account of their performance in battle, their fighting power was no less, if not higher or much higher, than the Anglo-American's. Please stop producing any such stupid so-called war film.
Rating:
Summary: Very dated and dull
Review: Guns of Navarone may have been the most exciting film of its time but now it's just a dull action film, so boring I was yawning the whole way through. It's not only the fact that there's no sense of urgency in the entire situation, there's also immensely fake scenes featuring a soldier mowing down an entire German platoon with one burst of machine gun fire. Add to that about two other platoons with a grenade for each and you've solidified the film's camp value. I don't have anything against 60's films. As a matter of fact, I love a lot of films from that era (Lawrence of Arabia and Ben-Hur) and there are some very exciting action films from that decade such as Where Eagles Dare and the entertaining The Dirty Dozen. Guns of Navarone is just never as tense as the premise could have been.
Rating:
Summary: Rapid action-drama.
Review: If you thought old movies were too slow for you this one might change your mind. It's a WWII epic about 6 proffesional soldiers, sent on an impossible mission into Nazi controlled Greece. While they're there, they battle pretty much every German soldier in Greece. Adding to the action, the men have their own problems to solve.
Rating:
Summary: OK Film, OK Extras, Poor Transfer
Review: After the rave reviews I read about "Guns of Navarone," I was a bit disappointed. I wouldn't consider this one of my favorite action or WWII movies. The performances were strong, but I thought that some scenes were a little boring and some of the escapes were a little too easy. It's not a BAD film, but I've seen better. On to the DVD. The 30 minute documentary was filled more with stories and anecdotes rather than any insight into the film or the making of the film. Director J. Lee Thompson's commentary is a bit boring, but he is 85 years old. Some good information is included in this. He sounds like he's about to fall asleep. Four featurettes from the 60s are included, but are of only nostalgic value. There are also talent files and trailers. The picture quality is poor, especially by Columbia standards. Grain is present throughout, the colors are faded and dull, this is a pretty bad transfer for a film that is only from 1961. The rear projection shots look even worse. "Gone With the Wind" (1939) looked better. The 5.1-remixed sound is okay, but shows signs of age. Surround use is limited mostly to airplane flyovers. If you like the film, get this disc, but that's a reluctant recommendation from me.
Rating:
Summary: The Biggest and Best "Guns"
Review: We don't have movie stars anymore; we have "actors." If nothing else, the Guns of Navarone proves this point, as no less than the talents of Gregory Peck, Anthony Quinn, Anthony Quayle, and David Niven bring Alistair MacLean's gripping novel to life. The result is one of those old-fashioned, sweeping adventures that never sacrifices character for empty-headed action sequences or expensive but ultimately pointless special effects. Peck leads a rag-tag group of commandos to destroy a German fortress whose giant cannon threaten the English Navy. Like all such cinematic missions, however, there is a traitor in the group threatening their success, as well as a series of setbacks from the Germans and Mother Nature. There's never any real question about whether or not the mission will succeed, only who will be left when it's all over, and verbal sparring by Peck and Niven adds to the tension (perhaps the best scene in the film occurs when Niven challenges Peck to execute the traitor). Young audiences, particularly those spoon-fed on the palp generated over the last 10 years, will probably scoff at the film's unhurried pace and tame action sequences, but the real action occurs inside the characters' heads and hearts. A must-see for anyone looking for a thinking person's action movie.
Rating:
Summary: Terrific first half is bogged down by a weak second half
Review: I had so many hopes for Guns of Navarone and for a long while there the film was everything the critics said it was. For the first 75 or so minutes Navarone is first-rate entertainment with sequences that are just as exciting as any action film I've seen. It's only unfortunate that the second half couldn't sustain the same momentum and it's even worse considering the fact that several changes could have been made that would have resulted in a more satisfying finale. The plot, as most Alistair Maclean fans known, is about a group of 6 commandos who are sent on a near impossible mission. Their job is to take down two large guns on the Nazi island of Navarone so 2,000 British soldiers can be rescued. Throughout the mission they face great odds and close calls. As I said before, the first half of the film is terrific. The set-up is excellent as the description does give a sense of a how impossible it is. Then there are three consecutive sequences of action and excitement that come almost immediately after the other, almost giving the viewer little time to catch their breath. It begins with an excellently done shootout between the commando team and several Nazis on the high seas, then continues to a struggle to get all the supplies out of a boat before it capsizes, and finishes with a risky four hundred foot climb up a cliff with very dangerous weather. However, after the point when they are chased by German fighter jets the film begins to slowly decline. Some scenes felt a little goofy, especially one escape sequence that felt a little too easy. Some of the transitions were poorly done as the editing could have been tighter. What really annoyed me the most was the scene where James Darren and Anthony Quinn take on all those soldiers. At least 20 Nazis were closing in on them, and Darren just runs toward them and fires a few bursts and all of those Nazis are dead. I'm not kidding you. I thought I would never see that in a film so acclaimed. But that's not just the end of that. Afterward, Anthony Quinn throws just one grenade at about ten spread out German soldiers and EVERY single of those soldiers are killed, even about five of them at least fifteen away from the small explosion! He even does this again and the result is identical. I'm sure many people find this an exciting film. There are some great moments in Guns of Navarone; it's just unfortunate that the film couldn't keep it up.
Rating: 
Summary: Slow, lumbering and oh so mediocre
Review: My favorite WWII movie of all time is Where Eagles Dare, and so I had high hopes for this movie, maybe too high... Although I found the extras interesting on this DVD, the film itself was slow moving and littered with all too few action sequences. It leaves one with the impression of a movie that cannot decide whether it wants to be an action adventure or a character driven drama and in trying to be both it falls under its own weight....I would definately recommend renting this before buying...
|
