I cannoni di Navarone

A beautiful Dmitri Tiomkin score resonates throughout this definitive "allies-out-to-blow-up-the-enemy-stronghold" film. Top actors of their day, in strong performances, play second fiddle to the story itself, which moves the viewer inexorably along to the final assault against "The Guns".

I first saw this film in the theatre at age 11. I've seen it dozens of times since. It's not Ben-Hur, nor even Citizen Kane. It's just my favorite film.

"The Dirty Dozen" may have updated the film's premise for the cynical late '60's, but as much as I love that old hard-boiled film, even I have to admit that it doesn't hold a candle to "The Guns of Navarone". Though it may be hard to remember now that the premise has been used so much, the impossible mission theme was NOT a common staple in action films until this movie. The question of whether or not the team is going to pull it off is, for once, not as simple as many other simple-minded movies have made it. There are moments where the mission is endangered by just about everything imaginable: the CO being critically wounded, suspicious enemies, personality conflicts, wrenching moral dillemas, a traitor in the ranks, being captured by the enemy. The storyline plays out like the most extreme manifestation of Murphy's Law: everything that can go wrong DOES go wrong.

The team put together here couldn't be more incongruent with each other. Gregory Peck's world-class mountain climber who becomes the team's reluctant CO, David Niven's hot-tempered, authority-defying sapper, Anthony Quinn's Greek ex-Colonel who has promised to kill Peck at war's end, Stanley Baker's weary soldier who's tired of the unending slaughter, a young Greek national who wants more and more of it...the real miracle is that they manage to get as far and as well as they do. For every step forward, they wind up paying for it. Be it in blood, moral anguish, or pain, no one comes out of this mission unchanged or unscathed. I honestly feel that it is this theme of sacrifice that is the key to the greatness of "The Guns of Navarone".

Ever since I was a little boy, I've watched several classic war movies with my father. He was an absolute fan of this kind of movies and I guess I've inherited that passion from him, because since then I try to watch and buy as many (classic) war movies as I can find. So far I already have several of them in my private DVD collection, but until now, "The Guns of Navarone" wasn't a part of it. The main reason for that is because I hadn't seen it before and therefor didn't know what to expect of it. But now that it was finally shown on television, I was able to tape it and to watch it.

When in 1943 the Germans are attempting to bully neutral Turkey into joining the Axis, 2,000 British troops are trapped on the small and strategically unimportant Greek island Kiros. Something has to be done to save them and there is only one way to get there: by boat. But it's impossible to come near to the island because the only sea route is defended by two gigantic German anti-ship batteries, deployed in a massive cliff side bunker on the island of Navarone. An air attack has been attempted before and proved to be useless and the only option that is left is sending a team of six Greek and English mountaineers to meet up with partisans to try and dynamite the guns. The team does not only face the almost impossible task to conquer the difficult terrain, they also have to try to get past a German garrison and to make things worse, there also appears to be a traitor among them...

About one thing I'm already certain: I'll buy this movie on DVD as soon as I can find it. This is one of the better classic war movies that I've seen lately and I really had a good time watching it. Not only does it give a more realistic view on the war, the characters are also a lot more realistic. They aren't as invincible as you sometimes see in other classic war movies (think for instance of "Where Eagles Dare (1968)"), in which the Americans or other allies seem to carry some kind of magic shield around them that can't be penetrated by German bullets, while they can kill hundreds of the enemy with only one bullet. In this movie they have to deal with all kinds of difficulties like difficult terrain, a traitor,... and yes, even the good guys can get killed or wounded.

What I also liked was the fact that this movie was shot in Greece and therefor gave a realistic feeling to the setting, without feeling like a brochure for a romantic holiday (like Captain Corelli's Mandolin). I know, we all expect that and believe that it is normal when we see it, but I've already seen otherwise and it's something you didn't always get at the time. Think for instance of the movie "The Battle of the Bulge" (1965), which was supposed to be situated in the Belgian Ardennes, but which was shot with olive trees in the background and in a desert-like terrain. And trust me, I'm Belgian myself and I know the region all too well, so I know that there really isn't such a type of terrain to be found there.

Next to the good story and the correct decor, this movie also offers some fine acting from a great classical cast. With Gregory Peck, David Niven, Anthony Quinn, Anthony Quayle,... you get some of the most famous actors at the time and they all did a very nice job in this movie. Add to this the fact that story was very good, that the action still looked nice, that everything was shot in the right country and that everybody spoke the correct language. Then you know that there is absolutely nothing more I could ask for in this movie. I give this movie a well deserved 7.5/10.

For any boy growing up when I did, back in the late 1970s, it was well understood that "Guns of Navarone" was the sine qua non of adventure films, a movie you called friends about when you saw it listed in next week's TV Guide. It's hard to believe so much time has gone by, both since my boyhood and since the film was made, but "Navarone" still holds up very well, a character-driven film alive with nuance and subtlety. It moves at an assured clip, not rushed or forced, making the viewer follow its story through every agonizing twist and turn.

What makes the film especially good is the crisp dialogue, lines that point up the moral and philosophical argument at the heart of the film and which resonate today as much as then:

Mallory: The only way to win a war is to be just as nasty as the enemy. The one thing that worries me is we're liable to wake up one morning, and find we're even nastier than they are.

Franklin: I can't say that worries me!

Mallory: Well, you're lucky.

Good performances abound, but the best by far is David Niven's Cpl. Miller, a complex character whose smooth front and witty banter conceals much of the conflict of the film. It's he who tangles most often with Gregory Peck's Mallory, and has at least three scenes in the film that are top-rate. We may like Miller because he keeps things humming and provides welcome comic relief, but he's no less the center of the film than Peck or Anthony Quinn, the two well-cast leads whose relationship is enriched, at least from our remove, by the unique vow Stavros has made to Mallory about the unsettled business between them.

The plot is a thing of beauty, moving with all the synchronicity and clever precision of a diabolical cuckoo clock. The special effects have suffered more than a bit from the march of time (though one should remember that was the only part of the film that won an Oscar in 1962). Some process shots are cringe-inducing now. But the pace is still gripping and the payoff spectacular. Here's the film that was the template to every popcorn actioner that came after, its imprint recognizable on everything from the James Bond movies to "Star Wars" to Indiana Jones. That's impressive, but more so is that "Guns" remains as entertaining as any one of them, and more thrilling than most.

I saw this film with my father at an outdoor theater when it first appeared.

Remember those?

When those two German cannons stretched across the screen, they must have been at least eighty feet long. The special effects of films in those days might have been primitive compared to now, but those days had a trick or two up their sleeve to make the most of them, that we can no longer experience.

And outdoor theaters might as have well have been invented and built for this movie. I can't remember a more suspenseful cinematic experience in my whole life-- or a more dramatic night out with Dad. I was glad that he was there, just a reassuring foot or two away, in case the terror became unbearable.

So it surprised me to learn here that Guns of Navarone appeared only in 1961. That would make me twelve or thirteen years old, not eight. If I remember it so vividly, how could I be so wrong about the time? Perhaps this is further testimony to its impact-- how small and vulnerable it can make one feel in its sweep of events.