VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,1/10
2386
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaIn 1943 in Tunisia, a unit of the French Foreign Legion fights the Germans over possession of a bank treasure in gold bars.In 1943 in Tunisia, a unit of the French Foreign Legion fights the Germans over possession of a bank treasure in gold bars.In 1943 in Tunisia, a unit of the French Foreign Legion fights the Germans over possession of a bank treasure in gold bars.
Pierre Semmler
- Capt. Ulrich Dieterle
- (as Peter Semler)
Caroline Silhol
- Mme Chanterelle
- (as Caroline Sihol)
Michel Beaune
- Le général français
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Michel Berreur
- Un légionnaire
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Daniel Breton
- Un légionnaire
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Claude Carliez
- Un légionnaire (vers la quatrième minute, il reçoit une balle dans le dos)
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Hans Verner
- Le colonel allemand
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- Quiz5th highest grossing movie of its year in France but after starting fast, dropped quickly because of negative word of mouth.
- BlooperAround 00:05:01, during explosion, we can see a mannequin laid down on the ground.
- Versioni alternativeIn the German theatrical and video version 11 minutes are missing. 08:52: Beral (Villeret) explains his situation while Mahuzard (Constantin) seeks for volunteers going back outside the Turkish bath (3 min.). 23:35: On their way to the flak Augagneur (Belmondo) and Beral are creeping over a cemetery (2:30 min.). 44:30: Augagneur tells Helene (Laforet) about his favorite cinema Roxy-Palace and why he decided to become a foreign legionnaire. Mahuzard is listening to Edith Piaf on the radio. Then he goes to the door and frightens Beral by explaining to him what they usually do with disloyal french soldiers (5 min.). 79:52: Karl (Matthias Habich) and Augagneur in the tank. With help of headsets and microphones both speak about El Ksour and Paris. The tank is driving through the Tunesian desert (2 min.).
- ConnessioniReferences King Kong (1933)
- Colonne sonoreLes Morfalous (Générique)
Written and Performed by Georges Delerue Et Son Orchestre
Recensione in evidenza
The film ultimately stands as a flawed yet somewhat entertaining entry in the World War II genre, marred by significant shortcomings that prevent it from reaching the heights of more accomplished war films. While it presents an engaging premise and makes solid use of its desert setting, its execution leaves much to be desired, particularly in terms of direction, acting credibility, and overall cohesion.
Visually, the film has its moments, with the cinematography effectively capturing the harsh, sun-drenched landscapes that reinforce the sense of isolation. However, the film suffers from noticeable stylistic anachronisms. Hairstyles, wardrobe choices, and certain props feel out of place for the 1940s setting, diminishing the immersion. While some war films meticulously recreate period-accurate aesthetics, this one takes a looser, less disciplined approach, which undermines its credibility.
The action sequences are competently staged, relying on practical effects and pyrotechnics that add a degree of realism. Yet, beyond these surface-level thrills, the film lacks the weight and intensity needed to make its set pieces truly impactful. The choreography often feels too staged, with little of the raw unpredictability that characterizes the best war films. This issue extends to the overall staging of scenes, where group movements and background action feel poorly coordinated. There is a clear lack of directorial control over the positioning and purpose of secondary characters, leading to a sense of confusion in the mise-en-scène. Extras and minor players often appear aimless, failing to contribute meaningfully to the atmosphere of a given moment.
The film's pacing is another drawback. It meanders between moments of tension, adventure, and humor without ever fully committing to a cohesive tone. Some comedic elements feel forced, clashing with the more serious themes, and the lack of a clear directorial vision results in tonal inconsistencies that weaken the narrative. Unlike war films that successfully balance humor with danger-such as Kelly's Heroes, which seamlessly integrates irreverence with wartime peril-this film stumbles in its attempt to do the same. The humor often undercuts the stakes rather than enhancing the tension, making it difficult to invest fully in the unfolding events.
Performance-wise, the film is largely let down by its direction rather than the actors themselves. The lead delivers a serviceable performance, bringing charisma to the role, but the dialogue often feels under-rehearsed, with interactions that lack spontaneity and conviction. Supporting characters fare even worse, with many seemingly uncertain of their purpose in each scene. The delivery of lines frequently feels stilted, as if the cast was not given sufficient preparation or clear direction on how to approach their roles. The result is a series of interactions that feel hollow, failing to create the necessary dramatic tension or chemistry between characters.
The film's technical aspects further highlight its shortcomings. In addition to anachronistic design choices, there are clear signs of rushed production, with continuity errors and inconsistencies in character positioning between shots. These issues, while minor on their own, accumulate over the course of the film, reinforcing the sense that it was not as tightly controlled as it should have been. A strong director can elevate even a modestly budgeted film through precise scene blocking and meticulous attention to detail, but that level of craftsmanship is noticeably absent here.
The soundtrack, while serviceable, does little to elevate the film. It provides the expected cues for tension and action but lacks the kind of memorable themes that define truly great war films. At times, it even feels at odds with the scenes, further emphasizing the tonal confusion that plagues the movie.
In the end, the film earns a passing grade, but only barely. It is not without entertainment value, particularly for those who appreciate war films with a more lighthearted or adventurous slant. However, its lack of directorial control, underdeveloped performances, and overall uneven execution prevent it from standing out. For dedicated fans of World War II cinema, it remains a curiosity rather than a must-watch-a film that had potential but ultimately falls short due to its lack of polish and coherence.
Visually, the film has its moments, with the cinematography effectively capturing the harsh, sun-drenched landscapes that reinforce the sense of isolation. However, the film suffers from noticeable stylistic anachronisms. Hairstyles, wardrobe choices, and certain props feel out of place for the 1940s setting, diminishing the immersion. While some war films meticulously recreate period-accurate aesthetics, this one takes a looser, less disciplined approach, which undermines its credibility.
The action sequences are competently staged, relying on practical effects and pyrotechnics that add a degree of realism. Yet, beyond these surface-level thrills, the film lacks the weight and intensity needed to make its set pieces truly impactful. The choreography often feels too staged, with little of the raw unpredictability that characterizes the best war films. This issue extends to the overall staging of scenes, where group movements and background action feel poorly coordinated. There is a clear lack of directorial control over the positioning and purpose of secondary characters, leading to a sense of confusion in the mise-en-scène. Extras and minor players often appear aimless, failing to contribute meaningfully to the atmosphere of a given moment.
The film's pacing is another drawback. It meanders between moments of tension, adventure, and humor without ever fully committing to a cohesive tone. Some comedic elements feel forced, clashing with the more serious themes, and the lack of a clear directorial vision results in tonal inconsistencies that weaken the narrative. Unlike war films that successfully balance humor with danger-such as Kelly's Heroes, which seamlessly integrates irreverence with wartime peril-this film stumbles in its attempt to do the same. The humor often undercuts the stakes rather than enhancing the tension, making it difficult to invest fully in the unfolding events.
Performance-wise, the film is largely let down by its direction rather than the actors themselves. The lead delivers a serviceable performance, bringing charisma to the role, but the dialogue often feels under-rehearsed, with interactions that lack spontaneity and conviction. Supporting characters fare even worse, with many seemingly uncertain of their purpose in each scene. The delivery of lines frequently feels stilted, as if the cast was not given sufficient preparation or clear direction on how to approach their roles. The result is a series of interactions that feel hollow, failing to create the necessary dramatic tension or chemistry between characters.
The film's technical aspects further highlight its shortcomings. In addition to anachronistic design choices, there are clear signs of rushed production, with continuity errors and inconsistencies in character positioning between shots. These issues, while minor on their own, accumulate over the course of the film, reinforcing the sense that it was not as tightly controlled as it should have been. A strong director can elevate even a modestly budgeted film through precise scene blocking and meticulous attention to detail, but that level of craftsmanship is noticeably absent here.
The soundtrack, while serviceable, does little to elevate the film. It provides the expected cues for tension and action but lacks the kind of memorable themes that define truly great war films. At times, it even feels at odds with the scenes, further emphasizing the tonal confusion that plagues the movie.
In the end, the film earns a passing grade, but only barely. It is not without entertainment value, particularly for those who appreciate war films with a more lighthearted or adventurous slant. However, its lack of directorial control, underdeveloped performances, and overall uneven execution prevent it from standing out. For dedicated fans of World War II cinema, it remains a curiosity rather than a must-watch-a film that had potential but ultimately falls short due to its lack of polish and coherence.
- GianfrancoSpada
- 23 feb 2025
- Permalink
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Vultures?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 30.000.000 FRF (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 46 minuti
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was L'oro dei legionari (1984) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi