Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Good Movies => Topic started by: ulthar on January 04, 2008, 01:25:01 AM



Title: GUNS OF NAVARONE
Post by: ulthar on January 04, 2008, 01:25:01 AM
It's been years, many years, since I've seen this one.  We watched it the other night, and I must say, this is how you win a war - you realize there is something bigger then you.

Gregory Peck gives a performance of a career, and of course, Anthony Quinn, not a pirate this time, is iconic.

Columbia, why are you not releasing movies like this anymore?


Title: Re: GUNS OF NAVARONE
Post by: Neville on January 06, 2008, 10:56:44 AM
"This is how you win a war"? Uhm. I certainly wouldn't take this movie that seriously. It's just a bigger-than-life heroes versus a lot of bad guys shoot 'em up phantasy. It's just that it's a damn great one.

If you liked it and I'm not too late for that, let me warn you to avoid the sequel with Harrison Ford -subpar affair, really- but get a copy of "Where Eagles Dare" as soon as possible. It has everything "Guns" has, but also Clint eastwood, snowy landscapes, several impossible plot twists and a escape plan that involves blowing up pretty much all the German army.


Title: Re: GUNS OF NAVARONE
Post by: Dennis on January 06, 2008, 01:02:08 PM
If you like reading, the author of the book this movie is based on, Alistair Maclean, has written many novels like this. They don't require a lot of thought, but they are fast paced, easy to read and very entertaining. Some of my favorites are, The Satan Bug, Ice Station Zebra, The Golden Rendezvous, HMS Ulysses, I could go on for a long time. A lot of his novels have been made into movies.


Title: Re: GUNS OF NAVARONE
Post by: ulthar on January 06, 2008, 01:23:32 PM

"This is how you win a war"? Uhm. I certainly wouldn't take this movie that seriously. It's just a bigger-than-life heroes versus a lot of bad guys shoot 'em up phantasy. It's just that it's a damn great one.


What I was talking about is something I think was accurately depicted in this movies.  Soldiers are not always whiney wimps who just want to get home as portrayed in some more modern war pics.  What I meant was the idea that the cause is bigger than the individual.  SOMETIMES, that is true.

There is also a very well known doctrine called "The Battlefield Paradox."  This states that the more willing you are to die for your cause, the less likely you WILL die for your cause.  The theory, as I understand it, goes that the more willing you are to die, the harder you will fight, and are thus more likely to overcome an enemy who is "meh" about his purpose for being there.

This movie states at the beginning that it is based on legend; that these specific characters were built up to the superhuman is a given.  However, legends are often born of real history, and certainly, there have been men, successful soldiers, throughout history that were of this "caliber."

So yes, I do think this movie depicts a way to win wars.  You DON'T fight them half-assed, you don't fight with politics.  If a cause is sufficiently severe to go to war over (and not something to take lightly by any stretch...I believe war is a terrible, but sometimes necessary, thing), it should be done right.

THAT is how you minimize the evil effects of war.  You fight it to win.  THE GUNS OF NAVARONE showed this in its storytelling.


Title: Re: GUNS OF NAVARONE
Post by: Neville on January 06, 2008, 01:28:33 PM
Relax, ulthar. Just thought you were reading too much in what essentially is a film built for entertainment value. Now that you explained it more thoroughly I won't deny part of it may be in fact implied in the movie.

BTW, I just saw "Bear Island" last night. It's based on yet another of McLean's books. It's not nearly as good as the plot summary suggests (Scientists! Snow! Nazi U-boats!), but it's got a great cast and almost non-stop action scenes. Not good, as I said, but great fun indeed.

"Ice Station Zebra" is also a pretty decent thriller, although it's not as good as "Guns" or "Eagles".

Just stay away from "River of death", both book and film, they're both stinkers, specially the book.


Title: Re: GUNS OF NAVARONE
Post by: Yaddo 42 on January 06, 2008, 06:41:33 PM
I used to read a lot of McLean, fun action stuff in far flung locales, exciting without the ingrained snootiness in lots of the Ian Fleming Bond books, but I loved those too for a while.

I liked the book River of Death until that stupid dashed off ending, but looking back at it later, I think I just liked the set up more than the execution. The movie is a boring mess.

I liked Guns of Navarone a lot, it's kind of a template for other later action epics, lots of filmmakers owe a huge debt to this film for copying it over and over.

My favorite character is the bomb maker played by David Niven, he's conflicted and not the bravest character in the bunch, but his scene when he explains how they've been set up and sabatoged by a spy in their midsts all along is one I have to watch everytime. He's angry at being nearly killed and used, and had his pride hurt concerning his bombmaking craft, so he lays it out point by point. Great dialogue and a certain style of acting there.

I second seeking out the excellent and exciting book as well.