Von Panzern überrollt

I'm sorry to say that this film, which is James Garner's first leading role, is a mess. And almost all of the fault is in the writing.

There have been other films about military teams in training. And they have been better than this.

We can thank the writing for some horrible characters. And some terrible plots. They try to mix training scenes with scenes concerning the personal lives of the men, but it's all a mess.

I wish I could list all the times I cringed in response to a particular line, but that is not possible. They follow one another like lemmings.

Some visual effects were also off-putting, like when they trainees are rappelling up a cliff and one man's line comes loose and he plummets to the ground. The entire scene was contrived, amateurish and poorly done.

Obviously there are some people who liked this film, but I cannot recommend it.

Veteran Director Wellman guides the capable cast through all the usual war movie cliches and still manages to keep our interest. Scattered throughout the action are some nice cameos by then "up and coming" stars, and an especially nice bit done by Edd "Kooky" Brynes. This one is still fun.

He was not impressed! And the guy I talked to was a U.S. Ranger who took part in assault landings in North Africa, Sicily, the main Italian landing, and finally at Anzio. (He was captured by the Germans at Anzio and ultimately escaped, making his way eastward to the Russian lines. But that is another story.) My friend was fairly critical of the action portrayed in the movie, despite the fact that another Ranger was the technical adviser.

As for the movie itself, it is only slightly above mediocre. Although I am a big fan of older black and white movies, I must say that the lack of color here is a negative. Also, based on memory, too many scenes were shot on a sound stage. A film noir is fine shot that way, but an A level war movie should have more impressive production values. After all, WWII was not fought in a blimp hanger.

I had not seen this film before this year, and I was surprised how good it was. Though obviously filmed in the USA its portrayal of British characters (though incidental to the plot), was refreshingly good. The action scenes were well filmed and it is nice to see James Garner not playing for laughs. Though a good light comedian, I think he is best in straight roles like in 36 Hours and the Great Escape. The cast is on the whole very good, and I have to say that I thoroughly recommend watching this film, if like me you are a war movie fan.

Routine, by-the-numbers war film made on an off-day by the great William A. Wellman. It's no better, and somewhat worse, than other WW II films of that era, with some sappy and contrived love stories thrown in. Although Wellman hadn't made "B" pictures for years, that's just what this one comes across as--far too much of it is shot on sound stages (apparently to save money on location shooting) which makes it look cheap, as does the surfeit of poorly integrated newsreel stock footage, and what little action there is isn't particularly well done. The script is, to be honest, awful, and the acting--other than Garner, whose first major role this was and who's quite good and Edd "Kookie" Byrnes, who plays an arrogant young West Point officer on his first combat assignment--is for the most part pedestrian, with the tired stereotypes you see in pretty much every war picture: the slow-witted hillbilly, the fast-talking city slicker, the weary veteran sergeant, etc.

Overall, it's slow and boring, with some unnecessary comedy relief thrown in and too much attention paid to the GIs' love interests. Not one of Wellman's better films, by a long shot.