They Were Not Divided

Starting 'today' with Princess Elizabeth riding behind her late father on Horse Guard's Parade, and then flashing back to 1941. Harry Waxman's atmospheric black & white photography facilitates the use of copious amounts of actuality footage (including both Montgomery & Eisenhower), rather at odds with Lambert Williamson's lush score.

Director Terence Young later hit the big time with the James Bond films; hence the reappearance in them of several of this film's supporting cast (including 'Q' himself).

The BBC recently aired this on a lazy Monday afternoon in mid-August when probably not many were watching. But as this was made by Terence Young (future director of some prolific Bondmovies) I happened to tape it.

What a great surprise this proves to be. Probably about the sole movie account of a (chiefly) British tank battalion journey into France and Belgium after D-Day.

I will admit it's all very "stiff British upperlip" (jolly good show boys and so on)and especially the romance segments have dated badly, but there is a true feel of authenticity, not only that it's made about 4 years after WWII, but the director gives a realistic and almost documentary-like style to the battle scenes.

It all moves along at a brisk pace, and being a bit of WWII buff, it gave me a very rare insight and almost 'behind the scenes' view of a tankbatallion in action in 1944.

I'll doubt if it is available on DVD so you will maybe have to wait till the BBC airs it again, in 10 years or so !

"They Were Not Divided" is a British WWII film about a Welsh tank unit that also seems to have a lot of Americans, Englishmen and Canadians among them. It takes place from just after Dunkirk in 1940 and ends with the fall of Germany.

The story is VERY episodic and character development is seemingly unimportant. This makes the film a bit less involving and cold than a typical war story...which is its biggest weakness. As a result, it comes off like a Cliff Notes version of the war in Europe. It's not terrible at all but could have been better.

By the way, most of the 'Americans' in the movie sound exactly like Brits TRYING to sound American. I think British viewers would not have noticed this, but Americans sure will be able to tell they aren't from home! Now I know how Brits feel when they watch American films with horrible British accents...such as Bert in "Mary Poppins"

This early Terence Young film is a unique masterpiece of its kind. It tells a true story of two soldiers getting trained and fighting together from after Dunkirk up to the battle of the Ardennes, that is four years, giving a very natural and meticulous account of their lives and comrades, their jokes, their life in the barracks, their girls and wifes and sweethearts, their dreams and their every day existence at war, at the front, at the pub, at some parties - a film couldn't almost be more humanly documentary. In addition, the direction is superb all the way, perfectly natural, the pace is constantly efficient and sustained the whole way, it doesn't really tell a story, it just follows the soldiers around everywhere, the dialogue is intensive the whole way, and it is not until the last scenes when it all comes together and proves an overwhelming masterpiece. This is a film to watch again.

I was hoping for a more compelling film; but there was far too much dialogue, and not enough action. Especially, after the basic training section of the film, which is actually the better part of the movie.

There were just too many bromides and cliches that were continually interfering with the natural evolution of the film. The actors did a competent job, as did the director, but the production values, to say the least, were slipshod. Maybe it was because it was an armored division. Armored division films of WW all seem to suffer from similar shortcomings; with the exception of Patton. Films like The Battle of the Bulge, The Battle of Alamein, Desert Fox, Rommel, and even the modern Fury with Brad Pitt, all had character development problems, action sequence problems, and pacing problems.

Doing dialogue for these types of films is very difficult to accomplish; that is why very few of them are highly praised compared to infantry, naval, and air force films. The natural confining aspect of a tank does not lend itself to good development of dialogue. However, to be fair, the film is watchable and entertaining, and will satisfy most WW 2 genre fans.