I will declare an interest at the outset because my late grandfather actually fought at the battle of Anzio(which he did survive. Therefore I was interested to see how the film dealt with Anzio. This unfortunately is a disappointing film, although not terrible by any means. It tries to be ambitious, with an anti-war stance but ends up as a strangely tame film to become a quite conventional heroic war movie. The film is not particularly realistic, and lacks a sense of danger. There are major characters killed of but you won't have any real feelings for them.
This film is not helped by the fact it does suffers from the Hollywood(US) perspective. This largely ignores the British effort, and concentrates on the American action at Anzio. The film as a sop perhaps tries to compensate for this by heavily criticising the American generals. Although the British command made mistakes, in reality the American generalship was far worse and genuinely appalling The thinly disguised General Clark who is the character Gerneral Carson, was an egotistical moron, who threatened to shoot any British who arrived in Rome on the day 'he' conquered Rome. This unsurprisingly is not in the film, but you can certainly understand why Anzio was a near disaster, when you had idiots like that in charge.
Strangely enough Anzio bears comparison to Saving Private Ryan in structure, both start with a beach landing although as the film does get right Anzio was unopposed unlike Utah beach. The film like Saving Private Ryan then concentrates on a section of American soldiers, and their actions. There is also like saving private Ryan an allied plane attack which at the end which plays an important role in the final outcome.
The film unfortunately lacks the savage intensity of Anzio. The town of Anzio, and its surrounds was under constant and intense Artillery bombardment from the Germans. There was also constant pressure from German infantry and the conditions were reminiscent of the first world war. This state of affairs was to last in a very bloody stalemate for three months, before a breakout was achieved. You simply don't get any impression of that intense and constant pressure however being placed upon the allies from the film. There is none of the sense of fear and dread, that being confined to those few miles of land around Anzio actually had on the allies. Therefore the film ends up disappointingly conventional and ignores the reality of the conditions in Anzio.
The acting is patchy, with only the characters playing the American generals and Kesselring really worthy of note. Peter Falk's performance as a playboy GI is out of kilter with the film. I like Peter Falk, but here his performance is ham-fisted, and unconvincing. Robert Mitchum is a good choice for the lead, and that face can do war weary better than most. Yet as Hollywood demands, despite being a cynical war journalist, he takes over the action and he gets to kill the last German sniper.
So you won't get any insight worthy of note about Anzio from this film. It doesn't bother to try and create a realistic overview of what actually happened at Anzio. As this film was made in 1968, I'm not particularly surprised by the emphasis on the American war effort, therefore I'm not particularly upset by it. It bears so little reality to what Anzio must have been like that I can't judge it as a historical war film like the longest day, or a bridge to far. This is just a war film with a title that tries to lend it some historical credibility. It has little or none, so I would not take it seriously.
There are it is true sporadic moments of interest and excitement, some of the battle scenes are well done, especially when some American units are ambushed by German tanks. The final action scene with the plane strafing the sniper and Robert mitchum trying to kill the sniper is well done as well. It isn't enough however dramatically, or historically accurate enough to sustain your interest.
This film is not helped by the fact it does suffers from the Hollywood(US) perspective. This largely ignores the British effort, and concentrates on the American action at Anzio. The film as a sop perhaps tries to compensate for this by heavily criticising the American generals. Although the British command made mistakes, in reality the American generalship was far worse and genuinely appalling The thinly disguised General Clark who is the character Gerneral Carson, was an egotistical moron, who threatened to shoot any British who arrived in Rome on the day 'he' conquered Rome. This unsurprisingly is not in the film, but you can certainly understand why Anzio was a near disaster, when you had idiots like that in charge.
Strangely enough Anzio bears comparison to Saving Private Ryan in structure, both start with a beach landing although as the film does get right Anzio was unopposed unlike Utah beach. The film like Saving Private Ryan then concentrates on a section of American soldiers, and their actions. There is also like saving private Ryan an allied plane attack which at the end which plays an important role in the final outcome.
The film unfortunately lacks the savage intensity of Anzio. The town of Anzio, and its surrounds was under constant and intense Artillery bombardment from the Germans. There was also constant pressure from German infantry and the conditions were reminiscent of the first world war. This state of affairs was to last in a very bloody stalemate for three months, before a breakout was achieved. You simply don't get any impression of that intense and constant pressure however being placed upon the allies from the film. There is none of the sense of fear and dread, that being confined to those few miles of land around Anzio actually had on the allies. Therefore the film ends up disappointingly conventional and ignores the reality of the conditions in Anzio.
The acting is patchy, with only the characters playing the American generals and Kesselring really worthy of note. Peter Falk's performance as a playboy GI is out of kilter with the film. I like Peter Falk, but here his performance is ham-fisted, and unconvincing. Robert Mitchum is a good choice for the lead, and that face can do war weary better than most. Yet as Hollywood demands, despite being a cynical war journalist, he takes over the action and he gets to kill the last German sniper.
So you won't get any insight worthy of note about Anzio from this film. It doesn't bother to try and create a realistic overview of what actually happened at Anzio. As this film was made in 1968, I'm not particularly surprised by the emphasis on the American war effort, therefore I'm not particularly upset by it. It bears so little reality to what Anzio must have been like that I can't judge it as a historical war film like the longest day, or a bridge to far. This is just a war film with a title that tries to lend it some historical credibility. It has little or none, so I would not take it seriously.
There are it is true sporadic moments of interest and excitement, some of the battle scenes are well done, especially when some American units are ambushed by German tanks. The final action scene with the plane strafing the sniper and Robert mitchum trying to kill the sniper is well done as well. It isn't enough however dramatically, or historically accurate enough to sustain your interest.