Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

A British team are tasked with entering occupied Greece and destroying a large gun tower on the island of Navarone. With the gun tower being heavily guarded by the Nazis, the team have to use their ingenuity to outfox the Germans.The Guns Of Navarone is a good story and to be fair it had enough going for it to hold my interest, but unfortunately it's a film that I found to be sporadically thrilling and compelling rather than consistently compelling and thrilling.The first thing has to be addressed is the length of the film and one thing I really don't like is a film that spends an awful long time just setting up the plot - sometimes this can work with complex plots that need to introduce several characters or films that involve interwoven stories, but where the plot is rather linear such as it is in The Guns Of Navarone I would have much preferred it if we'd have got to the crux of the plot much sooner (some of the earlier scenes felt rather redundant and didn't seem to do much to drive the narrative forward). Although the slightly plodding pace is more of a problem in the first half sadly examples of it are dotted throughout the film - director J Lee Thompson seems to use a lot of long takes which admittedly look good, but inevitably just add unnecessary length to the picture.The cast are a key to make this work and although David Niven has top billing (according to IMDb) it is very much Gregory Peck who is the lead actor here and he does a great job giving a rather calm and understated performance as the 'voice of authority'. David Niven is also excellent in what I would class as a 'supporting role' in this film.Still as I've mentioned it has enough about it to make it worth watching - although J Lee Thompson seems to have tried to turn this into some kind of epic he does mostly keep the story on track and it does slowly manifest itself into an intriguing battle of wits. It's certainly worth a look and probably would have been even better if the running time would have been trimmed slightly.

Good WW2 drama.Based on the Alastair MacLean novel, solid plot and good action sequences. On the negative side, maybe too speech-filled and preachy. Also overly long.Gregory Peck doesn't do bad performances, and this is no exception. David Niven is a bit irritating in his role though. Solid performances from a stellar supporting cast: Anthony Quinn, Stanley Baker, James Robertson Justice, Anthony Quayle. Richard Harris, early in his career, also has a minor role.

The Guns of Navarone is one of those films that has clearly aged in a lot of aspects and still offers a lot of replay value even 50 years down the line. Directed by action/adventure expert J. Lee Thompson and written by High Noon scriptwriter Carl Foreman, this film is a peculiar example of the adventure genre done right.The film presents a straightforward goal: WWII is raging on and two enormous German cannons are placed in a cave on the Greek island of Navarone, sinking all ships that enter its firing range. Rather than attempting a frontal assault, a small team of six Brits and Greeks are ordered to infiltrate the island by boat and blow up the cannons. We follow them as they narrowly survive mother nature and encounters with Germans and along the way their dispositions toward the mission and each other change.Like I said, this film has aged…mostly well. There are a lot of things that you can't really watch with a straight face. Peck's acting is a bit hammy at times and the way the tension between Peck and Quinn's characters is resolved is as symbolic as me shouting in your ear is subtle, but overall, this film manages to excel in terms of action without disregarding character development as so many modern-day action flicks tend to do.According to the trivia section on IMDb, Gregory Peck was disappointed by how many viewers failed to properly identify Navarone as anti-war and though I can understand his frustration, I think this has more to do with the style of the film than the intended message. When I think 'anti-war', I think of films like Kubrick's Paths of Glory with its clearly delineated anti-war morals. Navarone however, is first and foremost a bundle of (exciting) action set pieces. Of course there is drama, some of it still really effective, but the film's many action sequences are crucial as they define the film as just that – an action film – because these scenes tend to lack some sense of symbolism, underlying the futility of war, etc. In other words, there's anti-war stuff to be found here, but it's overshadowed by the amount of Hollywood spectacle.In the end, not every war film needs to be an in-your-face anti-war ad. The Guns of Navarone is first and foremost an exciting adventure film, excelling at many of the tropes that have made the genre popular. Even 50 years later, Navarone has a lot of replay value and (though occasionally campy) is still fun to watch and genuinely exciting.

...while my favourite anti-war film is the original All Quiet On The Western Front. I don't know enough about either World War 2 or the probable merits of seeing this motion picture in all it's original glory at a big cinema sneeringly recommended by a previous commenter, all I know for sure it's a damn fine film to watch on the TV at home. Which without intending to be snooty I've done many times over the decades; it's just some people actually prefer concentrating on a smaller screen with no one munching popcorn in their ear.An Allied mission comprising of six big strong men sets out to destroy the gargantuan Nazi guns entrenched in the cliffs at Navarone in Greece. This mission is to be by sea, mountain and land and faces many trials and tribulations along the way caused by the Nazis and internal frictions. The moral relativist dilemmas come thick and fast and are what help make this a special war film – at the other end of the decade there was no such moralising in Where Eagles Dare. Examples: whether or not to kill or kill to order; the possibility of using up a man's life to further your own ends or orders; instead of holding doors open for them should men shoot women; how tough it is to make decisions which effect others; why the two not so intelligent working class men were doomed to die and the three intelligent upper class officers destined to survive; what bloody good does any of it do anyway; and surprisingly more. On the evidence presented it's even possible to debate whether the Nazis really did have a shocking taste in undies. My favourite bit is David Niven's dramatic unmasking of the traitor and what he expects from his commanding officer Gregory Peck in resolution – everyone's emotions are expertly played with, including ours.There's (generally) great acting, production and story – the special effects are sometimes a disappointment but aren't a problem as never central to the plot. It's doesn't have to be a true story or totally perfect in all departments, just suspend belief for 150 minutes and it's fantastic entertainment: If War is Hell you probably wouldn't guess it from this film, watch it to decide.