Anzio (1968)

Too much of everything

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

RELEASED IN 1968 and directed by Edward Dmytryk & Duilio Coletti, "Anzio" (aka "The Battle of Anzio") chronicles the uneventful Allied amphibious landing at Anzio, Italy, in late January, 1944. While a reconnaissance detail offers evidence that there's no serious enemy opposition in the 30 miles between Anzio and Rome, the commander (Arthur Kennedy) inexplicably decides to dig-in, which provides Field Marshal Kesselring (Wolfgang Preiss) the opportunity to marshal his troops against the invasion. This prolongs their capturing Rome until early June.Winston Churchill was dissatisfied with this, commenting "I had hoped we were hurling a wildcat into the shore, but all we got was a stranded whale." The movie focuses on a war correspondent (Robert Mitchum) who accompanies a small group of Rangers who patrol the Italian countryside and are ambushed at the Battle of Cisterna and try to make it back. The soldiers are played by Earl Holliman, Peter Falk, Reni Santoni, et. al.The movie's based on real events, but you can tell that the writers pandered to the audience in light of some of the contrived dialogues, e.g. General Lesley quoting Churchill at the end (Lesley, of course, representing the real-life General Lucas). Another negative is the incongruent soundtrack and score, most notably the opening song by Jack Jones, "The World is Yours." Yet it could be argued that this lends the movie a unique charm.Some armchair critics complain that the movie should have focused more on The Battle of Anzio, as far as the invading Allies fighting Kesselring's counterattack, but that's here to a point (since all the events fall under the umbrella of that battle) and I think they came up with an innovative way to condense 4.5 months into a fairly compelling two hour flick.THE MOVIE RUNS 117 minutes and was shot entirely in Italy (Naples, Caserta & Rome). WRITERS: H.A.L. Craig (et. al) from Wynford Vaughan-Thomas's book. ADDITIONAL CAST: Robert Ryan has a small role.GRADE: B-

THE BATTLE FOR ANZIO is about as unexciting a war epic as you can get: an overblown (produced by Dino de Laurentiis), overlong US-Italian co-production, it fails to ignite the screen with any kind of energy, excitement or drive despite dealing with an interesting theatre of the Second World War. The first third is particularly gruelling, an almost plot less introduction to the leading characters before they head off to war, full of drunken partying and over-running scenes of people flirting and talking, all portrayed in the most boring way possible. Once we arrive in Italy, the next two thirds quickly change and the film degenerates into yet another men-on-a-mission type flick of which the Italians were so fond in the wake of THE DIRTY DOZEN.I was a little surprised to find out that such a supposedly epic film had turned into the usual low key story concerning guys trapped behind enemy lines. The budget isn't very evident anyway, with disappointing set-piece battles and only a few shoot-outs that manage to raise the pulse. The script is rather sub-par, throwing in the usual anti-war messages yet topping off with a cheesy happy ending in any case, and many of the characters are interchangeable aside from the leading duo. The young actors (Thomas Hunter, Giancarlo Giannini, Mark Damon, Anthony Steel) don't have a chance to shine and pointless cameos from the likes of Arthur Kennedy fail to register. Bob Mitchum and Peter Falk are typically good value for money but they're given particularly dull characters to work with here. THE BATTLE FOR ANZIO is definitely a war film that deserves to be forgotten.

Much noise has been made of the film's weaknesses including the decision to base it around Robert Mitchum as a tired and drunk war correspondent and Peter Falk as his barely coherent partying murderer friend. The historical details begin with some promise but as the film goes on they get glossed over in favor of various Hollywood World War II movie clichés. In my opinion this film stumbles out of the gate on the wrong foot with a tonally off opening credits sequence feature bizarre animated titles and an upbeat love song (when there's no love and barely any females to speak of in the movie!), and it never really recovers.The film just barely delivers on its title and shows us none of the actual battle of Anzio but some of the landings and an inaccurate version of the Battle of Cisterna in which 767 Rangers were surrounded and wiped out. Otherwise, the film is just another dull "trapped behind enemy lines" type movie with a lot of antiwar gum-flapping dialog about the uselessness of war.There is, however, some attractive scenery of the Italian countryside on display and a few quality war scenes at play. Wolfgang Preiss really shines in his brief scenes as Kesselring and one wishes we could have had more of him. Action-wise we're treated to two one-sided massacres; one of American rangers at Cisterna (led by a dubbed Venantino Venantini) followed by the main heroic squad mowing down several clueless Germans in a farmhouse. The only surprises really come during a tense sniper battle which for me was the highlight of the film. This wasn't quite the Dmytryk of the classic era, but he still had some good work left in him.It feels like a major missed opportunity that the film never gives us any major combat with both sides putting up a spirited fight. It may be for that very reason why the nearly-unanimous response among war movie fans to this film over the years has been that of utter disappointment.

While the title to this film is "Anzio", it isn't exactly the famous Battle of Anzio. The battle resulted in 30,000 American casualties--so it was a HUGE battle. But, in this film it's only a battle of a few dozen against a few dozen--and it's really not THE battle of Anzio--it's A battle at Anzio! Now this might have worked, but the film really never kept my attention.The main characters in this film are Robert Mitchum (as a war correspondent), Peter Falk and Earl Holliman. All three are in a group of soldiers who are in the advance of an invasion of American soldiers in Italy during WWII. But what most of the film is is just just seeing these small group of soldiers fighting and dying...and nothing else. You get no sense of who won the battle, why the battle was fought or of the enemy--just faceless folks shooting at each other and folks dying. Despite these talented men in the leads, the film just never amounted to anything but watching guys die.Curiously uninvolving and not particularly interesting. This film needed a better script and some reason to exist.