Wordiezett So much average

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

jimel98 There are a number of inaccuracies, but that's fine, not all war movies have to be historically accurate, but with that said, it just isn't a very good movie. Some of the silly things thrown in for reasons unknown: suddenly during a battle a speech by Hitler is heard, but not being listened to on a radio, just part of the soundtrack; when the Italians are being killed with the flamethrower suddenly we hear some kind of prayer in Italian, but again, part of the soundtrack; when the Quaker medical officer dies we hear his lines about being a conscientious objector replayed. We're treated to just a number of nonsensical additions or gimmicks that just don't work. Additionally, the special effects are OK, but not great and they weren't great when they were used the first time in "Tobruk", a much better movie. Lastly, I swear Richard Burton, while dressed as a German captain and speaking to a German enlisted man, asked for the telephone in English. I listened a few times and I'm sure of it. I'm glad I watched this, but I seriously doubt I'll never watch it again.

bkoganbing Looking at the criticisms of poor Richard Burton for taking a role in Raid on Rommel makes me want to put a word in for him. Acting was a craft as well as an art to him, it's how he made his living. I'm sure he got a good pay day out of Raid on Rommel. I think he also wanted to try the action genre as well. He made a much better choice with Where Eagles Dare though.It's a poorly conceived story from start to finish. Someone in Allied Headquarters in London had the brilliant idea of freeing a bunch of captive commandos in North Africa and send them on a mission to Tobruk to spike some harbor guns. Same idea as in Guns of Navarone. So Burton gets the job. But upon executing the escape he discovers he has freed a bunch of medical personnel and hardly enough commandos. Never mind he uses what he has.His mission is to blow up those guns, but on discovering a fuel depot for Rommel he makes a little side trip to blow it up. Hello, but I think he was compromising the mission he was sent on. Wouldn't it have made a lot more sense to do the job you're assigned to and then when you got out you tell headquarters and they do another mission? That makes more sense to me.The fuel depot sequences and the finale with the guns at Tobruk harbor are taken from the Rock Hudson film a few years earlier. Burton gives a rather pedestrian performance as does the rest of the cast.By the way as if our heroes didn't have enough on their hands they're also transporting the mistress of an Italian general. That man wasn't going to sacrifice any of the comforts of the homefront. They keep her all doped up and at one point, one of the commandos decides to sacrifice for king and country and give his all for the mission. Just who was the dope who thought her up?

rps-2 The history is wrong. The props are inaccurate. The story is over the top derring do nonsense. It was the presence of Richard Burton that drew me to this turkey. Alas, it must have been his worst role. I fail to see how any film maker can be so careless with his subject and so contemptuous of his audience. The Germans did not use flying boats and certainly not in the desert. The Wehrmacht did not use the type of campaign ribbon shown on the German uniforms. There are no puffy white clouds over the Libyan desert. Edward R. Murrow's CBS broadcasts could not have been heard in Africa. And on and on and on. Nor have we even approached the absurd plot, complete with an Italian bimbo and a philatelic Erwin Rommel. Or the very chintzy special effects. Nope. My one line summary says it all. A really bad movie!

frankfob Toward the end of his career, Richard Burton was accused of taking any role if he was paid enough money for it. Unfortunately, after seeing this Burton film directed by veteran Henry Hathaway, the same might be said of Hathaway. He was one of the industry's top-rank directors, responsible for some of the finest films to ever come out of Hollywood, but his career was virtually over by the time he made this (he would make only two more--a western with Gregory Peck and a cheap blaxploitation flick--before he retired); he should have quit while he was ahead. Hopefully he was well paid for this picture, as it has virtually nothing to recommend it. The action footage was lifted wholesale from 1967's "Tobruk", and isn't particularly well integrated into the film. The performances are lackluster, the script is a patchjob, and it has a "let's get it into the theaters quick and get it out before they hear how lousy it is" look to it. A complete waste of time. Don't bother.