This movie is better than "Guns of Navarone"? I don't think so!

Rating: 5/10 (21 November 2006)

It seems a lot of people liked this movie well enough to count it better (by 1/10 percentage point) than "The Guns Of Navarone." That's hard for me to believe. "Guns" was an early story in Alastair MacLean's books, and includes lots more invention than "Eagles." By the time he got around to this story, his whole shtick was well-established. If you had read enough of his books ("Breakhart Pass" included) you knew going in the hero was the most evil-seeming character (Richard Burton), and all the heroics would prove him the one who wins. I read the book long before the movie came out, and the movie didn't do anything to change my opinion of the story. The acting by the lead characters did make the movie worth watching, but the story made it difficult to stay with.