Anzio (1968) is sort of about the Battle of Anzio (It’s right there in the title and everything), but it is more about a journalist, Robert Mitchum (Gung Ho!, The Story of G.I. Joe, The Longest Day), and a rogue soldier, Peter Falk (Castle Keep), who are sporadically involved in or adjacent to the Battle of Anzio.
If we try to put Anzio in the category of epic battle movies like A Bridge too Far and The Longest Day it clearly fails. Actually it pretty much fails in any category, but let’s talk about it as a battle movie. If it is a battle movie, it is less like A Bridge too Far and The Longest Day and more like both Midway movies and The Battle of Britain in that it focuses on a smaller number of individual characters instead of giving us multiple viewpoints. Actually, Anzio is even more like Bridge at Remagen or Battle of the Bulge. It does give us some German Generals talking strategy and the broad strokes of American high command, but it mainly focuses on Mitchum and Falk’s characters.
There’s nothing wrong with narrowing the focus in an historical movie, particularly when you can still give the audience the basic story of the battle. But this film tries to combine the historical with smaller, personal stories and doesn’t do either well.
The history seems like the point early, but quickly takes a backseat. Arthur Kennedy (Bright Victory) plays General Jack Lesley, who is clearly based on Major General John Lucas who initially led the invasion. All the Allied generals have had their names changed for reasons that are not clear to me. Lucas has been widely criticized for being overly cautious, though there is disagreement about this (I think; this is not a history site) and his commanding general, played by Robert Ryan (The Longest Day, The Dirty Dozen) and also with a different name that the actual general, did advise him not to “stick his neck out.”
Nonetheless, The Timid General is too obviously timid both during an expository press conference where he announces to the world that he will be overly cautious, and almost every other time he speaks. Later in the movie Churchill’s purported statement about the actual general is included. “I had hoped that we were hurling a wildcat onto the shore, but all we got was a stranded whale.”
German Field Marshall Albert Kesselring (Wolfgang Preiss, The Longest Day, The Train–we could go on) states his astonishment that they haven’t advanced and plans his counter strategy while speaking in English because who can afford subtitles? That’s pretty much the entirety of the history lesson.
Our heroes are part of a scout unit that reaches into Rome on the first day, though those patrols reportedly only reached the city’s outskirts, while Lucas/Lesley is cautiously being cautious and fastidiously informing anyone who will listen of his extremely prudent caution.
Rene Santoni (perhaps best known for saying “pajamas” several times in Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid, okay probably for his role in Dirty Harry) is your comic relief for the evening, and I enjoyed seeing him only because I have great nostalgia for him saying “pajamas.”
The only interesting character is the renegade hustler yet great soldier, who has “a foot locker full of medals” played by Falk. His is the only character with any depth, but still not with great clarity. He has a bunch of money, has his own ambulance and before the battle is in it with three women he calls “whores” who he also seems to care for and seem to care for him. One cries and says she wants to go with him. He tells one of the others to “take care of her.” He appears serious, but I don’t know what we’re supposed to think about him. Falk gives depth to a character we can’t do anything with in such a superficial movie.
The focus, however, is on Mitchum’s character, who is in nearly every scene. He is in the Jeep that enters Rome; he is at the press conference; he is at the head of the column in most troop movements. The only scenes he misses are one where Falk’s character is the focus, and surprisingly he is not able to interact as casually with German leadership as he is with Allied command.
And Mitchum’s character is not interesting. This may in part be due to his performance, which I’m willing to describe as lackluster, but it is safe to say the script is weak.
The depth the movie suggests in Mitchum is that he seeks to answer the question: “Why do we do it? Why do people kill each other?” This is obviously an excellent question, but the film doesn’t actually look at it in any useful depth.
He finds an answer that is unsatisfying and based on a clearly incorrect assumption. He finds Falk’s motivation and claims it is the universal answer, even though Falk’s own answer is slightly different than the one Mitchum finally gives, and Falk’s character is presented as atypical. How Mitchum’s character arrives at his pat answer is finally a mystery–one I don’t care to investigate.
There is some good military footage of the landing on the beach which features some cool looking landing craft and looks really authentic, but also has post World War II tanks, which is something I forgive movies for. Many of the American soldiers entering the landing crafts have British Lee Enfield rifles. This is only extras though, and the filmmakers appear to have taken pains to hide their apparent lack of American weapons. All of the primary and secondary characters have appropriate weapons..
The relative authenticity of the beach landings might give you hope for the rest of the film, but these hopes are dashed in the presentation of the first major engagement of the campaign. A German ambush, apparently based on an actual battle, is ludicrous. The Germans fire some sort of warning shot, tip over their overly-elaborate concealment and wait patiently for their full force to be revealed. Then they call for a surrender. The officer in charge of the Allied forces shouts in defiance and then stands up and begins firing, so that he can be killed, plunging the unit into chaos.
The German machine gunners have either Bren guns or BARs, which is something I’m less forgiving of, and American soldiers, apparently helpless to fight effectively without their slain leader, or emulating him, run straight at the emplacements and are mowed down.
It also has a truly dopey minefield scene; I’ve seen some dopey minefield scenes in my time, but this may well be the dopiest. Actually, most of the minefield scenes I’ve seen are fine or good—this one and the one in Tobruk are notable exceptions, and it’s theoretically possible the one in Tobruk is not dopey, but I wouldn’t bet on it.
The final, climactic scene, where four or five German snipers fail to kill four or five Americans, is sort of good–it’s certainly the best action sequence in the film. This all feels a little mean because Anzio is not egregiously bad–it’s just not good. Everyone, with the possible exception of Mitchum, seems to be reasonably competent and trying. Director Edward Dmytryk (Tender Comrade, Back to Bataan, Eight Iron Men, The Caine Mutiny, The Young Lions) has certainly made some strong World War II films–this just isn’t one of them.
Finally, Anzio doesn’t work well as history or as character study or as a rumination on the nature of men in combat, and it isn’t a good action movie. If you really love Peter Falk, and who can blame you if you do, you probably still shouldn’t see this, though I understand if you do.
Recommendation
If Anzio is already on, and you can’t find the remote, you could watch it, but don’t make any sort of effort to watch it. I found a four-movie set that includes Anzio that costs eighty-five cents more that a DVD of Anzio. I might buy that myself–but Anzio‘s the weakest of the four movies in the set. I’m not even supplying a link for Anzio by itself because I wouldn’t want to gain financially from your poor decision.
If you want a Peter Falk World War II movie–get Castle Keep. This is not to suggest you should actually get Castle Keep–or that you actually would get it if you watched it. If you want a great Peter Falk movie, get The In-Laws.