Published in 1967
In the years since the Second World War, there have been a number of generations of books and films covering events – both real and fictional – set during the conflict. Initially, most films were straightforward tellings of events. Sink the Bismarck, Battle of the River Plate, The Dam Busters. At first in black and white, slowly moving to colour, they became standard fare on Sunday afternoon television. Full of stalwarts of the British acting world, they were deeply patriotic, reinforcing the idea that the stiff upper lip won the war.
As the Sixties progressed, the atmosphere changed. Cultural and social changes allowed a more questioning look at the war and everything surrounding it. Contemporary events – especially the Vietnam War – meant that the first generation to come of age since WW2 didn’t have the reverence of their parents. This meant that although there was still a plethora of war films, many took a more sceptical or humorous stance.
I don’t remember when I saw Where Eagles Dare for the first time, but I have seen it several times over the years, and it is certainly one of the more well-known big-budget war films from the era. It has even given us that oft-quoted phrase ‘Broadsword calling Danny Boy’. If you like the genre, it is an entertaining, well-crafted film. It is, of course, also completely ridiculous.
On first viewing it seems to have everything; intrigue, secret agents, deception, treachery, action, suspense, and some reasonable acting from the likes of Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood. The basic premise is that an American General is captured in Bavaria when his plane crash lands. A team of agents, led by Major Smith (Richard Burton) is hurriedly put together to attempt a rescue, as the General knows all the details of the forthcoming allied landing in Europe. But many of the participants are not what they appear to be, and the plot twists and turns, as everyone tries to separate friend from foe.
But sit back after watching it, think it through and the holes start to appear. And there are a lot of them. Firstly, the issues which plague most British and American war films of the time; all Germans are incredibly stupid; all German guns miss everything but all allied guns hit their target every time.
Then there are the issues specific to the film. I won’t detail them all, in case you haven’t seen the film, but they include a team whose members seem mostly unsuited to such a dangerous operation (although they are essential to the plot), and a German General arriving in a 1950s helicopter (yes, I know the Germans operated a few helicopters during the war, but none like the one in the film, and none that any senior officer would have used).
After watching part of the film when it was on recently, I decided to read the book to see how it compared. It’s not something I do very often. If I’ve read a book, I have a very clear image of the characters and settings; the film invariably disappoints. If I’ve seen the film first, I can’t then unsee the actors.
Alistair MacLean is not an author I would normally be drawn to, but it was easy enough to read, and quite enjoyable, for its type. So how do they compare?
Firstly, the tone is very different. The film is largely about the action; shootouts and explosions. The book is much more sedate. There is certainly death and violence, but it is incidental to the story; there are many more people alive at the end of the book than there are at the end of the film.
Many of the characters are different too. A few names have been changed; largely, I suspect, because the filmmakers preferred simpler ones to those in the book (i.e. names that their largely English-speaking audience could understand). The character played by Clint Eastwood in the film is very different to that portrayed in the book. I guess this is because, let’s be honest, Clint always played Clint (and I’m generally a fan of his).
The three main female characters have undergone more radical change. In the film, Mary is crucial to the mission, looking after Smith’s back. Heidi is an agent already placed in the town, but playing a subsidiary role. The third is the German Colonel’s middle-aged secretary, who is also an expert in administering truth drugs. But in the book, Mary and Heidi’s roles are reversed; Heidi is the strong one, and Mary is a bit of a wimp. As for the secretary; in the book she is young, blond and clearly a gay sadist. I assume the filmmakers thought that was too much for their audience, but why Mary and Heidi were changed so drastically is difficult to fathom.
The tone of the two is very different. The film is aggressive and explosive. The book is slower and relies on suspense. Nothing new there, most books are ‘sexed up’ when they are filmed. But are they any good? Well, both are fine in their own way. They obviously appeal to a specific audience, but both are entertaining and exciting. Just be prepared to suspend your disbelief for a few hours, and enjoy the ride.
📚 Click here to view the book on Amazon.
🎞 Click here to view the film on Amazon.
