Talk:Force 10 from Navarone (film)

Untitled

I THINK THIS MOVIE WAS GREAT AND MUCH BETTER THAN THE GUNS OF NAVARONE. THIS SEQUAL WAS MORE REALISTIC. TO SAY IT DID BAD AT THE BOX OFFICE DOESNT MEAN IT ISNT A POPULAR MOVIE TODAY. MANY MOVIES FLOPPED AT THE BOX OFFICE BUT LATER BECAME CLASSICS. MY CASE IN POINT. THIS MOVIE IS VERY POPULAR WAR FILM AND WAS PLAYED MANY TIMES ON TV. IF YOU HAVE A DVD COLLECTION OF WAR MOVIES, YOU SHOULD ADD THIS TO IT. THE YUGOSLAV PARTIZANS AND JOSIP BROZ TITO ARE SHOWN, WHICH IS RARE FOR AMERICAN FILMS. THE PARTIZANS AND TITO DID IN REAL LIFE PLAY A BIG PART IN DEFEATING THE NAZIS. THE SERBAIN CHETNIKS WHO SUPPORTED THE NAZIS IN WW2 ARE ALSO SHOWN IN A ACCURATE ACCOUNT. GREAT MOVIE AND AS REALISTIC AS IT CAN GET FOR A WAR MOVIE.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.111.75.195 (talk) 02:13, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

good movie.. Jagoda 1 06:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Critical History

I agree that the film has cult status. But I wasn't able to find it on the web though I certainly didn't look "everywhere." I think it was a tremendous movie and liked it a lot better than it's alleged predecessor, which I found stuffy and pretentious. I've watched it dozens of times. Nevertheless, if we can't come up with something in 6 months or so, the comment about "cult status" probably ought to be removed.Student7 00:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I think its more to do with reading the novel then watching the film, the novel is far superior and contains many twists and turns that you'd associate with an Alistair MacLean novel. Plus the film expects you to connect the characters of the laundry boy from Guns and Lescovar here as one and the same, this is the start of the ridiculous presumptions the rewritten script includes. But really there are so many continuity mistakes included in Force 10 that leaves fans of Alistair MacLean annoyed.--The Mercenary 73 (talk) 18:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Chetniks as German allies

I've expanded the section regarding the Chetnik controversy to include the fact that both MacLean's novel Force 10 and another of his book mistakenly call the Chetniks collaborators. —Chris Buckey 18:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

This section is unreferenced and contradictory. At first it says that Chetniks were not German Allies. Then it asserts they fought with the Axis after the USA/GB felt they "unreliable". This section needs references and more clarity.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.215.59 (talk) 10:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Film Facts

Is it really notable that some of the cast went on to appear in James Bond films whilst others didn't but some of those who didn't later worked with other actors who did? TheOneOnTheLeft (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it is relevant. This is a movie filmed in Britain just like most James Bond movies are. A product of a small labor pool which is why in Bond some actors have played two different characters in two different movies (e g., Charles Gray, Shane Rimmer, Joe Don Baker etc). It's like saying that most of the English football team are made up of people from England. DLibrasnow (talk) 17:29, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Đurđevića Tara Bridge

This is an appalling claim. Even if this is the bridge used in the film (...) I seriously doubt this was anyone's intent. The same goes for the change in the location from Bosnia to Montenegro, can we see some reason for this? MartinSFSA (talk)—Preceding undated comment added at 03:36, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

At anon IP's urging I have added both a wikilink and an external link to the bridge. Also removed synopsis claim bridge was in Bosnia, I certainly can't remember if it was given a real or fictional location. MartinSFSA (talk) 18:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Reception

The section reads: "The film was moderately successful." But the sidebox says: "Budget $10,000,000 Box office $7,100,000." How is it in any way a success if it failed to turn a profit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.246.15.52 (talk) 19:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

According to the Internet Movie Database http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077572/ the film's budget was $5 million, I can't find any other source to back $10 million. Mediatech492 (talk) 22:44, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

German equipment

Just watched the film on TV, and the armor used by the germans in ths scene when they approach to cross the dam seem to be T-34/85 medium tanks; not sure about the half-tracks. Pretty impressive sight of the bridge, I must say. Regards, DPdH (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

• At least one of the half-tracks seem to be an american M3 Half-track modified to resemble a german Sd.Kfz. 251 with a Flakvierling 38 AA gun mounted on top. Regards, DPdH (talk) 14:25, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • As I recall these were Russian Tanks alright, with minimal, if any attempt to make them look like German models. That is always a disappointment to me, moreso when there woudl be minimal effort to make them look correct. 68.12.245.91 (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
    • They were on loan from the Yugoslav Army, I believe, or rather the Yugoslav Army itself. -- Director (talk) 17:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

American equipment

Has anyone else noted that Harrison Ford's ribbon bar on his dress uniform is on upside down? Rklawton (talk) 08:45, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• AnthonyUnger.jpg (discussion)
• Oliver A. Unger.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)