The Lemon Has Landed
This movie is a Lemon. Beware, don't be fooled by the great cast - this movie is rediculous.
shareCouldn't agree more - absolute tripe
share
MovieChat Forums > The Eagle Has Landed (1976) Discussion > The Lemon Has Landed
[deleted]
Could you also tell us why exactly you think it is 'rediculous' ? Such a comment is completely useless without any supporting argument(s).
“I feel so miserable without you; it's almost like having you here.”
Your right Slash83 mus; I should have been more descriptive on the message board, however the below text is my comment on the movie which is posted on IMDB, this is a more detailed explanation of my critique - hope this sheds light.
Brendan-
<<I thought this was going to be as good as Sturgess' The Great Escape. If it weren't for the exceptional cast and acting this movie would have been laughable. In fact, even with their great performances this utterly ridiculous story was, well ridiculous and completely unbelievable. The beginning of the movie I had much anticipation that this was going to be one of the best war movies - the cast, director, location, subject all added to this. Until, of course, the movie was about 20 minuets in and the silly escapade began. I gave this movie a 4 out of 10, I warn - don't rent! The Eagle Has Landed, should be more like the Lemon has Landed. It was agonizing to see such good actors submerse themselves in such comic stupidity for 122 minuets>>
Well, I didn't think the film was that bad - I thought the average vote of 6.7/10 was spot on. Sure, not the best war film, or film, for that matter, but I thought it offered ample entertainment value without looking too ridiculous. Plus the star line up offers star-spotting entertainment of its own. Of course the Larry Hagman scenes were pretty woeful.
I saw this on TV when, in a hopeless act of bad taste, it was shown on a Christmas Eve. I'm not a war movie fan, and I do have a fairly precocious taste in films (my favs include Psycho, North By Northwest, Rosemary's Baby, Get Carter and Bonnie and Clyde - yes I like that period), so I am a fairly good judge of character when it comes to movies. I thought this one offered reasonable rainy arvo fare.
Maybe I'm on my own.....
I cannot believe someone would call "The Eagle Has Landed" a lemon! This makes me furious. "The Eagle Has Landed" is one of the best action movies ever made. It is not a lemon!!! It has a first-rate cast (and I mean FIRST-rate,) and is full of extremely well-executed and artful suspense. Please, if you're a fan of '60s/'70s WWII films, and have not seen this exceptional film, you must--it is one of the very best of its genre. DO NOT listen to these goons. They are completely wrong and have deplorable taste (not to mention spelling.)
shareThe movie was (as the "map" in the car insurance commercial) a disappointment. There were too many things that didn't ring true. To wit:
1. Hagman's over-the-top scenes were totally out of character with the rest of the movie. I don't think I've ever seen such a 180-degree switch in tone and mood (and then back again) in a war movie. His fault or Hagman's? I don't know.
2. The whole Molly and IRA terrorist (Sutherland) relationship.
"Gee, after a 30-second conversation with you, I've fallen so much in love with you that, even knowing that you're on the Nazi side, I'll betray my family, friends, and country. You know what, I think I'll kill my fellow villager when he discovers what you're up to, I think I'll protect your radio from discovery by any Allied soldiers so you can continue in your mission to assassinate my PM, and I think I'll help you escape so you can continue in your life's work of IRA terrorism, all because you're cute and flirted with me."
3. I didn't understand the whole premise of the Polish paratroopers insisting on wearing their own uniforms. Is it because they were being honorable so they'd be considered soldiers, not spies, if captured while performng this mission? If so, why did they hide them by wearing free Polish soldier uniforms over them? Going into a country disguised as something you're not puts them back as being spies, not soldiers. Did they do it because, if things didn't go well, they wanted to fight and die wearing their uniforms and not spy clothes? That doesn't make sense either since they were wearing both. Dumb!
A good movie will have a consistent and well-defined thread that ties the actions and motives together. This movie's thread was cut into shreds at too many points.
While you may think the plot didn't make much sense the movie is based on a best-selling novel. If you haven't read it you should.
share"3. I didn't understand the whole premise of the Polish paratroopers insisting on wearing their own uniforms. Is it because they were being honorable so they'd be considered soldiers, not spies, if captured while performng this mission? If so, why did they hide them by wearing free Polish soldier uniforms over them? Going into a country disguised as something you're not puts them back as being spies, not soldiers. Did they do it because, if things didn't go well, they wanted to fight and die wearing their uniforms and not spy clothes? That doesn't make sense either since they were wearing both. Dumb!"
I'm watching the film at the moment and just noticed that scene. If memory serves me right (it's been a while since I've read the book and I can't seem to find my copy at the moment), it's Himmler that insists that the German uniforms are worn under the Polish outfits, much to the annoyance of Radl and Steiner who think it's a stupid idea. Don't supposed anyone can find the relevant paragraph?
----------------------------------------
Gaz
----------------------------------------
Page 82 of the book - Chapter 4...by Pan Books
Heinrich Himmmler talking to Radl - quoting book directly..
"The raiding party will wear normal uniform underneath these British camouflage outfits. That way they will be fighting as German soldiers, not gangsters. Just before the actual attack, they could remove these disguises. You agree?"
Radl personally thought it probably the worst idea he'd ever heard of, but realized the fultility of argument. "As you say, Herr Reichsfuhrer"
***
I Personally found Sutherland terrible, but the film is pretty loyal to the book (with 20 pages to go).
The romance could have been missed out I feel with Molly. The book also has a subplot of Devlin and the London police and Birmigham gangsters which was also missed out.
In the book, Pitts is called Shafto and is played exactly as how he is in the book by Hagman.
Hope this helps
ps: Now finsihed the book.
It has a slightly different ending!
you say that in the book, pitts is called shafto, well, they made a lot of other mistakes as well, mainly in rank. in the film, the second in command of steiner's unit is a hauptmann (captain) but in the book, he's an oberleutnant. (1st lieutenant) also, captain harry whoever-he-is, (the clever american officer) is a captain in the film and a major in the book. at the same time, one of the british officers guarding churchill in called major concoran in the film, and colonel concoran in the book! that's quite a big difference.
also, where did steiner's father and the traitor ss officer peterson go? i think those two parts of the plot were quite interesting!
don't get me wrong, i love the film, and have got the digitally remastered dvd, but i'm a stupid, obsessed perfectionist, who can't do anything better than notice those kind of things!
Gr. Arg.
"Polish paratroopers insisting on wearing their own uniforms"
- It's just that if you're captured with no uniform you're considered a spy and executed because Geneva Convention for POWs doesn't apply to civilians.
>>- It's just that if you're captured with no uniform you're considered a spy and executed because Geneva Convention for POWs doesn't apply to civilians.
Apparently applies to terrorists, though. ; ( At least it will now that Obama is in charge.
The Thunder Child ezine
http://thethunderchild.com
I have to admit this movie is guilty pleasure for me. It's just been on TV for the umpteenth time and I watched it again. I'm not sure why people criticise the 'ridiculous' plot. The CIA came up with a lot of weird and wonderful ways to kill Castro that make this plot seem mundane. . .
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.
In reply to tuckertex's 3 points:
1. Over the top yes, but strangely in the real world numbskulls like this can rise to high ranks in the military. Incompetent or glory-seeking leaders in the military do get hundreds of soldiers killed.
2. Seems ridiculous in a movie, but actually completely plausible in the real world. You'll remember that she actually liked Liam and did not particularly like the boorish villager. Liam had charm and she fell for it.
3. The quest for honour easily overrides common sense. The goal obviously was that if it ended in a pitched battle, as it did, they could strip down to their German uniforms - in a real war they would then get treated as soldiers. However it is plain that Steiner knew that if it came to that they were going to die and to him honour was dying in his proper uniform.
Although fiction cannot stretch plausibility to the extent that reality does things usually do take odd turns in good movies just things do in real life.
I haven't read the book so I cannot comment on who pushed for the uniforms in the original. Either way it had to be worked in because this is what led to the downfall of the entire mission.
Excellent review by Tuckertex! Eagle is, unfortunately, a lemon. Good visuals, a good cast, but there is a basic flaw: too much of an attempt to show the Nazis as "just like us." The premise is foolish: if indeed a German officer had been as anti-Nazi as the Caine character is supposed to have been, he would have wound up dangling by piano wire from a meat hook--as all too many did. Tuckertex has summarized the flaws of the various subplots very well indeed.
shareYou fool there were loads of German soldiers and Officers who were anti Nazi but pro Germany. Not all Germans believed in what Hitler was doing but fought for their country.
shareMost regular German soldiers didn't care for the Nazi party, they were simply fighting for their country, and had an elevated sense of duty and honor associated with that (being their country and all). Fallschirmjaeger (paratroopers) tended to have an even higher sense of duty and elan... in my opinion, portrayed well in the movie. Having met several German ex-paratroopers, I can tell you for sure that they are indeed a LOT like us! Professional German soldiers of that caliber were fighting for their country and for each other, and simply surviving towards the end.
How's this for comparison: I personally know a former Fallschirmjaeger and a former US paratrooper from WW2, both of whom have become best friends over the years, and live in the same town today in Pennsylvania. They said that they started off sharing the bond of being paratroopers, and soon figured out that they both had the same sense of humor, parallel childhoods, and both loved fishing! Something to consider before you go demonizing all Germans as "evil Nazis"....
The fallschirmjäger are my favourite soldiers ever in miltary history,so them in the movie,i liked it a lot.But i have liked the movie too for sometime thought not packed with action and battles.And philonius_the_conqueror thanks for the story on the FJ and u.s paratrooper.
Christopher
>3. I didn't understand the whole premise of the Polish paratroopers insisting on wearing their own uniforms.
It was clearly explained in the movie (and the book), watch it again.
Its all about the honour of fighting (and dying) in their proper uniform.
Thought EHL was excellent. Its genre, as another poster pointed out, is "adventure" and not strictly a "war movie."
1. I agree that Hagman was somewhat "miscast." His protrayal of Col. Pitts is borderline comical/parody, which is out of step with the tone of the movie. Upon rewatching (yep) the movie, he was trying to portray a totally green officer who pulled strings to get a prime assignment, for which he was totally unprepared and unqualified.
2. Ok, perhaps this was also a bit forced, but history is again full of anecdotes about what people do for love (really). I found this aspect of the movie kind of was shoehorned in to get the ladies to watch. (Haven't finished the novel yet so I'm not sure how it was developed in the book.)
3. Wearing the Polish outfits: A legal issue. Combatants found out of uniform will be treated as spies, which means they will be summarily executed (This happened to the German infiltrators during Bastogne.) Apparently there is a technicality/loophole, which is: you can hide your uniform under civilian clothes in order that you can escape and evade the enemy. Of course this is splitting hairs, and Germans and Japs did not recognize the terms of the Geneva Convention anyway.
[deleted]
Well, there was also the Wehrmacht's parachuting hundreds of special forces disguised as American MPs during the Battle of the Bulge, resulting in innumerable difficulties in supply, communication, and troop movements. So I agree, the plot isn't necessarily ridiculous in and of itself.
REPENT, you son of a bitch!
I think that the way the uniform thing works is that you cannot wear civilian clothes, cause then you are treated as a spy. You can wear the uniform of another country but only on the way to and from a battle. At any point when you begin to fire at the enemy you are supposed to reveal your true uniform, or otherwise identify yourself. I think it comes from the naval tradition of flying false colors - you can fly the flag of another country to lure your opponent into range, but you have to run up your own flag before you open fire.
share1. Hagman's over-the-top scenes were totally out of character with the rest of the movie. I don't think I've ever seen such a 180-degree switch in tone and mood (and then back again) in a war movie. His fault or Hagman's? I don't know.
Hagman plays it a little too broadly, caught here between his Col, Anthony Nelson days on "I Dream of Jeannie" and his huge breakout in "Dallas" but the essential idiocy of the character is true to the novel.
2. The whole Molly and IRA terrorist (Sutherland) relationship.
"Gee, after a 30-second conversation with you, I've fallen so much in love with you that, even knowing that you're on the Nazi side, I'll betray my family, friends, and country. You know what, I think I'll kill my fellow villager when he discovers what you're up to, I think I'll protect your radio from discovery by any Allied soldiers so you can continue in your mission to assassinate my PM, and I think I'll help you escape so you can continue in your life's work of IRA terrorism, all because you're cute and flirted with me."
One of the problems inherent in converting huge novels into 2-3 hour films is that a lot of stuff gets short shrift. The development of this romance is a prime example. What is wistful, bittersweet and, ultimately, heartbreaking in the book comes across a little too TV-Movie-of-the-Week-ish in the film. Although Jenny Agutter brought Molly to life in a way that completely fulfilled how I saw the character in my mind while reading the novel, the whole subplot needed more time to gel.
3. I didn't understand the whole premise of the Polish paratroopers insisting on wearing their own uniforms. Is it because they were being honorable so they'd be considered soldiers, not spies, if captured while performng this mission? If so, why did they hide them by wearing free Polish soldier uniforms over them? Going into a country disguised as something you're not puts them back as being spies, not soldiers. Did they do it because, if things didn't go well, they wanted to fight and die wearing their uniforms and not spy clothes? That doesn't make sense either since they were wearing both. Dumb!
I don't remember now how they explained this in the film, but in the novel, it was very much a Himmler order that the team found to be idiotic and useless. And, of course, it proves to be their undoing.
A good movie will have a consistent and well-defined thread that ties the actions and motives together. This movie's thread was cut into shreds at too many points.
Well, you are harsher on this movie than I would be, but I'm coming at it from having read the book and to see a lot of it rendered so well makes me more willing to forgive certain things. Also, I can fill in holes that someone who hasn't read the book cannot. But it is less than it could have been and, considering the talent involved, that's disappointing.
[deleted]
I agree Mhormann. "The Eagle Has Landed" is a minor masterpiece.
shareNot that bad, I'll rate it 8(I woul drate it 7.5 if I could)
The idea is good, the acting is superb and the direction is as good as it can get but I hink it is in the script(or screenplay) where the problem is...
Too bad, I heard It wa sbased on a novel, I'll have to check it, because the idea was good.
And Sutherland and Duvall saved the movie for me. I'm a fan of Michael Caine, but Sutherland steals the show.
To a new world of gods and monsters!
- Dr. Pretorius, Bride of Frankenstein
The plots pretty smart, I'm sure the Nazi's dreamt up plenty of mad plans such as this, after all Hess flew in to try to broker some kind of peace deal with the duke of hamilton was it ???
The cast are pretty good, Donald Pleasance is great as Himmler. I always find something odd watching guys like Duvall and Caine playing German officers.
I agree with the comment about Hagman as Colonel Pitts, this element of the film just doesnt fit.
Overall i reckon its a bit of a let down. It could of been a challenger to the greatness that is Where Eagles Dare but it fumbles the ball in places where it could of gotten better.
I think Hagman's character was such a jackass due to the timing of the film. At the time of the film's release there was alot of negetivity surronding the military due to Vietnam. Hagman was Vietnam, Treat Williams WW2. I liked the movie myself, with a cast that strong its hard to go bad... although there was oceans 12...
shareI think the detractors are missing the point, the film is an adventure movie, not to be taken seriously, and a damn good one too. Packed with stars (apart from Jenny Agutter) they overact gloriusly.
For those musing over the portrayals of certain germans, all they are doing is keeping to Jack Higgins' characters, usually to the letter.
By the way, for those of you in the UK, you can visit the real village it was filmed and see the church, the waterwheel and The Manor house. I met an old guy there who showed us around and explained that the pub and shops were all built by the film crews. It is Mapledurham near Reading.
None WWII film where the good guys are the germans and NOT the bloody yankees, nothing personal but that´s quite redundant, could be catalogued as a lemon...
You can dislike the movie, but it´s not "another-wwii-movie".
Devlin/Sutherland is amazing.
To call it ridiculous is an unfair assessment in my opinion. It may not be a great work of cinematic art, but I find it a pretty decent and entertaining little film. Its greatest fault is that it takes enormous factual liberties, but I'm willing to suspend my disbelief enough to enjoy it for what it is.
-----------
Border relations between Canada and Mexico have never been better. - George W. Bush
Although some people have tried to defend the Molly/Sutherland IRA guy subplot, noone's mentioned the fact that the character of Molly might be from a Catholic, Irish background, in which case she maight have had a pre-existing sympathy (or at least empathy) for Sutherland's character.
As for the film being slightly ridiculous - a lot of good 'war' movies are!
im a big fan of higgins books and i will agree some have been over the top and repeats a little bit, and its a wonder how one of the characters in another higgins series manages to dodge bullets for 20years but the eagle has landed is a good book and allright movie, maybe if they slowed it down a bit and changed a few things, but over all jack higgins likes to up the notch in his books and in the end it is plausable.
shareYep, Hmmm. Escape to Victory!!!
shareIf she were Catholic then why would she try to seek spiritual comfort from Father Verecker?
shareMost of jack higgins books are formula writen therefore potboilers
The discription of a Lemon is fair to both the books and the odd film that were and might be made.
But people go to see the films in droves and like wise bought the books and in the scheme of things thats what counts and has helped to make Jack higgins very wealthy man.
"1. Hagman's over-the-top scenes were totally out of character with the rest of the movie. I don't think I've ever seen such a 180-degree switch in tone and mood (and then back again) in a war movie. His fault or Hagman's? I don't know."
I think it was a none too subtle dig at the americans in general during ww2.
I fail to see how you can class this film as a lemon.
Another example of the movie not being realistic is when an SS General happened to be around in the trainyard. Those Generals would have been smoking cigars in their offices, not standing around in a cold trainyard watching Jews get herded into wagons.
shareActually, the SS General in charge of the destruction of the Warsaw ghetto was SS Brigadefeuhrer Jeurgen Stroop, and there is a picture of him standing in the middle of a street in Warsaw, surrounded by troops, but I agree, it is very unlikely that he would be standing around as the Jews were deported.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/Holocaust/stroop.jpg
I've got 3 terrorists heading south down Bakalakadaka street!