Who doesn’t love a big old war movie? Pretty much no-one anymore; this sub-genre seems to be the preserve of old-timers and military aficionados these days, but when I was a nipper, there was nothing but WWII films on the telly. Developed by Stanley Kubrick, amongst others, this 1969 venture is a little more bitter and worldly than most, with a rather jaded view of military heroism, a balanced view of Allied and German strategies, and a pretty impressive set of action scenes, with stunts sorted by the great Hal Needham.
Director John Guillermin went on to helm The Towering Inferno and King Kong, and really knows the business end of a helicopter shot; the opening scenes set a high bar for action, even if the speeded up shots of Korean war tanks are regrettable. Blowing things up is the theme here; the bridge at Remagen will be blown up by the Germans as the Allies advance, but the Nazis have to get as many of their troops back over first. The US strike-force deputised to blow up the bridge have a last minute change of heart when they realise it’s still intact; George Segal and Ben Gazzara may be so world weary they can barely stand, but one more push is required; will it be a bridge too far? Meanwhile, on the German side, Robert Vaughn’s Major Kruger enjoys swishing around in his full-length leather coat and terrorises the locals as his plans fall apart; a cigarette case proves to have a vital role in the story.
‘But…who… is the enemy?’ For the finale, Kruger looks to the skies and asks with Shatner-esque poise as he grabs a sly fag before his firing squad; The Bridge at Remagen generally skips such philosophising in terms of complaints about the awfulness of fighting. There’s almost a MASH style bravado here, although Segal’s grizzled Lieutenant gets ever tougher by the minute, and the stylish, open-topped Rolls Royce he zooms around in suggests he could manage a gritty franchise all of his own. Like many war films, the schoolboy logic here syncs with the simplified war that cinematic history would have us remember these actions.
As unfashionable a film as can be imagined, The Bridge at Remagen is actually a decent enough package; the pity is that while the shots in and around the bridge at highly impressive, they don’t cut together with the main location and the joins are obvious. But those still living WWII in their heads will find much to enjoy; with Segal, Gazzara and other in lockstep with the tough-guy, ‘war makes a man of you’ theme, this is one for aging boys to savour.
Bridges are so much better than walls or leaky ferries. I knew about writer because I once lived in MD (next to WV) and my Welsh grandad was a coal miner in PA. You provide an awesome forum for commenting on movies, many of which get lost in the crowd. You’re the authority; I’m just a fan that loves movies.
Budd Schulberg (on the Waterfront) wrote the original screenplay but I don’t think any of his work survived.
I did not know that…wonder what Kubrick’s version would have been like. Not much like this, I’d imagine…
When I think of Rhine I think of wine but when I think of war, I often think of the comment you mentioned Kruger made towards the end of the movie RE ‘who’s the enemy?’ The guy that wrote the book the movie’s based on became a politician, Dem from WV, and advocate for coal mine safety, died in 2016. Too much info, back to abridged writing… Bridge at Toko Ri did something similar in making wars horrors realistic, nihilistic.
Was there another reason writer Hechler put BRIDGE in title? It’s a metaphor for something neutral that connects two ends. The card game (whist) pits 2 against 2; each side tries to win tricks, slams and dummies are involved..hmmm. Though London Bridge is now in Arizona and they redirected a mighty river so water could flow under it, and there’s barely enough water under Waterloo Bridge to drown in, a bridge is a clever devise. My 2 fav bridge movies remain For Whom the Bell Tolls and sappy Bridges of Madison County. Thanks to great writers, reviewers, and filmmakers, bridges, like the stoic, determined one at Remagen, remain standing–though physically gone.
FFS, I might as well give up, or just give you the login details for my blog since you outwit me every time! Did not know that about the author, or Waterloo bridge. You out bridges me! But I’m with you on Madison County, and happy to die on that particular hill (or bridge)….
Wow you’ve got a proper commentator!!
Yup, don’t even have to threaten them at all!
Remagen, Too Far,On the River Kwai, seen ’em all. Married to an old-timer military aficionado. Can’t wait to tell him that one!! 😀 😀
I can’t imagine he’ll be thrilled by this description. So, if you know this film well, please explain the significance of the cigarette case in this narrative? Marks will be removed for spelling and punctuation errors. Do not attempt to write on both sides of the paper at the same time.
Kruger loses it.
Sigh. And…
And he loses the war. Metaphor.
Actually have no idea will ask the old-timer MA.
I don’t think this is a full description of the plot of this film. Fail!
I’m definitely one of those who don’t watch war movies anymore. Just like I don’t watch westerns. And soon, I suspect, won’t be watching superhero movies.
Movie genres seem to have their heyday and then hang around like that uncle who hasn’t realized he’s 50 but is still acting like he’s 22…
I like your comparison to super hero movies. Sometimes you can have too much of a good thing.
Yup, although I had enough of Superhero movies roughtly 15 minutes into Iron Man 2 over a decade ago….
I absolutely love the X-men trilogy…I knew nothing about comic books and was so entertained by how new and fresh it was. The Marvel series never quite grabbed me the same way..keeping up began to feel like a job instead of entertainment. I gave up around Thor 2…….
There’s a handful of decent ones, usually because proper talents get involved like Shane Black or Taika Waititi. But most of the Marvel films are pretty much anonymous, and the ‘America saves the world’sentiment is very pre 2016….
I did come back for Wonder Woman 1 and liked it very much. It was good and I’m hadn’t seen one in awhile. As the saying goes, “How can I miss you if you won’t go away?’
I’m not missing super-hero movies now that they’re gone. Lowest commen denomenator stuff, mask and costumes to replace actual actors, endless green-screen to replace locations, all culture reduced to the level of an excitable ten year old boy. Not real movies IMHO.
Well thats wrong. There are actors, they don’t wear masks all the time, in fact Natasha Romanov, Wanda, Thor,Hawkeye never wear masks, and are real actors, I can name them all. Granted the idiots in space are a bit naff, Star Lord, pfft, but The Avengers have a lot of character and pathos going on in them.
Wibble, and you know it, Bunty…
“Pink-haired and saltire-suited Kelpie is the new Scots superhero, and while her superpowers have not been revealed, Marvel tweeted: “In Scotland, it’s not the monsters you have to worry about. It’s the loch.” Can’t wait for your review on this! 🤣🤣
Wut?
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/heritage-and-retro/retro/big-mistake-scots-react-marvel-launch-new-uk-superhero
urk that doesn’t work, delete it.
Have just read about this, it sounds like drivel to me.
Hope it’s true, hope they make the movie of it, hope its brilliant and so on.
It won’t, it’ll be two big monster men bashing each other, a vortex and not much more like all these boring films are. Besides, most Scots are super heroes…
Hahahahaha. Pfft.
Blerk!
I think superhero movies are going to go the way of the western. Those had a huge swing in popularity but now? You hardly ever see one…
Hey Booky there have been some good Westerns recently, especially Tom Hanks latest and a Netflix single series called Godless. I really like Westerns.
Exactly. They have a place. Just not THE PLACE, like they did for about 10 years, or like superhero films have had recently. I look forward to superhero films going back to 1 or 2 a year, at most.
Yes that would be good.
So what kind of movies do you watch, aside from cutting edge, modern stuff like The Muppets?
Machismo filled action flicks with the depth of a piece of paper, like “The Man of Tai Chi”.
George Segal and gritty don’t really go together for me. I remember watching this on TV (we don’t have telly over here) as a kid. I wonder if you could even make a movie like this today with all the old equipment. It’s like watching The Battle of Britain and being amazement that these are actually real planes flying around and not CGI. You’re in a state of awe and all the practical effects and stunt work. I’m guessing we just couldn’t make movies like this now. Everything looks like Call of Duty.
I think Segal was more than just a light comic lead, which is something he did well. But he could do grritty, and he does it here. And I prefer to see real tanks than CGI, films like Midway do look cool, but more like comic books than war….