I'm not understanding something. On the fishing boat after the encounter with the German patrol boat, Anthony Quayle comments to Gregory Peck about how strange it was that the Germans spoke to them in English, as if they knew who they were. This implies a traitor, but Anna (who joined them much later) was the only traitor in the story as far as I understand.
shareGermans likely spoke in English because they --naturally-- thought they were speaking to Greeks and English being the international language?
I don't remember Quale saying that but I doubt he thought the mission had been compromised by the briefing sessions that was interrupted by the janitor who tried to listen in.
Anyway that guy was put in jail until the mission was completed.
Kisskiss, Bangbang
Quayle: "Funny the way the German officer kept speaking English to us back there. Almost as if he knew who we were." Peck: "Yes, I had the same thought. I think our friend Baker may have some explaining to do."
shareMeaning Baker went back on his word, the laundry boy was not put in prison, and the Germans have been tipped off (by the laundry boy spy) that the team is on its way.
shareThanks, that helps explain it. But that leads to the question: did Baker intentionally betray the mission? And if the Germans were tipped off and the patrol boat crew knew who they were, why didn't they arrest or shoot them immediately?
shareIt's not likely that Baker, a British officer, would intentionally betray an authorized mission to the Germans.
The Germans could have been tipped off that there was a commando mission without knowing with certainty that Mallory and his crew were the commandos. They were reasonably convincing as Greek fishermen so the Germans had no reason to take immediate action.
---
You got your mind right, Luke?
Nicoli merely reporting the altercation at the barracks without even knowing who they were could have been enough to make the Germans suspicious.
I've had a lot of sobering thoughts in my time Del Boy, it's them that started me drinking!
In the book it's strongly suggested that Nicoli told the Germans they were coming. Baker didn't believe Mallory when he accused Nicoli of spying, so he didn't lock him up like he was supposed to. All through the story, they are dogged by Germans who know they're coming, and it was all due to Nicolai. The film plays it a bit differently.
Whores will have their trinkets.
You do realise this is not called the Internet Book Database right?
We have to show the world that not all of us are like him: Henning von Tresckow.
No sh!t. The point is that the movie is BASED on the book, and that some things better explained in the book were not so clearly explained in the film. The OP's question is directly related (i.e., who was the traitor). Sorry if shedding a bit of extra light on someone else's question is so f()cking offensive to you.
Whores will have their trinkets.
Here's how I saw it:
The Germans were tipped off by Anna. She knew that the resistance was expecting a team of experts to sabotage Navarone soon. That's probably why the German patrol stopped them, spoke to them in English assuming they could be the men they were looking for, but did not arrest them immediately, because they weren't sure.
Mallory and Frankin did not even know about Anna at that point. Therefore they naturally assumed it was Nikolai who had informed the Germans, and thought it was Baker's fault for not detaining him.
Baker was rather snobbish and annoying, but he was a British officer and certainly not a traitor. But it was the only possible explanation Mallory could come up with at that point.
Never be complete.
I think this is the most likely explanation. It must have been Anna, even before we see her in the story. The writers must have included the Mallory/Franklin dialog as an advance hint of a traitor to come (Anna). This as melodramatic intrigue that later plays out and is confirmed.
share[deleted]
You guys are reading way too much into this. Peck's remark about Baker had nothing whatsoever to do with Anna. If it had, this would have come out in the film. You don't invent a supposed red herring for the audience and then not let them in on it later: it would be pointless.
Mallory (Peck) makes the remark about Baker because Baker had employed someone who was obviously a spy, Nikolai, the laundry boy. As a spy Nikolai would have been regularly informing the Germans of anything he found out. The Navarone mission was just one more thing he would have tried to get information on. Nikolai was not a red herring; he was a real spy in his own right.
Clearly, there had been one or more leaks somewhere, but you can't blame the whole thing on Anna. After all, she only knows about the mission because she's in with the partisans. How could she inform Nikolai? She couldn't. They probably didn't even know of one another's existence. She isn't some intelligence mastermind, simply a local tool the Germans use. The Germans (as is the case for every side in any war) had multiple sources of information, Nikolai being one, Anna another. The comment about Baker was meant to indicate that he had a spy working right under his nose and didn't realize it, and since this is a movie, in such a dramatic context Mallory's comment is meant to be taken that before he was arrested Nikolai was able to tell the Germans enough for them to be on the lookout for the team and their boat.
[deleted]
Luckily I was able to get Andrea Stavrou out of Crete to help me!
👍
🇬🇷
I'm not saying Anna informed Nikolai. Why should she, anyway? I'm saying she informed the Germans who were in the same village as her, like she did throughout the second half of the movie.
Never be complete.
But what would Anna have informed the Germans of? Even if she knew the team was on its way, Anna wouldn't have known about Baker or Nikolai or the incident the team had with the two, let alone the patrol boat Captain speaking English to them, which is what Franklin's (Quayle) comment started off about.
Besides, it's not a question of why would Anna have informed Nikolai, but how could she. She couldn't, even if she knew he existed, which itself is highly unlikely.
The point is, Quayle's comment had nothing to do with anything Anna did. If it had, this would have come out in the film.
Actually the point is, nobody is talking about Anna getting in contact with Nikolai, except you. Anna and Nikolai were just two spies in separate locations, probably not even aware of each other's existence. I say that (although this is 100 % speculation) Anna informed the Germans, as a result the team were almost arrested but managed to destroy the German patrol, therefore they naturally suspected of a spy, but couldn't imagine who it could be, other than Nikolai: a spy they caught just one day ago. They *thought* Nikolai had informed the Germans, whereas it was actually Anna who had informed them. No connection or contact between Anna and Nikolai.
About your question: The resistance knew that a team of experts was coming to sabotage the guns. Since the resistance knew, Anna knew this as well, she was one of them. She didn't know the details, of course, and she didn't need to: a team of saboteurs coming to destroy the cannons, that was major news. All she had to do was give this information to the Germans, they would take care of it themselves.
That's why the patrol captain spoke to them in English, he thought (correctly) that he had spotted the saboteurs. But the poor condition of the boat and Mallory's perfect Greek accent threw them off for a couple of minutes, and that was enough for the team.
All speculation, of course, but I think it's perfectly plausible.
Never be complete.
Actually the point is, nobody is talking about Anna getting in contact with Nikolai, except you.
Anna and Nikolai were just two spies in separate locations, probably not even aware of each other's existence.
I say that (although this is 100 % speculation) Anna informed the Germans, as a result the team were almost arrested but managed to destroy the German patrol, therefore they naturally suspected of a spy, but couldn't imagine who it could be, other than Nikolai: a spy they caught just one day ago. They *thought* Nikolai had informed the Germans, whereas it was actually Anna who had informed them.
I guess we agree to disagree. You say there was no scene where it was confirmed by the major characters that the real perpetrator was Anna, and where they admit they were wrong in suspecting Nikolai, therefore this can't be true. I say indeed there was no such scene, but that doesn't mean it can't be so. They don't have to spell everything aloud in a film, we as the audience are allowed to make some deductions, particularly at such a late point in the film (when Anna's cover is blown).
There is also the fact that in that same scene, during David Niven's lenghty monologue, he mentions "since we came here we've been jumping from one frying pan into another" or something like that. He mentions several occasions that they barely escaped being caught, and finally makes the connection to Anna. It's true that the German navy patrol is not among the incidents he mentions, but one could argue that it should have been.
Of course it's possible that Baker released Nikolai as soon as Mallory and the team left, and it was indeed Nikolai who was the informer. But I think it's a much higher probability that the informer was Anna, who was already walking freely on the island, who also had the same information as Nikolai, and who had the opportunity to contact the Germans as easily as Nikolai.
The Quayle-Peck exchange makes no sense otherwise -- there'd be no point or purpose to it.
I don't think we, the audience, are supposed to make deductions about anything in a film without some actual evidence for such a belief; and as I've said, one way or another such deductions would be affirmatively confirmed at some point in the film itself.
There's no question Nikolai was a spy; the only issue is whether he was the one who tipped the Germans off to the existence of the mission in the first place, that is, before they set out for Navarone. Now, since Nikolai was caught in the act of listening to the details of the mission, it's not likely any of that leaked to the Germans, but because of Peck's comment about Baker having some explaining to do, the film is stating that Nikolai is responsible for at least alerting the Germans to the existence of the mission. And, since he was put under arrest by Baker after being caught, and in the absence of any information that Baker went back on his word and let him go after the team left, he must have alerted them beforehand that a mission was underway.
As for Anna, obviously she was told by the Germans that the team was on its way, and as she's already been spying for the Germans this was just one more assignment. Obviously she's the agent on Navarone, but there's no indication she had any information on the team's vessel, route and so forth -- nothing about their voyage to Navarone itself. She's only responsible for what happens once they get there.
You make a very good point in raising Niven's rant, but it only serves to confirm what I'm saying. The reason why, in his monologue leading up to the exposure of Anna, Miller (Niven) doesn't mention anything prior to their arrival on the island -- he specifically states, "Ever since we got here we've been jumping out of one frying pan into another" (emphasis added) -- is that Anna only informed the Germans about their actions once they'd arrived. Information about the previous part of the mission -- the trip to Navarone -- has to have come from Nikolai.
Again, we can only go by the dialogue in the film. If Mallory (Peck) and Franklin (Quayle) had thought, during their conversation on the boat, that someone other than (or in addition to) Nikolai had tipped off the Germans (as a way of explaining the patrol boat captain speaking English to them) this would have emerged in the film. But it doesn't. Miller's subsequent piece of dialogue, referring to all the problems they'd had since getting to Navarone, is further confirmation -- "movie" confirmation, if you will -- that while Anna was the spy from the time they landed, Nikolai was, per the earlier exchange on the boat, the one responsible for tipping the Germans to the existence of the mission, even if his capture cost them further information.
Movies, to state the obvious, operate in a different way than real life. Characters often say things we never actually see. You might have a character lie in a movie, or have some ambiguity or uncertainty or trick at play, but these will always be definitively exposed at some point, in order to make the plot clear. Absent such exposure, the audience is supposed to take the information they hear through dialogue at face value -- as a statement of fact.
So to summarize: The mention of Nikolai (and Baker) by Peck and Quayle is supposed to indicate that Nikolai is the spy who tipped the Germans off about their being en route on the boat. Niven's reference to jumping from one frying pan to another since their arrival on Navarone, and not including the patrol boat in his list of issues, clearly assigns the blame on Anna for events on the island, but not before. That's the form and logic of movies.
These two scenes make it plain who's supposed to have been the spy at different portions of the mission. But there is no overlap between them.
I'm not sure what the intention was in THIS film but in the sequel (Force 10) they specify that it was Nikolai who blew their cover.
shareInteresting and great update to this question. Nikolai is it? I wonder why the original film made this such a mystery. Possibly intended to be answered in the Force 10 sequel, as you mentioned.
share