The core of the story, operation market garden, was a mostly British campaign. The stories of characters played by American stars (except Gene Hackman maybe) were mostly peripheral, were not that important to the main story and were probably the reason why the movie is not rated higher. Opinions?
share7.4 is not a bad rating.
Most of the movies of this genre such as, Where Eagle Dare, Guns of Navarone, The Longest Day etc. even Valkyrie are generally not rated that high. Probably because they are often not watched by women. Although the Longest Day is rated at 7.8 and that may be purely thanks to the cast.
It is logical that most characters in such films are not important to the main event, (otherwise it becomes a historical docu-drama) however this should not really make the film any worse.
Take a look at Saving Private Ryan, probably the finest film in this genre ever made, where the main characters are peripheral to the Normandy invasions but very well made. Ditto for a Band of Brothers.
A Bridge Too Far was an ok film, but nothing great.
Reg your comments, please keep in mind that in the mid to late 70's it was very popular (and foolish in my opinion) to simply assemble five or six top stars and put them in a film without a real plot. Sadly, millions of people would pay to see these mindless films and the studios would continue producing them.
Hence the airplane disasters films such as Airport 75, Airport 77, Concord. etc, where they would simply show airplane passengers being in a crashing plane with top starts playing the passengers and actors such as Alain Delon playing the pilot.
Typically the famous stars would be both from the US and from Britain, as in this film.
As to Operation MG being mostly British campaign, it was not really.
Two of the three airborne formations were American.
A good documentary on this is the "Battle For The Rhine" episode from the Battlefield Documentary series.
Yes, the American stars were very necessary. A film like that costs megabucks to produce, money that could only come from the US. US money means US actors in main parts.
To be fair, they didn't do too badly. within the limitations of the script and direction.
Your response to A Bridge Too Far re "Operation Market Garden" not being mostly British, yes it was mostly British.
American troops were only two divisions. The 82 and 101.
The British had:
One parachute division, the 6 Airborne.
XXX Corps. A Corps is about two to three divisions.
There was also the Polish Brigade.
So 2 American divisions and at least 3 British divisions, and 1 Polish brigade. This is why it was "mostly British."
Other than the small point of the 82nd and 101st Airborne being 2/3 of the air drops, it was mostly British.
I suspect veterans of the All American and Screaming Eagle divisions would hardly say their roles were peripheral.
Agreed on both points - largely American campaign and 100% US funding for the film.
shareThe air drop was only half of the campaign. No American units on the land make this operation "mostly British." If it had been "Operation Market" we can then argue that it was mostly American. But "Garden" had an entire Corps,
Wikipedia reports there were 41,000 total soldiers participating. The Airborne troops were three divisions and one independent brigade. There were 10 brigades in the armored and motorized units. Three divisions are about 9 brigades. 6 American brigades and 3 British.
So yes, by this token Operation Market-Garden was a "MOSTLY BRITISH" operation.
If I remember correctly the operation was about taking 3 bridges
The US Airbourne took 2 of them
The British could NOT take theirs
THAT was the bridge to far