They Who Dare (1954) User Reviews

Effective Action Movie WW2 with Authentic Aircraft

[colin-barron · 6/10 · 21 June 2009]

This film will be of great interest to WW2 Aviation enthusiasts as it features several authentic Italian Savoia - Marchetti S.M. 79 three - motor bombers. These aircraft were provided by the Lebanese Air Force which was the last operator of the type.

I would make an educated guess that this film was shot on Cyprus as there is an abundance of British Army trucks and armoured cars modified and painted to resemble German vehicles. A Bristol Beaufighter aircraft can also be briefly glimpsed during the airfield attack sequence.

The special effects ,such as model aircraft being blown up, are not up to modern standards but they are no worse than other 1950s war movies such as "The Dambusters".

Lack-lustre war movie but pleasant enough

[MOscarbradley · 5/10 · 22 July 2014]

"They Who Dare", which Lewis Milestone directed in 1953, comes across as a kind of preamble for "The Guns of Navarone" and was handsomely shot on location. It deals with the exploits of a small group of British and Greek soldiers tasked with blowing up German air bases on Rhodes but is rather lacking in action; most of the time is spent on the journey to the targets thought when the fighting does start it is lively enough. This is Dirk Bogarde in handsome, dashing leading man mode rather than Bogarde the actor he was ultimately to become and others in the cast include Denholm Elliot and Akim Tamiroff, though they are both wasted. It's hardly comparable to Milestone's other war movies but it's far from being a right-off either.

The Colossus' of Rhodes.

[hitchcockthelegend · 5/10 · 30 July 2014]

They Who Dare is directed by Lewis Milestone and written by Robert Westerby. It stars Dirk Bogarde, Denholm Elliott, Akim Tamiroff, William Russell, Eric Pohlmann and Harold Siddons. Music is by Robert Gill and cinematography by Wilkie Cooper.

It's "men on a mission" time as Special Commandos and some Greek partisans meet up on Rhodes to blow up two German airfields. And that's about it really, oh of course there's problems along the way such as questions of loyalty, hazards and set-backs such as minefields, and talking – lots of talking - as the men stand or sit around pondering the war and or - their own inadequacies etc. When the big action finale comes it is kind of worth the wait, but the performances are only adequate throughout and the script is lazily written to the point of tedium setting in. 5/10

The Guns of Rhodes.

[rmax304823 · 4/10 · 3 January 2012]

I usually enjoy movies like this -- a commando raid against two German and Italian airfields on Rhodes, shot in color in a bold and picturesque setting -- but, man, this is one sluggish story. The Brits have produced some of the best war movies committed to celluloid but this isn't one of them.

It's a nice team too -- Dirk Bogarde, Denhold Elliott, directed by Lewis Milestone. And you aren't likely to see period Italian warplanes like this very often.

If it begins with a torpid scene in a Cairo nightclub, well, that's alright. One expects it to pick up its pace as the story unfolds. The problem is that it never does.

Half a dozen men -- a British unit with two Greek guides -- are landed by submarine on the coast of Rhodes. We get to know the sub's Greek captain. And it's not just a perfunctory acquaintance, although he has practically nothing more to do with the mission. (Compare the submarine scenes in "The Man Who Never Was.") Lots of pointless joshing and cartoon drawing.

On Rhodes there are moments of tension, recalling some incidents in the later "The Guns of Navarone," but for the most part we see the men stumbling along rocky trails, avoiding Italian patrols, sneaking away to visit relatives in nearby villages, carefully treading through mine fields, sitting about in caves and discussing the situation. There is some tension but very little action.

Few of the scenes are artful or suspenseful. The airfields are blown up but they never seem like critical targets. A few fewer Italian bombers to attack the British in North Africa; a couple of airfields that are easy repaired. This isn't the Guns of Navarone which threaten the evacuation of troops from the Greek islands. It's not a factory in Norway manufacturing heavy water for an atomic bomb. There are two of Milestone's signature shots (panning across the faces of men about to attack) but the effort hardly seems worth it.

Overall, a surprising and colorless disappointment from sources that had done better, and would do better in the future.

"Guns of Navarone"....lite.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 31 August 2016]

Dirk Bogarde plays the leader of this group of commandos. Their mission is to split into two groups and simultaneously destroy two airbases in Axis controlled Greece. The immediacy and importance of the mission isn't so obvious in this one and most of the commandos are rather faceless characters.

Sometimes movies don't age well for a variety of reasons. In the case of "They Who Dare", the problem is that less than a decade after this film debuted, a very similar yet much, much better movie came out and far surpassed it. So, if today you watch the film, you're very likely to think "Wow....THE GUNS OF NAVARONE sure did this sort of thing better!"...and you'd be correct. Both films are about an international group of commandos who are secreted onto a Greek island to disrupt the Axis. With Navarone, the objective were those freakin' big guns. Here with "They Who Dare" it's an attack on two airbases. The latter film is better mostly because it has a better cast, more interesting script and a nice Hollywood polish this one lacks. Now it's not a bad film...but it certainly isn't close to the quality of the latter film.

By the way, one way this film differed greatly was that once the guns were blown up, the British Navy arrived and rescued the heroes. However, in this Bogarde film, the mission is completed and then they have to work their way OUT of Greece...kind of on their own! And, this makes up a substantial portion of the film...which also makes the film run on way too long.

A Poor Print Makes An Unwatchable Film

[boblipton · 5/10 · 21 June 2019]

It's the Second World War. Dirk Bogarde is sent on a mission to Rhodes to destroy two Axis airbases with a crew of British commandos and Greek partisans.

The copy of this movie that played on TCM today was in poor shape. Not only was it too dark to reveal much in the way of details, but the color balance on the Technicolor print it was drawn from -- or perhaps the telecine it was converted on -- was off; the dark-for-night scenes had gigantic swaths of blue, and the faces of the actors verged on orange. the cinematography by Wilkie Cooper looks like it was bleached into impressionism. It looks like it was drawn from a bad 16 mm. TV print. In addition, while there were many scenes shot on location in the Dodecanese, there were a tremendous number of process shots put together in such a way that there was no mistaking them.

It's a shame, because it's a talented director -- Lewis Milestone -- with actors worth looking at: Dirk Bogarde, Denholm Elliott, Akim Tamiroff, Gerard Oury, and Eric Pohlman head the cast list.

I think this movie is worth another attempt, but until I can see a copy drawn from senior 35 mm. elements, I cannot recommend this to anyway. If someone is aware of a better copy, I would like to know of it.

"Don't cloak a cheap gesture with noble motives!"

[richardchatten · 7/10 · 10 October 2022]

The usual malarkey about commandos blowing up a petrol dump, this is almost certainly the least of Lewis Milestone's war films, about which several reviewers have already commented upon the resemblance to 'The Guns of Navarone'; although it also strongly anticipates Dirk Bogarde's subsequent scenic tour of the Greek islands in 'I'll Met by Moonlight' (which had a much more memorable score by Mikis Theodorakis than the rather twee one provided here by Robert Gill).

Luridly shot in Technicolor, the director is inevitably denied the opportunity to exercise his beloved lateral tracks aboard the submarine but quickly makes up for lost time once the team hit the beach.

Akim Tamiroff is rather quiet for once, but Eric Pohlmann's back-slapping submarine commander is easily hammy enough for two; although Sam Kydd's little ditty about Confucius quickly becomes tiresome.

Well at least Bogarde is great

[Gloede_The_Saint · 4/10 · 15 August 2009]

Not sure what I expected from this one. Dirk Bogarde is my favorite actor and I have had pleasant encounters with Milestone as well. Here the latter screws up on multiple occasions.

First off the cinematography is way too light and some of the shots are rather clumsy. The script could be faltered as well. And some of the acting, especially from the one playing a character who keeps singing this awful and quite annoying tune.

Mind you it's not bad. Bogarde's performance makes it worth while. But really if it hadn't been for him this would have been below mediocrity. It got a few strong moments and whenever Bogarde is on screen you nearly forget everything else that has been going on.

I will not recommend this but overall it was OK. I think the casting apartment did some horrible choices though.

They Who Dare

[CinemaSerf · 6/10 · 26 February 2023]

British forces in the Mediterranean are being constantly harried by Luftwaffe aircraft based on Rhodes. It falls to Dirk Bogarde ("Lt. Graham") to lead a small squad of British and Greek fighters whose job will be to infiltrate the defences of two air bases and reduce them - and their planes - to rubble, then get themselves back to the awaiting submarine of Eric Pohlmann's jovial "Capt. Papadapoulos". It has spells when it is quite exciting, but for the most part this is a rather slow-to-start and meandering adventure story that focusses way too much on the foibles of the characters rather than delivering a solid story. A decent cast - Denholm Elliott, Sam Kidd and Akim Tamiroff add little to neutralise the verbosity of the whole thing and the denouement didn't seem to quite make sense (or perhaps I just blinked?). It could easily lose twenty minutes of the preamble and focus more on the military and raiding aspects of the plot which I think would improve it greatly. As it is, Bogarde does enough to keep it moving - but only just.

They Who Dare Are Often Dire

[writers_reign · 4/10 · 5 July 2009]

Off hand I can't think of a single plus point for this one other than the appearance of Gerard Oury in a supporting role. Oury continued to act throughout his life, long after he had added writing and directing to his repertoire and at least the scenes he is in here are watchable. Pretty-boy Dirk Bogarde turns in another Rank Charm School performance and leads the over-acting, encouraging the likes of Eric Pohlman, Denholm Elliot and Sam Kydd to go OTT. It's difficult to imagine that a plot like this - small team of commandos sent to Rhodes to blow up a couple of airfields - had any mileage left in it by 1954, unless you lavished more than a stick of gum on the budget and thought in terms of Guns Of Navarone. Even as a freebie with a daily newspaper it's not worth the price of admission.

The short version is the one to watch

[JohnHowardReid · 9/10 · 16 November 2012]

Please note that my vote of 9/10 applies only to the 92-minutes version. The 107 minutes version I would rate as 5/10, or maybe 6/10 at the most.

The problem with the long version -- and the reason "They Who Dare" earned so many scathing and unenthusiastic reviews on its first release back in 1953 -- centers on inconsistencies and other defects in scriptwriter Robert Westerby's characterizations. Recognizing that these complaints were legitimate and that Dirk Bogarde's box office popularity was being undermined, the movie was withdrawn and expertly cut down to 92 minutes.

As far as I'm concerned, the cutdown concentrates on action, and as these sequences are directed with Lewis Milestone's usual bravura, I'm not going to quibble about a few little, trifling elements of confusion that I may have in following the plotting and the storyline.

Solid WWII film . . .

[byron-116 · 6/10 · 13 March 2022]

. . . as only the Brits can make. Filmed on location on the island of Rhodes, as well as in Cyprus. Splendid performances by Dirk Bogarde, Denholm Elliott and as always by Akim Tamiroff.

Nothing fancy

[darth76 · 4/10 · 13 October 2002]

World War II movie, of British production, which does not have anything that justifies the time one could possibly spare to see it, other than the great Dirk Bogarde starring, with the good British actor Denholm Elliott in a second role. The scenario is rather conventional (we have seen this stuff many times) and does not develop the characters and their relations as it could. It has also attempted to give a Greek aroma, in a very clumsy way: as there is not even one Greek actor among the cast the spoken Greek sound very strange (at least to someone who knows the language like me). Additionally, the portrait of the Greeks falls into a lot of stereotypes, which sometimes are offensive to these people, revealing more things about the script writer himself than the actual Greeks. I have given to this movie 4 out of 10.

Disappointing account of a real life mission

[shakercoola · 5/10 · 4 May 2019]

A British war drama; A story about a band of British commandos assigned to sabotage two Nazi outposts in the Aegean. This film is based on the British military mission Operation Anglo, during World War II, an inspiring tale of a Special Boat Service attempt to disrupt the Luftwaffe from threatening Allied forces in Egypt. However, the film lacks thrills and is a rather predictable men-on-a-mission tale. Danger and action comes without much suspense and the film has a throwaway ending. Dirk Bogarde seems miscast as a leader of a deadly commando unit and the rest of the cast, who perform well, are poorly served by sloppy dialogue. To its credit, the action is convincing and it has some attractive locations and colour and light is richly captured.

Not one of Milestone's milestones

[tomsview · 6/10 · 10 May 2023]

It's easy to see where this film went wrong because it happens right at the start. The way Lieutenant Graham (Dirk Bogarde) walks into that dreary hotel set and tells Lieutenant Poole (William Russell) about the upcoming secret mission, making sure the girl in the tight dress at the bar isn't listening in, robs the plan of any real gravitas. The prologue of the film with narration over documentary footage was probably added because the opening was so weak.

The real raid was an amazing achievement. A small group of British SBS and Greek operatives paddled ashore on Rhodes and blew up 34 German and Italian aircraft along with a fuel dump. You simply don't get the sense of awesomeness of the achievement in this film's plodding script.

The opening should have seen Dirk in the briefing room with the door locked behind him after being summoned by the commanding general. After crisp salutes all around, the General, played by someone like Laurence Naismith or Geoffrey Keen, would explain the mission as they studied a large wall map; pointer stick optional. Then this mission could have kicked off in proper style.

As well as the lacklustre opening, the Greeks were played in an exaggerated, Gilbert and Sullivan manner; Eric Pohlmann as the sub captain was particularly annoying.

Director Lewis Milestone is probably to blame for this and the forced humour. However the film does contain a sequence or two that shows his distinctive touch. Milestone was good with troops seen in the tracking shots of the Germans and Italians advancing over the tough terrain.

The attacks on the airfields were well enough staged, however the way most of the team were captured seemed less dramatic than in fictional films like "The Guns of Navarone" where, in reality, the worst wounds one could expect were from the sharp tongue of the director.

As a baby boomer in Sydney I saw nearly all those British war movies of the 50s at the local cinema. However even in my pre-teens I could distinguish the great ones from the not so great. At that stage of my film analysis it came down to the boredom factor. Unfortunately "They Who Dare" registered higher on that scale than I would have liked.

Unwatchable

[buystuffrnh · 3/10 · 25 June 2019]

Between the extremely poor lighting and script the result in unwatchable.

Slightly plodding WW2 men-on-a-mission movie

[Leofwine_draca · 5/10 · 18 November 2016]

THEY WHO DARE is one of the more disappointing WW2 movies I've watched. Where the film should be tense and exciting it just sort of trudges along through the story, much like the same characters. Despite the narrative being chock-full of dramatic events, nothing in the picture is ever very exciting, and you don't end up caring much about the fate of the characters one way or the other. It keeps you watching throughout, but I was expecting to be on the edge of my seat and I never was.

The story is about a squad of British commandos who arrive on the island of Rhodes with the objective of blowing up a German airfield. Their mission is full of the usual problems and complexities, and things are far from over when they finally arrive at their destination. The film is full of stunning Greek scenery and has some strong character work from the likes of Akim Tamiroff, but the plodding pace and seeming disinterest of the director works against it.

Dirk Bogarde is a good choice for the youthful hero, tough and yet humane at the same time. I've always been a fan of Denholm Elliott so there's nothing to complain about there either. In addition, character actors who are usually limited to brief cameo parts in low budget movies, such as Sam Kydd and Eric Pohlmann, get bigger and better roles than usual. The story has the sting of realism to it, but at the same time remains uninvolving throughout. I've not seen any of Lewis Milestone's other movies so I can't say how much he's to fault.

A right snooze fest!

[alexanderdavies-99382 · 3/10 · 27 March 2018]

There is absolutely nothing to recommend about "They Who Dare." I think the title "They Who Dare to Make this Film" would have been more appropriate. The dialogue and the plot are so boring!! Tedium soon sets in as our heroes talk their way to victory, rather than actually fighting the enemy. Dirk Bogarde must have been looking forward to his earnings, that's all I can say. He clearly doesn't feel the need to act much here. Mind you, I daresay most other actors would feel the same way. There is no attempt to infuse a spark of imagination into the dialogue. It is merely a case of going through the motions.

Lackluster war movie

[dierregi · 5/10 · 19 February 2022]

A SAS team is sent to Rhodes to sabotage enemies airfields. They bring along four locals (two guides and two officers) and they all get into a mighty mess.

Unfortunately, some of the drama seems contrived and suspenseful situations seem created to add a pep to an otherwise boring plot.

As in any decent war movie, don't expect everybody to survive.

This would make a good radio play!

[mallaverack · 4/10 · 17 April 2021]

The version I watched on TV was a pathetically unwatchable print. For a majority of the movie I could not make out the characters - the night scenes (of which there were many) were laughable with the orangutan-coloured faces of the characters highlighted against a very dark blue night.

Being so unwatchable, it was difficult to appreciate any nuances of expression on the faces of characters making this movie presentation much better suited to radio.

The plot was nothing out of the ordinary and since the vision was almost non-existent because of the poorest of quality prints, there's little else to say.

A pastel look at wartime.

[mark.waltz · 5/10 · 6 April 2024]

If it wasn't for the cast or the colorful photography, this World War II drama wouldn't be worth remembering as it's pretty generic and lacking in surprises. The film deals with the allies efforts to destroy the axis path to Rhodes and prevent Rommel from his journey. Basically, it's a series of dangerous situations and while some are pretty intense, overall I've seen better war films. The main stars, Dirk Bogarde and Denholm Elliott, are very good, but it's a pretty routine assignment for them.

It's not an important issue that the film doesn't really have much humor, but the personalities seem to just be drawn in to create a type rather than to create character, and it's pretty cliched. But it's also pretty to look at, even though it's colors look nothing like real life. The cuteness of the allied soldiers being looked at with curiosity by mountain goats was amusing but pointless.

Akim Tamiroff and Eric Pohlmann are part of the ensemble with Lewis Milestone ("All Quiet on the Western Front") directing, and yet there is nothing really memorable about this outside of some beautiful scenery that gives momentary "ah's" but little else. Some of the shots makes the film look three dimensional, even though the story is pre flat. If it wasn't for the color, this would be ranked a 3/10.

Boooooooooring

[mxpkmhngh · 1/10 · 16 January 2023]

How would I review a movie I had to start 3 times over, because I fell asleep because it was sooo boring?

Unbalanced script (too much pointless talking and pointless scenes). It takes way too long before the action begins. Unconvincing dialogues and unconvincing choices in a war (visiting your family when you're on a mission for no other reason than visiting your family). Strange colors, way too saturated. So much wooden acting (even by good actors) and bad editing, that it's almost a parody on a WWII-movie. Avoid this pathetic flic and spent your time on better things. Unless the sole purpose is to fall asleep.