D-Day the Sixth of June

The main issue i have with this film is that 98% of the film has nothing to do with D-DAY , it's about two officers on a boat talking about their romance with a woman. If the film had suggested that this would be the story that would have made it much better like if the title had been say "Two soldiers and a lady" that would have been good but calling it D-day the sixth of June is just totally wrong. It's like calling Manhunter the life of Hannibal Lector (for those of you who didn't get that joke Hannibal only shows up for about five minutes in Manhunter). Aside from the title being wrong the story is really uninteresting mainly because you want the film to show you you the bits with D-day in them because that's what the film has promised in the title but it never bloody shows them. If you want a really boring melodrama about love then yeah it's for you but other wise don't watch it and ignore the title completely.

For many years, I avoided watching "D-Day the Sixth of June" because I assumed it was a film about the D-Day invasion. I was shocked to learn that it really was NOT about D-Day...and was much more a romance than a war film. What a surprise.

The film begins on a transport ship taking some commandos on a raid just before the main D-Day attack. A British officer (Richard Todd) and an American one (Robert Taylor) meet each other for the first time and they both realize they have something in common...they are in love with the same woman. The film then does a brief flashback about the relationship between Todd and Dana Wynter and a much longer flashback about the relationship between Taylor and Wynter. The latter is complicated because Taylor's character happens to be married.

This film plays more like a soap opera in many ways than a war film. In this sense, it's a bit similar to "From Here to Eternity"....though a bit less grand in scope. After all, the battle sequences consists of a few dozen men at a time and lacks the scope of the attack on Pearl Harbor in "From Here to Eternity". However, they both are very good films...soap and all.

Overall, this is a very good film despite the ubiquitous use of the song "You Never Know"...a song you come to hate after a while. Still, very well made and worth seeing.

Okay, we'll keep this one short: lots of big stars (Robert Taylor, Dana Wynter, Edmund O'Brien, et al), lots of extras, lots and lots of talking, but absolutely no sense of urgency or feeling of impending action is present in this hour and 46 minute blabfest. In fact, for the first 80 minutes, nothing much happens. Yes, Taylor is quite handsome in his military uniform and, yes, Ms. Wynter is very fetching in her military uniform and, yes, a predictable romance develops with an equally predictable ending, but THAT'S IT!! That's the whole plodding film in a nutshell. Believe us, if movies about the greatest invasion in history are the sort of thing that floats your boat, you would be much better advised to stick with "The Longest Day". This over-processed turkey spread shoulda stayed in the can.

A film which springs immediately to mind after watching D-Day the Sixth of June is Abbott and Costello go to Mars. In that cerebral little opus A&C never actually get to Mars - they go to Venus instead, and even then it is only after some considerable preliminaries. Unlike that picture, D-Day the Sixth of June does actually get to the events referred to, but it is only as an aside for ten minutes or so at the end; like Abbott and Costello go to Mars, the title is a complete misrepresentation.

For most of its running time this film is actually a boring and clichéd melodrama in which Robert Taylor, Richard Todd and Dana Wynter play three two-dimensional characters involved in a love triangle against a backdrop of wartime England (Hollywood's conception of wartime England, anyway). The three roles may just as well have been played by cardboard cut-outs, but for what it's worth Richard Todd probably comes off best, being the only one of the major cast members who even hints at creating a real-life character. Robert Taylor is at his most wooden, and also possibly a little too old for his role. His love scenes with Dana Wynter generate less passion than an undertaker's convention. But then again, Dana Wynter always did seem to me to be a particularly passionless actress.

It can only be regretted that the film's makers did not spend more time on the subsidiary characters, who seem to me to be far more interesting. Brigadier Russell is well played by John Williams, and his resentment of the American interlopers is a theme which could have been developed far more fully. Likewise the flaky nature of Edmond O'Briens Colonel Timmer is never really explored or explained in any sense at all.

All in all, I enjoyed Abbott and Costello Go to Mars a lot more.

Another big-budget WWII adventure, filmed in color and widescreen by Fox in the '50s - and a misleadingly titled one, as it barely concerns the crucial 1944 Normandy invasion it references (not surprisingly Fox returned to this subject, and tackled it much more comprehensively, in THE LONGEST DAY [1962])! As a matter of fact, the film's one genuine battle sequence, while quite well done, occurs only after having gone through some 80 minutes of incessant talk; the bulk of this footage is devoted to a romantic triangle, told in lengthy flashbacks, which comprises American Robert Taylor and Brits Richard Todd and Dana Wynter, plus a rather irrelevant subplot involving maverick Colonel Edmond O'Brien! That said, the film is glossily proficient and remains highly watchable as the kind of unassuming entertainment turned out on a general basis by Hollywood in its heyday...