Change Your Image
daveapps
Reviews
Ground Zero (1987)
background to this movie
I'm surprised to find that this film has been seen (and appreciated) in America. It wasn't all that successful in Australia, most people felt (like me) that it was a great plot idea let down by the writing (I also found Colin Friels' performance a little flat - and I thought the film went a bit heavy on the anti-American angle).
However, these reviewers don't seem to quite know the background to the film. Britain's first atom bomb was tested on Monte Bello island in the Indian Ocean in 1956, but the next series of tests were carried out at Maralinga in the South Australian desert, at the invitation of the Australian government. There was nothing secret about this, the government actually used the tests to promote itself as looking after Australia's security. Sounds very familiar! At the time the movie was made (1987), there was a big issue over the radiation levels that Australian troops had been exposed to during the tests, and the effects on their long-term health (much the same as for US troops during the Nevada tests.) There were also questions raised about how much effort had gone into evacuating the local Aborigines from the area both before and after the tests. This is the issue that forms the background to the movie, but it is really about drawing parallels between Australian subservience to Britain in the 50's and to the USA in the 80's, and just how much this is really in Australia's interest.
The debate back then was over the US satellite facilities at Pine Gap, today it is over support for the war in Iraq. The movie should have been topical and relevant, then and now, but it isn't because it is done with such a heavy hand. The scene where Colin Friels and Donald Pleasance are suddenly ambushed by US troops in the middle of the Outback is just stupid. The scene where he is making the hot dog commercial is supposed to be about the domination of American culture, but it doesn't work either. The line where he is talking to the rat in his kitchen when he gets home, probably looked good on paper, but should have been cut from the movie. The final scene should be brilliant, but isn't. When Colin Friels says, 'Hey, wait a minute...' he shouldn't say anything! His face should say it all.
My opinion - this film isn't great, but it could have been, which is why I found it so disappointing. Close, but no banana - damn, another Americanism!
The Desert Rats (1953)
More accurate than most
There are more than a few inaccuracies in this movie, starting off with the fact that 'The Desert Rats' was - and is - the nickname of the British 7th Armoured Division, and comes from their mascot, the jerboa. I wouldn't try to comment on the technical points of equipment, but, on the strategic side, the producers did a better job with their research than many other WWII movie makers.
The garrison of Tobruk at the start of the siege in April 1941 consisted of 9th Australian Division (the 'Rats of Tobruk', not the 'Desert Rats'), 18th Australian Brigade and a British Army Tank regiment (equipped with infantry tanks). The artillery and anti tank regiments at this stage were all British, as the 9th's artillery was still training at Gaza in Palestine.
Of Wavell's other forces, three infantry divisions were in Greece and one in Ethiopia. 7th Armoured was in Egypt, at only around half strength. Several independent regiments were also scattered around the Middle East.
Rommel's forces consisted of the Afrika Korps - 15th and 21st Panzer (armoured) Divisions and 90th Light Division - and the Italian forces -one armoured division, one motorised infantry division and four infantry divisions. This force of around 100,000 men was all the High Command would allow him for most of the campaign, because of the supply problems.
So, at the start of the siege, the allies were heavily outnumbered, just as the movie shows. With so little to hold Egypt, Wavell knew his best chance was to deny Rommel the use of the deep-water harbour of Tobruk, ninety miles west of the Libyan border. Without it, Axis supplies had to come overland from Benghazi, over two hundred miles further west. As the movie says, he asked for two months. True to his word, he launched his counter-offensive in June, but it was heavily defeated. It would be another five months before his successor, Auchinlek, could launch the successful Operation Crusader, which relieved the siege in December 1941. By this time, only a single Australian battalion, the 2/13th, was still in Tobruk. By October, the Australians had been on reduced rations for six months, and at the insistence of the Australian government they were gradually replaced by British and Free Polish troops.
The film is also accurate in the depiction of the final engagement of the siege, with 2/13th holding El Duda, just east of Tobruk. Rommel made a final attempt to take Tobruk, which he nearly did before withdrawing on 5th December, 17 days after the offensive began.
The battle scenes are fairly well depicted. The key to defeating Rommel's main attack on 1 May was for the infantry to hold the perimeter, allowing the German tanks through onto the anti-tank guns, but stopping the German infantry from following them. Not mentioned in the film, two weeks later Wavell launched a minor attack on the Libyan frontier, forcing Rommel to move forces east to garrison Sollum, Capuzzo and Halfaya. Also not mentioned is the role of the RAF on Malta, slowing down Rommel's attempt to build up forces and supplies for a new attack. Of course, the main reason he was not able to attack again before the Crusader offensive was the German invasion of Russia on 22 June, putting Africa a distant last on the priority list for supplies and reinforcements.
Rommel did finally take Tobruk in his Gazala offensive of May/June 1942, at which time it was held by inexperienced South African troops. This allowed him to advance into Egypt as far as El Alamein, where the rest, as they say, is history. Nevertheless, the defence of Tobruk in 1941 was a bright light for the allies at time of general gloom and disaster, and well deserving of a film that I consider quite entertaining. Just don't get me started on the 'Aussie' accents of most of the minor characters!