Leofwine_draca ATTACK ON THE IRON COAST is a typical UK/USA collaboration detailing a brave Allied attack on German forces during WW2. This one has all of the planning of THE DAM BUSTERS and a similarly-themed raid in which a group of dedicated soldiers risk their lives in attempting to destroy a strategically-important German position in occupied France. There's a whiff of THE COCKLESHELL HEROES about it to in the way the action is sea-based.Stories such as this may not be true but they're certainly based on real raids which did occur and thus they're easy viewing. ATTACK ON THE IRON COAST is suspenseful and well-acted by a decent cast, all of whom give a ring of authenticity to their characters. Lloyd Bridges is a typically hard-assed character, a Canadian major brought in to lead the British attack. Andrew Keir is well cast against him as the gruff and antagonistic ship's captain.There isn't a great deal of action in this picture although the usual training sequences and the like play out. The special effects are limited to rather poor miniature models of the ships but they don't spoil the effect. However, there is some suspense, and it does build to an action-packed climax which has all of the explosive incident, drama, and pathos that you could hope for.

Bob-45 I avoided "Attack on the Iron Coast" when it was released, given the "B" cast, poor reviews and little promotion by United Artists. Having watched it, I discover a movie with superb performances by Lloyd Bridges and Andrew Keir (in fact, the entire cast)and better production values than "A" list war movies such as "In Harms Way," "Tobruk" and "Operation Crossbow".This is the only movie Paul Wendkos directed that has impressed me. Using oblique camera angles and careful pacing, he manages to get the most out of his meager budget. Likewise, the producers managed a much more expensive looking movie, along the lines of "The Dirty Dozen," with many more sets to dress. The photography here is equally as good as "In Harm's Way". Too bad the script isn't better,with a rather trite subplot to explain Keir's conflict with Bridges. Keir's arguments against the raid did not require them. What I did like about the script is that what appeared to be obstacles Keir used to "sabotage" the raid actually contributed to its success.I must disagree with another reviewer regarding the ship miniatures. They look realistic on my computer screen. However, I have seen other movies ("In Harms Way," "633 Squadron," "The Guns of Navarone") where the miniatures and flats looked perfectly fine on the big screen but not on TV. In fact, in both "War of the Worlds" (1953) and "Thunderball" (1965), the wires holding up the models can be clearly seen on television, but not the big screen and both of these films were nominated for Oscars ("War of the Worlds" winning).I don't want to spoil your enjoyment of this film by overpraising it. So, please go into it with an open mind and judge it by 1968 technical standards. I believe you won't be disappointed.

bob the moo Haunted by his failure in a previous mission, Major Wilson signs up to lead Operation Mad Dog even though the risks are high. Mad Dog seeks to bring several boats of commandos onto a heavily fortified part of France's coast – one of them full of explosives. While the commandos raid the shore the ship will explode and reduce the defences to rubble and leave the area open for attack. However accidents during training are only the start of a fraught and dangerous mission.From this period it is not unusual to have a commando movie – if fact they were quite common and quite popular. Taking this as my reason, I decided to watch this film but quickly regretted bothering. The plot is not anything new – training a group of men for a risky mission against all the odds. The first half of the film is quite slow and the training is given none of the wit of Dirty Dozen and other movies that have done it better. Worse still is the fact that the film delves into Major Wilson's personal life, giving long scenes the feel of a melodrama. The actual attack is quite short and quite ordinary – lots of men running round alleys for 5 minutes. The model work is also pretty poor considering the time it was made – they really could have done better.Another reason for the film lacking teeth is the fact that I never really cared about the characters. It was surprising that, given how much of the film is spent talking, that only the two lead characters were developed to the point that I could give a damn about either of them. Of the two leads, Bridges is miscast and didn't convince me he was a tough wartime Major. Keir however was solid and I enjoyed his character.Overall this is a pretty poor film that is dull for the most part. It aspires to be a film like Dirty Dozen but it never manages to get anywhere near it. Poor characters, uninvolving development, weak action and a plot that does exactly what you expect it to. Even if you want a film in this genre you can do way better than this.

SgtSlaughter Paul Wendkos is an average director at best, but has the ability to turn a potentially terrible movie into a satisfying action flick. "Attack on the Iron Coast" is yet another low-budget entry in a series from Oakmont Production, and although it presents nothing new, but holds attention so well that the clichés are easy to overlook.John C. Champion's script is a fictional takeoff on a real WWII event, much like his earlier and much worse "Submarine X-1". This time, the story is based on Mountbatten's raid on the dry dock at St. Nazaire, in which a ship laden with explosives crashed into the repair dock and destroyed important German repair facilities.Lloyd Bridges ("A Walk in the Sun") plays Major Wilson (a takeoff on Lord Mountbatten), who's first commando mission in France turns into a shambles. But he is given a second chance when he plans an even riskier operation to destroy the German repair dock at LeClair (Ste-Nazaire). The only problem is that Captain Franklin (Andrew Keir, "Lion of the Desert") is opposed to the mission from the start, and the two must cooperate as the mission is a joint Army-Navy operation.This film is really a mixed bag. What's good is really, really good and what's bad is really, really bad. Lloyd Bridges gives a sincere performance as Major Wilson, but his character isn't developed as much as I would have liked. We're treated two a two-dimensional hero who doesn't have any weaknesses; he brings to mind John Wayne's Colonel Kirby of "The Green Berets". His conflict with Franklin is the core of the movie and provides enough tension that the German enemies aren't needed until the final act.The German characters are disappointing. We're treated to some very shallow characterizations which bring to mind the worst excesses of "Hogan's Heroes". The officers sit and watch dirty movies and become sated on fine wine and liquor while their subordinates bring in urgent reports of an approaching enemy ship. This is very unfortunate, because both George Mikell and Walter Gotell are very capable German actors who have had very good roles in the past - chiefly, "The Guns of Navarone", where they acted together in 1961. This really let me down. It would have been wiser to exclude German characters altogether and dwell on the commandos some more.The action sequences are withheld until the final 20 minutes or so of the film and range from well-crafted to laughable. Scenes of British commandos dashing about in alleyways and dockyards are excellently staged and well-shot, even if they're very generic. The scenes of British minesweeper in the bay, however, feature some of the worst miniature work of the period. It's obvious that this feature had a low budget, because they aren't many extras or realistic explosions in the entire film.Wendkos manages to keep things interesting by moving his camera fluidly and often shooting from high or low angles, giving the audience a unique perspective on the dialogue or action. The sets are all-top notch and the exteriors are very well-decorated. The German dockyard is expansive and really has a fresh, authentic feel to it and the various British war offices are equally believable."Attack on the Iron Coast" is nothing more than a routine, satisfying 90-minute film. There is nothing fresh and unique about it, but some fair acting and fast pace keep it engaging.