James Hitchcock
If you ask anyone in Britain to name a German prisoner-of-war camp from World War II, the answer (unless it is "don't know") will almost certainly be Colditz; few, if any, other camps have achieved anything like the same level of fame. Much of the reason for this lies with this film, the book by Pat Reid that it was based on and the 1970s television series "Colditz". The camp, officially known as Oflag IV-C, was regarded by the Germans as a "Sonderlager", or "special camp"; it was also referred to by them as a "Straflager", or "punishment camp". Situated in a mediaeval castle in the heart of the Third Reich, it was used to house prisoners- British, Polish, French, Dutch and Belgian- who were regarded as particularly anti-German or who had escaped from other camps before being recaptured. The Germans were determined to house such men in an especially secure, escape-proof camp where the inmates would always be outnumbered by their guards. The prisoners, naturally, were equally determined to prove the enemy wrong about the camp being escape-proof.The opening credits state that the film is based upon "the novel by Pat Reid", which is incorrect because Reid's book is not a novel but an autobiographical memoir. The film is, however, a good example of how to adapt a work of non-fiction for the screen by rewriting it as though it were a novel. All the incidents shown in the film are described either in Reid's memoir or in his later book, "The Latter Days at Colditz", which describes life in the camp after the author's successful escape to Switzerland in October 1942. In the film, however, the chronological order in which those incidents occur is radically different to their order in real life.The reason this is done is to give the film a traditional narrative structure akin to that of a work of fiction. The prisoners arrive at the camp and almost immediately set about making their plans to escape. The various national groups therefore set up their own "escape committees" to vet all escape plans and to weed out those judged to have no chance of success. Each nationality appoints its own escape officer to ensure closer co-operation. It is discovered that an informer (a Polish officer) is supplying information to the Germans. Even after the man is removed from the camp, however, the Germans are successful in foiling all escape attempts. Morale among the prisoners drops, and in desperation a British officer named McGill makes a foolhardy escape attempt which results in his death. Eventually, however, Reid and another officer, Jimmy Winslow succeed in making their "home run", and morale soars. The film ends with the British prisoners and their allies cheering their success.In reality one British prisoner (named Mike Sinclair rather than McGill- all names other than Reid's have been changed) was indeed shot dead while trying to escape, but this did not happen until 1944, two years after Reid's escape. Contrary to what is shown in the film, Reid and his companion (actually a Canadian called Hank Wardle) were not the first British officers to make a successful "home run"; that was the future Conservative MP Airey Neave who walked out disguised as a Nazi officer. (Neave's achievement is acknowledged in the closing credits). By rearranging the sequence of events in this way the film achieves a greater impact. McGill's death marks the film's emotional low point, which is quickly followed by its high point- the successful escape which, as Reid is the central character, is credited to him.The various personalities are well developed; Reid is practical, Wilmslow gloomy and fatalistic, McGill brave but hot-headed. The senior British officer, Colonel Richmond, is initially dismissed by the other officers as "wet", but reveals himself to be a calm and sensible leader. On the German side the Kommandant is portrayed by Frederick Valk as a typically stiff-necked Prussian Junker, complete with shaven head, monocle and barking voice- very different to the decent, humane officer played by Bernard Hepton in the television version. (According to Reid's account, Valk's interpretation was much closer to the real Kommandant. Valk, ironically, was a German Jew who had fled Hitler's Reich and specialised in playing Nazi officer types). Another German officer, Priem, is a fat, jovial man who takes a malicious pleasure in foiling escape attempts.Reid is played by John Mills, who appeared in several fact-based war films, including "Above Us the Waves", also from 1955, and "I Was Monty's Double". Bryan Forbes, who plays Wilmslow, was later to become famous as a director and made his own prisoner-of-war film, "King Rat".Reid's book may be about men in captivity, but there is nothing depressing about it. It is, indeed, notable for a light-hearted tone and he makes it clear that many of the inmates responded to their situation with a good deal of wit and humour. Despite occasional tragic moments such as McGill's death, a lot of this comes over in the film. Like the book on which it is based, "The Colditz Story" is often amusing and often exciting, and although its stiff-upper-lip tone can seem a bit old-fashioned today it remains rewarding viewing. 7/10
MartinHafer
This film is named after an actual German prison camp designated for incorrigible prisoners of war--those who had already attempted escapes from other camps. And, not surprisingly, the multinational inmates spend most of their time plotting to escape. And, by the end of the film, some actually make it. In fact, the statistics on actual escapes is pretty impressive. What surprised me about all this is that the Germans were actually VERY forbearing and didn't just shoot the prisoners because of this--and the difference between these camps and the death camps is striking.It's odd. Although "The Colditz Story" is based on a true account of prisoners escaping from this German prison camp--yet I never was bowled over by the film. I must admit that normally my biggest complaint about historical films is their inaccuracy--and this one sticks pretty close to the facts--yet I didn't really love the movie. I am not saying it's bad--the acting is very good. But I just didn't get into this film as much as some of the fictional WWII British films like "In Which We Serve" or "The Life of Colonel Blimp". It is still well worth seeing.
bkoganbing
People who watch The Colditz Story have probably seen The Great Escape as well and should bear in mind the fact that that camp where Steve McQueen, James Garner, and the rest was built to house all the big escape artists. Those really persistent offenders got incarcerated at the castle called Colditz. Those that is that didn't get summarily executed by the Gestapo as we well remember from The Great Escape.What an incredible waste of manpower, but those guards had to be lucky because they could be at the Russian front. In The Colditz Story there are more guards than prisoners. When you think about it, it would have been easier for the Nazis to let this bunch be exchanged.The protagonist of the story is later historian Pat Reid and he's played here by John Mills. Mills's character is the official British escape officer, there are French, Dutch, and Polish officers among those nationalities. Getting international cooperation here is about as easy as the alliance that defeated Nazi Germany with all the cracks and fraying in that endeavor. There are two other standout characters, the senior British officer Eric Portman and Scot's Guard Christopher Rhodes. Rhodes had an interesting career, he and Stanley Baker probably were up for a lot of the same parts in British cinema. He played some very rough characters on film, some outright villains. Here he's just an incorrigible prisoner who's very rebelliousness endangers the escape plans of many. His is the best performance in The Colditz Story.Made over 50 years ago, The Colditz Story holds up very well for today's audience. No flamboyant heroics like in The Great Escape, but some real situations in a story told simply and well.
Robert J. Maxwell
No reflection on the men involved in these historical incidents but this is a pretty routine story of a jolly group of Polish, British, French, and Dutch prisoners of war assigned to Colditz prison because they've so persistently tried to escape in the past.It belongs to a genre that includes "One Who Got Away" and virtually limitless others, the best known of which is probably "The Great Escape." It has most of the characteristics of the genre. There is the bluff but fundamentally decent German in command. There is the stern, handsome Unteroffizier, Anton Differing, always reliable in his limited range. There is the spy among the prisoners (cf., "Stalag 17"). The scrounging of goods. The fat, bumbling German in charge. The stage play that distracts the cadre. The comic scene in which one tunnel collapses upon another. There's not much blood and no sadism. The characters are stereotypes, but not like those of the early war years.There is no problem with either the direction or the performances. All are up to professional par. It's the script. It's disjointed and vague, as much character-driven as plot-driven. There's a certain carelessness evident in the writing. When the Polish tunnel collapses into the British tunnel, there is no preparation for the scene. Of course the sudden intrusion of the Polish tunneler must come as a surprise in order to have any comic impact, and it does. But why are the British tunneling immediately underneath the Polish tunnel? Why did they choose the route they did? What is the secret under the boards of the stage? We never find out.It's not dull and not uninteresting but it seems to go nowhere. The most engaging scenes are adventitious -- the Guardsmen doing some close order drill, for instance. Not uninteresting but not inventive enough to attract much attention.
