Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

mophfr This movie is the saddest failure in film history. You have to know that legendary film producer Euan Lloyd accepted to make the film in despite of the fact that insurances refused to cover Richard Burton. It was an ultimate proof of courage and loyalty to a friend, sadly rewarded by a tragedy : Richard Burton died one day before shooting. Burton, before dying, was very enthusiastic about the filming of "Wild Geese II. Something he would have never been if it was to act in an illogical story where he's not the leader anymore (the final movie). Actress Ingrid Pitt is also very clear : it was supposed to be the new big production starring Richard Burton. So it's ridiculous to imagine that Burton would have played the role played by his substitute Edward Fox (who plays his brother in the film) : it's true in only a few scenes. Most of Richard Burton's dialogs are in fact delivered by Scott Glenn, who plays the leading mercenary in the final version. The sniper is definitively NOT a role invented for Burton to take in account the fact that he had difficulties to walk (he had a surgery on his spine at the beginning of 1984) : it was in the book ! But reliable sources effectively claim that Burton would have been the sniper. But if Burton plays the role of Edward Fox, he's not the leader anymore and the story is ridiculous (like in the shot movie). So : where is the truth ? In fact Burton would have been the sniper in the first part of the movie. If you re-watch the film, you can see Edward Fox limping like Burton would have done it because of his surgery : Faulkner meets the Lukas' at EBC in London, the second interview between Glenn and the Lukas was in fact the continuation of Faulkner's: Burton's Faulkner would have accepted the mission of course and then hired immediately Haddad in London to help him. They exchange in London the funny dialogs about Faulkner's leg that you hear in the final movie when they come back to Berlin, after that they fly together to Berlin. All this is not in the book and was found out to let Glenn handle the action scenes (with still Burton as the logical leader of the mission). So in the script, in Berlin, Glenn jogs around the Spandau Prison under Faulkner's protection (hidden as a sniper somewhere in a building). Faulkner reports to Kathy at the stadium, then again Scott Glenn-Haddad visits the barracks for a closer observation of Spandau. When he leaves, some people try to kidnap him. In the final film he's kidnapped, but here Faulkner (still the sniper) shoots to save him, Haddad manages to escape but Faulkner not (because of his leg) and is quickly found, taken, violently interrogated and left for dead on the highway. You understand also that if Faulkner doesn't meet Reed-Henry at the hospital, it complicates unnecessarily the story. Unnecessarily because Burton could have played these scenes without a problem (except his limping, he was at his peak) and it's the leader of the mission who has to talk to the key characters who could help to organize the escape. Faulkner would have then re-met Kathy and explained to her that he has to be forgotten a little after these assassination attempt that he survived and goes to Bavaria before he meets again with Haddad in Munich. From there, the 3 of them (Faulkner, Kathy, Haddad) go back to Berlin. Faulkner is for one last time the sniper in the Turkish alley : he asks Haddad to lead Stroebling's men to that place and the final shooting is in the movie. From that very moment : if you let Faulkner keeping on being the sniper, the colonel Faulkner isn't the leader anymore and lets Glenn handling the dialog scenes. A nonsense that you can experience in the final version : Glenn delivers very poorly his dialogs and makes the movie look like a slow TV-movie, Burton would have set all these scenes under high tension. Again : re-watch those scenes, all of them are decisive and superbly written for an actor like Burton. On the contrary, Glenn would have attacked alone the warehouse towards the end, while Burton would have taken the lead on the accident's site. In fact, from the moment they return to Berlin, Glenn would have played almost exactly (except in the Turkish alley and in Austria at the end)the role of Edward Fox (who just took Burton's clothes and nothing else). That second part of the movie would have been very close to the novel. Of course : many scenes would have been far more spectacular. The helicopters that you see on the poster drawn for the movie starring Burton are absent from the final film but would have appeared towards the end : before the attempt to free Hess, there was supposed to be a massive operation of the British army (a simulated reaction to a Russian invasion, a training, but at a large scale in the conditions of reality, where the army has to evacuate British families from Berlin and so on...). It was Reed-Henry's idea to help the mercenaries to take advantage of that confusion during their own rescue operation. All this disappeared. But you could find many other examples like that by reading the book. Carney's novel is a masterpiece wonderfully respected by Reginald Rose. I really hope that this review helped you to imagine the pure masterpiece Euan Lloyd was about to deliver along with Richard Burton, Reginald Rose and Roy Budd (his music for that film is one of the most powerful themes ever composed in cinema history).

Matthew Kresal The Wild Geese is one of the better action films out there with its combination of a top-notch leading cast, a good supporting cast, a good script and spectacular action sequences. Its sequel in name only, Wild Geese II lacks many of those elements. As a sequel to the original film it is a bit of a let down and otherwise its a typical action film.The original film had the wonderful combination of Richard Burton, Roger Moore, and Richard Harris. Now Burton was set to return for this film before his untimely death. His replacement in this film is Edward Fox who plays his younger brother Alex. Fox is the real lifeblood of this film. He has a wonderful sense of humor in his character and he is believable as the brother to the Burton character. Fox, however, doesn't show up as much as his co-stars and that is a real shame.Why is it a shame? Because while Scott Glenn and Barbara Carrera are good actors, they lack chemistry. Glenn is not a leading man and it takes considerable effort to watch him throughout the entire film when he spends whole scenes by himself. While Carrera starts off being an intelligent and self-sufficient character, she ends up turning into a full-out damsel in distress by the time the film is over with. While this can't be entirely blamed on her, Carrera does little to improve upon the material. The supporting cast is mixed. Kenneth Haigh is rather convincing as Colonel Reed-Henry as is Robert Webber as TV network owner Robert McCann. John Terry lacks much acting chops as Michael Lukas. But the real star of the supporting cast is the cameo (for lack of better description) by Laurence Olivier as Rudolf Hess. Olivier appearance is brief, during the finale of the film, but his scenes with Fox, Glenn, and Carrera makes the two hour running length of the film seem worthwhile. When compared to the script and action sequences of the original film, this film is definitely lacking. Despite having been written by the same screenwriter, the films plot lacks both the punch and realism of the original. One might find that because of the change in locations from Africa to Cold War Berlin but the film still lacks realism. Not to mention that thee is really a lack of action in this film. Whiel the first film was not exactly loaded with action either, at least it had a huge set-up for an even bigger pay off at the end. this film has a massive set up and virtually no pay off. There is no large rescue action set-piece. Instead we are given a very bad looking car wreck followed by an improbable escape from East to West. So despite having an excellent Edward Fox and Laurence Olivier, Wild Geese II lacks in everything that the first film had. the film becomes a cardboard action / espionage film that lacks both intelligence and realism. It is a sequel in name only and if you love the original, you might want to stay away from this film. You are likely to be disappointed.

ShadeGrenade 'The Wild Geese' ( 1978 ), by no means a classic, was Oscar winning stuff compared to this stinker. Edward Fox plays the brother of the Richard Burton character; the dialogue at the start tries to imply that Eddie was out there alongside Richard in the African veldt. Oh no he wasn't! Based on Daniel Carney's 'The Square Circle', this is rubbish as adventure, lacking in action, being a compendium of the worst spy movie clichés of all time. At one point, someone even says: "We ask the questions!". Roger Moore had the good sense to turn it down, instead we get Scott Glenn looking as though he's stepped off the set of 'Westworld', and Barbara Carrera as the token crumpet. The plot concerns a publicity seeking U.S. news network hiring mercenaries to free Rudolf Hess from Spandau prison. Whilst it was possible to root for the original Wild Geese as they rescued a democratically-elected Prime Minister, its impossible to care if Glenn, Fox and Carrera spring Hess. Luckily for us, Euan Lloyd retired not long afterwards.

filmbuff1970 The Original Was a Minor Classic.it was Action Packed and contained Plenty of Humour.Infact it was like a British Dirty Dozen With Mercenaries instead Prisoners.The cast Seemed to Enjoy themseleves.unlike this movie where most of the cast look like there going to fall asleep.Scott Glenn is so wooden in this Chuck Norris would of been better.the Action is very Rare.Only Fox Plays it tongue in Cheek.The Script isnt Great and the story goes nowhere.Dull.However Roy Budds Music Score is typically Great.4 out of 10