Some movies age better than others; as the years pass, many become tired and dated, while a select handful gain recognition as timeless classics. The Guns of Navarone falls somewhere in the middle. The 1961 adventure film is still watchable, more than 40 years after it made a huge splash in its original theatrical run, but it does show its age considerably.

The Guns of Navarone is a World War II action-adventure film, with a star-studded cast (Gregory Peck, David Niven, and Anthony Quinn) playing a group of tough-as-nails soldiers assigned a task that pretty much everyone thinks is impossible: sabotage the deadly guns of the island of Navarone in time for the Allies to mount a rescue operation for 2,000 British soldiers. The commando team runs into difficulties from the very beginning, ranging from potentially deadly grudges among the team members, to a suspected traitor who may be leaking information about their plans to the Germans.

It's interesting to look at The Guns of Navarone and consider what makes it feel so different from a modern film of the same genre. For one thing, it has an extremely linear story: the plot doesn't so much unfold as unroll, with one set-piece following another in a tidy fashion. The result is that you don't really have to pay a lot of attention here; even the one "twist" in the plot is introduced and dealt with in fairly summary fashion, with no foreshadowing and little effect on the story. There's also an odd sense that the film's characters are balancing on the fence between realism and comic-book heroism. On the one hand, the film takes some time to introduce conflicts between the characters, and lingers on the characters in the concluding minutes of the film as if to emphasize that these are real people for whom life will go on; but on the other hand, none of these attempts at characterization really work, except perhaps for Anthony Quinn's Stavros. The secondary members of the team are never particularly well defined, and while the rather peculiar fate that befalls one of them in the final confrontation is, I think, intended to be a tragic commentary on his character, it plays out as merely baffling.

What's most striking about The Guns of Navarone now, though, is its pacing, which feels distinctly "off." Specifically, it feels painfully slow. However, it's not just a question of length. Though The Guns of Navarone does run a sprawling two hours and thirty-six minutes, other, even longer epics of the same era (like Bridge on the River Kwai or The Ten Commandments) make excellent use of their long running time. No, it's a question of what the film does with its length, and in the case of The Guns of Navarone, I don't think it really uses it effectively. The first hour or so of the film moves quite slowly, but is nonetheless engaging: we're getting the background for the story, seeing the pieces come together, and getting set up for the rest of the action.

But what worked in the first part of the film begins to sag badly as we get further in. All the scenes feel as though they're drawn out longer than they need to be; the camera lingers, the editing shows us several characters doing the same thing, the scene pauses as the characters give each other (presumably) significant looks... it adds up. There's very little dramatic tension here, because any excitement that's brought out by a particular action set-piece, like the team being chased by German soldiers, is allowed to drain away in the interminable filler scenes before we get to the next important plot point.

The Guns of Navarone won a 1961 Academy Award for Best Special Effects, and I would not be at all surprised if those effects are what carried the film at the time. Much the same way that many of today's CGI-heavy blockbusters will eventually be recognized as mediocre films beneath the glitzy trappings of impressive special effects, The Guns of Navarone has had its novelty worn off by the passing of time to reveal a film that's passably entertaining, but nothing special.

The DVD

Video

What is Superbit? Put simply, it's a transfer that uses the highest bit rate possible. The intention, of course, is to thereby deliver a superior video experience. That higher bit rate makes it possible for a film to appear with more detail, and to eliminate digital flaws that come from excessive compression. But it's essential to realize that a high bit rate is just one element of a superior transfer; while cranking up the bit rate will have a beneficial effect on just about any film's DVD transfer, it doesn't guarantee that the overall transfer will be optimal.

I'm leading with this caveat for a reason. The Superbit transfer of The Guns of Navarone does deliver on the high-bit-rate promise, and we can see the benefits of this treatment, but there are other issues with the transfer that a high bit rate can't solve by itself. While the Superbit transfer is respectable, it is by no means the definitive treatment of The Guns of Navarone.

OK, let's take a look at the nitty-gritty details of this transfer. The Guns of Navarone: Superbit is presented in anamorphic widescreen, at its original 2.35:1 aspect ratio. However, I did notice that in a few scenes, the image looks slightly squashed vertically, as though the aspect ratio is slightly off. Colors are handled reasonably well throughout the film: it does have a slightly brownish look to it, but it's not excessive. Contrast is usually done well, with dark areas looking appropriately black and shadowy areas also retaining the right level of detail.

However, the transfer is far from perfect, and it's clear that The Guns of Navarone needs – but didn't get – a restoration treatment. For one thing, the edge enhancement ranges from moderate to heavy, and is quite noticeable in a number of scenes. There's also a constant level of noise in the image, as well as a scattering of print flaws. Taken as a whole, the image quality varies from scene to scene. Some, like the indoor scenes, look quite good, with a clean and sharp appearance. The outdoor footage, however, is in worse shape, with more grain and a generally blurrier appearance. The "special effect" shots and transitions look particularly bad, and really call attention to the age of the film. All in all, this transfer is a notch above average for the more than 40-year-old film, but that's all I can grant it.

Audio

The two audio tracks available for The Guns of Navarone: Superbit are a DTS 6.1 and a Dolby 5.1 track. That's quite an upgrade for a 1961 film that was mostly likely originally produced in mono or at most stereo... and in fact, the DTS label doesn't really have a whole lot to offer.

The DTS and the 5.1 tracks sound very similar here, with the DTS offering a shade more in terms of audio depth and richness. As far as surround sound goes, though, both tracks have almost nothing to offer: the overall soundtrack sounds like a robust 2.0 stereo mix. Dialogue, music, and most special effects are squarely located in the center of the sound environment; it's clear and crisp, but not exceptional. For most of the film, the rear channels are completely silent. That's right: the music isn't even consistently spread to all the speakers. In a few of the more action-packed scenes, some of the background special effects are piped to all the speakers, and at those moments, the audio experience becomes much more exciting. However, this is done very inconsistently, and many exciting moments in the film are not presented in surround sound.

Extras

It's a Superbit; there are no special features. I'll comment, though, that I really appreciate the Superbit menus. Sure, they're basic and not "artistic" or themed to the film... but so what? I want to watch the movie, not its menus. What matters is that they're completely clear (no uncertainty about what's highlighted!) and very fast to navigate through.

Final thoughts

A review of a Superbit title always has to answer two questions: "should I watch this DVD?" and "should I upgrade from the previous edition?" I'll answer with a "maybe" and a "no," respectively. The Guns of Navarone is a passable 1960s adventure film that hasn't weathered the years all that well; it's worth watching if you're a fan of the genre or of the main actors involved, but I'd suggest it as a good rental choice rather than a purchase. As for fans who know they want to own a copy: consider that the previous edition of the film is also in anamorphic widescreen with Dolby 5.1 and has a nice slate of special features. Since the Superbit release doesn't offer a restored transfer, only a higher bit-rate one, I'd be inclined to suggest that viewers go for the non-Superbit version in order to get the supplements. Unless you are a die-hard fan of the film and are craving even the most incremental of improvements in the transfer, I can't say it's worth an upgrade. Rent it.