safeupherewithyou I have watched this film a few ti mes and think it is quite good, but the one thing that stands out to me (a female ) is the scene where Connor and the 'postmistress' are reading the letters and begin to think they may be a code. WHY ARE THEY IN BED?I know it's not very explicit, and I'm not a raving feminist, but why was that scene shot that way? Was it because in the 1970s everything had to have sex in it?Connor was not particularly physically attractive, was a lot older than the girl and there had been no previous (or subsequent) hint of a 'thing' between them, so why? It adds nothing to the plot yet tends to imply that all women in the forces were kind of official prostitutes.Only a small point about a pretty pointless detail but it niggles.

Theo Robertson First time I saw it and didn't think much of it now I first saw this in the mid 1970s as a child . I was from the last generation of British children who had a common interest in the second world war . I used to like buying war comics like Battle and Commando and used to love watching all those B & W war movies , but I was disappointed with THE McKENZIE BREAK first time I saw it probably because the plot mainly involved British guards going into a prison compound , getting beaten back by the German prisoners - Repeat every 15 minutes After seeing it again recently I do realise that my memories are somewhat simplistic but that doesn't mean the film has suddenly improved in my eyes . If I have to be brutally honest then I have to say it has diminished further . Since I first saw this movie I have seen many similar movies like BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI , THE GREAT ESCAPE etc films that are either more dramatic or more entertaining than this one , that's probably the problem with TMB it's rather serious in its tone without being compellingly dramatic and the one subplot that I found interesting during its recent broadcast of one of the prisoners being a suspected homosexual by his Nazi peers is rather unexplored There's a couple of other things that stuck out in my mind about this movie and not in a good way . One thing was when a character mentions that a couple of prisoners escaped and made it into the Irish free State . As every schoolboy from my generation knows not one single German prisoner held in allied captivity escaped back to Germany . I know it's not implicitly stated that these two escapees made it back to Germany but it's unlikely they'd be interned in Ireland . Secondly I couldn't help noticing a large German contingent were wearing Wermacht uniforms . Where would they have been captured and why go to all the trouble of keeping them in a Scottish POW camp ? Wouldn't they have been kept in the same region they were captured ? A very average film that will only appeal to people interested in men standing on roofs singing Nazi marching songs

Robert D. Ruplenas I'm always interested to see neglected movies that appear to have good credentials, but in this case the film's neglect appears justified. Evidently based on some actual incidents during WWII, the film just doesn't connect with the viewer for some reason that it is not quite clear to me. One very likely reason is that - in the print I saw on TCM, anyway - none of the scenes where the Germans talked among themselves were given titles. This interesting directorial concept - to let the non-German speaking viewer just guess from "context" what the Germans are saying to each other - is, in my book, an utter flop and helps to lock the viewer out. Also, the way the movie begins - just dropping us into a very confused situation without much setup - is disorienting. Brian Keith is pretty good here, but the reputations of "The Great Escape" and "Stalag 17" will not be challenged by this flick.

Stefan Kahrs I only comment on one aspect of the film that I found particularly noticeable. It is about the use of foreign languages, in this case German, in American movies.There were several occasions when the German POWs were talking amongst themselves in this film, and - quite rightly - the medium of communication switched then from English to German. The problem with this is that only a few of the actors who play Germans in this film are Germans, and the result is a bit off-putting. I would categorize the German-speaking in this movie into 4 classes:1. Non-native speakers who don't have clue what they are doing: they rush their lines very quickly, but are virtually incomprehensible. It is not even German with a strong accent, it just comes across as gibberish.2. Non-native speakers who do have a clue: they speak more slowly and are understandable, but sadly they all seemed to speak with a fairly strong and easily identifiable accent.3. Germans who speak normally.4. Helmut Griem. One can tell that he is stage-trained, because he tended to speak with this peculiar cut-glass, highly articulated accent stage actors are trained to use so that the people right at the back of the theatre would still understand what they say. It doesn't sound very real though - it doesn't in English and it doesn't in German either. Perhaps Griem instinctively wanted to compensate for groups 1 and 2, and surely the director wasn't in a position to tell that he was overdoing it.What some American movie makers (and this is a prime example, another one would be 'Die Hard') fail to realise is that whenever the original version of such a film is viewed by native speakers then foreign language scenes built on such premises will not work, they just make the knowing viewer cringe. Just think about what it would do to 'The Great Escape' if some of the inmates were played instead by German actors who speak English with a strong German accent.