This story, which i found a lot better than everyone else who has posted, is neither the final film from The Archers, or what was left of them, the two principals (see 'They're a Weird Mob' of 1966 and 'The Boy Who Turned Yellow', 1972), nor their worst film, nor Pressburger's alone, as some have claimed. I can't see how this film, which is neither predictable nor unsuspenseful, can be graded lower than the Graf Spree/River Plate disaster, which includes a big scene in it wherein the main characters sit around a table and describe the end of the German warship rather than show what they're describing because the producers ran out of money! THAT is pretty ignominious, compared to this minor little thriller that is, i just remembered, also NOT Dirk Bogarde's worst film! He made a few clunkers in the '60s nowhere near as interesting as this story of the people of Crete, under immense duress due to the presence of the uninvited English army, which was bombarded throughout the story by Germans who were also piling up large numbers of collateral Cretan damage in the process. It's a wonder the Cretans didn't throw the Brits out just to save their own necks. Now, that is the situation underlying the several subplots we see played out, an astonishing one most of the other reviewers seem not to have caught.A far more memorable war romance than most Powell-Pressburger aficianados apparently think it.

A group comprised of British soldiers stranded in Crete and local partisans decide to try something quite bold--kidnap the Nazi in charge of the island. Very little of the film actually involves the setup for the kidnapping and the actual event takes place somewhat uneventfully. The bulk of the film consists of a cross-country trek with the prisoner to try to spirit him out of the country.I decided to watch this film because I love the acting of Dirk Bogarde--plus, it being a Powell/Pressberger film didn't hurt. However, my overall impression was pretty unexceptional. Now I am not saying it's a bad film. The acting is fine and the direction seemed good as well. The problem, however, is that the story just never seemed all that interesting--even though it is based on the actual kidnapping of a German general by partisans during WWII. Competent but not enough to merit its being seen as anything more than a moderately interesting time-passer.

What may not be widely known to movie fans is that at least two, or possibly three members of the cast of Ill Met by Moonlight, were former serving British Army Intelligence Officers. Dirk Bogart served as a British Intelligence Officer during WW2 on mainland Europe and in particular in Germany. His job was to round up Nazi Concentration Camp Guards. Bogart was at Belsen CC on day one of liberation. The movie, although based upon a novel by the same name, is not a fiction, but based upon actual events which took place in Crete involving SIS (Secret Intelligence Service) Officers and Greek Army Officers and local Cretan Royalists. The plan was to capture a German general and smuggle him out to Cairo. This was in effect an SAS operation which was highly successful. The movie came too close to reality for comfort and I believe that UK SIS wanted to protect former members of the Cretan Resistance as well as it's own serving officers who had taken part in the operation. To this end, I think SIS saw to it that the movie was dominated by one of their own, Dirk Bogart.daxart

Like 'Spleen', I first thought that we were seeing genuine Cretan landscapes. But what puzzled me was not being able to recognise any of it - even allowing for change - especially the coastline where Moss and his party landed. (In his book, he refers to a distinctive landscape) A little digging - on this site- revealed that the film was made in France and Italy with no mention of Crete. The title, 'Ill met by moonlight' surely refers to the 'meeting' of Kreipe and his abductors. The film couldn't really show the fact that Leigh Fermor and Moss et al attempted the abduction on the four evenings that preceeded the actual abduction. The earlier attempts were abandoned because Kreipe came along whilst it was too early for moonlight! (one wonders why was it necessary to change the title for the US market?) I thoroughly enjoy the film, watch it every opportunity and each time pick up something that I've missed previously. However, I cannot help but wonder how much better it might have been if the writers had stuck more closely to the original script throughout. They had informed advisers available, Micky Akoumianakis was a true participant, and Houseman was in Crete as an British agent for a long part of the occupation. Though thoroughly grounded in fact, the few 'elaborations' detract from what was surely a solid enough story to stand on its own.Regardless of the differences, I continue to regard the film as one of my most favourites.