Overall this movie was poorly done. The plot has been used many times before and the low light filming is very grainy. There is a lot of low light filming so it stands out right from the beginning.Then they sort of judge World War II by 70's vietnam views by adding a medic who is a conscientious objector. He refuses to fight when the Brits take over the German convoy. A wwii movie should have the value systems of the 1940's, not the 1970's. The British knew why they were fighting the Germans. They added a lady character for no reason, she has no development and serves no purpose other then to have something to look at I guess.I liked Karl-Otto Alberty in his small role from 'Kelly's heroes so seeing him again in 'Raid on Rommel' was fun. He just fits the German soldier role so well. Wolfgang Preiss was excellent playing as Rommel. So the film does have some good points. At the end the party of what looked to be no more than 2 dozen men loses about 50 men and still has 50 men when they take the shore batteries. This is from using film from a previous movie and just slapping it together haphazardly. The movie should have ended after the tank scene at the fuel dump. If it had ended there I think I could rate it higher.

This is one of these films that often crops up when someone brings up the topic of worst war films . It probably doesn't deserve this reputation but there's no denying it drowns in a sea of mediocrity . From the outset there's a major spanner in the works with its setting of Libya in 1943 where radio broadcasts talk of the Battle for Tobruk . The film never states when in 1943 it's set but this doesn't matter because the battle for Tobruk took place the previous year and by 1943 Rommel was on the back foot and not as this film suggests on a knife edge between victory and possible defeat . The outcome of the North African campaign was certain in 1943 , especially with the Operation Torch landings in November the previous year . One can understand some artistic license in making the stakes some what higher but not to the point of rewriting history . Wouldn't have just been easier setting the film some time in early 1942 when things were far more uncertain ? Richard Burton even today is a legend of British stage but his career arc in cinema left a lot to be desired and he's obviously slumming it big time here . One wonders if he's trying to emulate the success of WHERE EAGLES DARE where is character is on a top secret mission to defeat the Nazis . The problem is the top secret plan is a bit to similar to a previous and much better film called TOBRUK and if this wasn't bad enough RAID ON ROMMEL makes use of footage from TOBRUK very blatantly which leads to several instances of confused continuity and is a distraction . It also explains why Burton has his hair bleached since the climatic battle scene is culled from TOBRUK where blond haired George Peppard takes on some German tanks . As a footnote the continuity announcer pronounced the title as " Rain on Rimmill " which whilst being some what surreal sums up the carelessness of this movie

There are a number of inaccuracies, but that's fine, not all war movies have to be historically accurate, but with that said, it just isn't a very good movie. Some of the silly things thrown in for reasons unknown: suddenly during a battle a speech by Hitler is heard, but not being listened to on a radio, just part of the soundtrack; when the Italians are being killed with the flamethrower suddenly we hear some kind of prayer in Italian, but again, part of the soundtrack; when the Quaker medical officer dies we hear his lines about being a conscientious objector replayed. We're treated to just a number of nonsensical additions or gimmicks that just don't work. Additionally, the special effects are OK, but not great and they weren't great when they were used the first time in "Tobruk", a much better movie. Lastly, I swear Richard Burton, while dressed as a German captain and speaking to a German enlisted man, asked for the telephone in English. I listened a few times and I'm sure of it. I'm glad I watched this, but I seriously doubt I'll never watch it again.

The history is wrong. The props are inaccurate. The story is over the top derring do nonsense. It was the presence of Richard Burton that drew me to this turkey. Alas, it must have been his worst role. I fail to see how any film maker can be so careless with his subject and so contemptuous of his audience. The Germans did not use flying boats and certainly not in the desert. The Wehrmacht did not use the type of campaign ribbon shown on the German uniforms. There are no puffy white clouds over the Libyan desert. Edward R. Murrow's CBS broadcasts could not have been heard in Africa. And on and on and on. Nor have we even approached the absurd plot, complete with an Italian bimbo and a philatelic Erwin Rommel. Or the very chintzy special effects. Nope. My one line summary says it all. A really bad movie!