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.
Regardless of the differences, I continue to regard the film as one of my most favourites.