4 reviews
This takes place in 1962 right before the Cuban Missle Crisis. French intelligence agent Andre Devereaux (Frederick Stafford), who's working for the US, gets involved with finding out what the Russians are doing in Cuba. There's more to it but you'll be so bored you won't care.
Hard to believe Hitchcock did this. The story and characters are uninvolving (and unlikable), it moves far too slowly and it goes on at least half an hour too long. This is the kind of movie Hitch did so beautifully in the 1940s (like "Notorious" or "Foreign Correspondent") but it's pretty obvious his heart wasn't in this one. Also he said he was trying to use color to tell the story--he later admitted it didn't work. The most surprising thing about this is how badly it's directed! It's very flatly done. With the exception of one shooting it looks like something any hack director could have filmed.
Acting is pretty bad. Stafford has his moments as Devereaux and Roscoe Lee Browne and Karin Dor are very good in small roles--but that's it. Everybody else seems drained and walk through this stone-faced just reciting their lines. And seeing John Vernon as a Cuban is actually pretty hysterical! Hitcock himself called this a complete disaster. It was also an understandable critical and commercial failure. For Hitchcock completists only. One of Hitchcock's few bombs.
Hard to believe Hitchcock did this. The story and characters are uninvolving (and unlikable), it moves far too slowly and it goes on at least half an hour too long. This is the kind of movie Hitch did so beautifully in the 1940s (like "Notorious" or "Foreign Correspondent") but it's pretty obvious his heart wasn't in this one. Also he said he was trying to use color to tell the story--he later admitted it didn't work. The most surprising thing about this is how badly it's directed! It's very flatly done. With the exception of one shooting it looks like something any hack director could have filmed.
Acting is pretty bad. Stafford has his moments as Devereaux and Roscoe Lee Browne and Karin Dor are very good in small roles--but that's it. Everybody else seems drained and walk through this stone-faced just reciting their lines. And seeing John Vernon as a Cuban is actually pretty hysterical! Hitcock himself called this a complete disaster. It was also an understandable critical and commercial failure. For Hitchcock completists only. One of Hitchcock's few bombs.
I don't care who made it, TOPAZ is a dreadful film. The acting is terrible - John Forsythe and Frederick Stafford make Greg Morris and Peter Lupus in MISSION IMPOSSIBLE look like Olivier and Gielgud. John Vernon looks exactly like one of those stock Latin American revolutionaries that the IMF force overthrew every week. As a thriller, it simply does not thrill. The dialogue is execrable - the dubbing worse. The only interesting bits are when - mercifully - hardly anybody speaks. The blurb on the 2005 DVD describes TOPAZ as a 'riveting' and 'spellbinding espionage thriller.' By the end, 'the danger and the suspense builds to a heart-pounding conclusion in this lavish, globe-trotting thriller.' Ask for your money back - but you won't get it. I think Hitchcock is greatly over-rated: he made some great films, yes, but some terrible turkeys as well. If you want a great espionage film, try THE IPCRESS FILE, THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THE COLD, THE GOOD SHEPHERD, or the TV series of TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY and SMILEY'S PEOPLE...
- donaldking
- Jan 17, 2014
- Permalink
Topaz is like a James Bond film made for bureaucrats. The dry plot is told through dull performances by uninteresting characters, all while lacking Hitchcock's trademark wit and suspense. I wonder if anyone truly enjoys this movie.
- cricketbat
- Dec 30, 2018
- Permalink
- jboothmillard
- Apr 14, 2012
- Permalink