User reviews

Topaz was the third from the last of the great Alfred Hitchcock's films and in those last few films Hitch eschewed using big American box office names. No doubt he'd come to the conclusion that his was the biggest box office name on the credits.

But if the leading and many of the supporting players were not known to American audiences they were certainly known to French audiences. Dany Robin, Frederick Stafford, Phillippe Noiret, Michel Subor, Michel Piccoli all have had substantial careers in the French cinema.

Topaz is certainly an international thriller with the action going from Copenhagen, to Harlem, to Cuba, and finally Paris. Only Cuba was not shot on actual ___location for obvious reasons.

The film is based on a spy novel surrounding the Cuban Missile Crisis. A Russian defector whose defection with his family is very nicely shot in Copenhagen hints at some major problems coming our way in the Pearl of the Antillies. Our biggest problem though is that because of the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion, we've got no real intelligence on the ground in Cuba. What to do?

Well if you're John Forsythe there's been a reason you've been cultivating the French for years. He goes to Frederick Stafford of French intelligence and asks him to find out what's happening in Cuba.

History in 1962 bares witness to what was happening in Cuba at that time, but also Stafford is concerned the Russians have a spy real high up in the French government, code name, Topaz.

There's a romantic angle here to, so very French. Stafford makes use of his mistress, a Cuban girl played by Karin Dor who wife Dany Robin has reasons to be suspicious of. Then again she's not sitting home waiting for the grass to grow under her feet. She's having a fling with Michel Piccoli who is a friend of her husband.

International Geopolitics and romantic affairs are all tied together in this novel which Hitchcock serves up with his usual touch.

What a sad end both the leads in this film had. Frederick Stafford was killed in a plane crash in 1979 and Dany Robin and her husband died in an apartment house fire in 1995. Truly a cursed film.

Besides those mentioned look for good performances by John Vernon as a Castro aide and wannabe and from Roscoe Lee Browne who's an operator for French Intelligence in Harlem. I kid you not.

It's not one of Alfred Hitchcock's best films, but Topaz is entertaining enough and Hitchcock fans won't be disappointed.

"Topaz" is one of Hitchcock's least satisfying films, yet the same time it's one of his most interesting ones, as well. Usually people don't remember it, maybe because there are no famous Hitchcock stars. Either the director didn't get any, or he didn't want them, because the audiences should tightly concentrate on the complex plot.

The film clearly divides into three parts. The one in the middle, which takes place in Cuba, is the best of them. It involves the films most memorable scene, the beautifully photographed murder. Weakest part is the last one, where you might get confused with the messy intrigues.

There are too many characters in the movie, which leaves many of them just bystanders, for example the worried wife (Dany Robin), who doesn't do really anything. The films brightest spot is Karin Dor, who gives an excellent performance as the beautiful Juanita. Too bad that her screen time is quite short. And the ending climax shines with its absence: the film ends like bumping into a wall.

While Leon Uris' book is a good read, Hitchcock's adaptation of the book for cinema captures much of the book's selling points. The killing of Juanita by Rico Parra is central to book and the film. The book has a sensual scene where Juanita distracts Parra to allow Andre to escape before she is killed. In the film, Hitchcock dispenses with the sexual distraction to go directly to the killing. The killing of Juanita captured by the overhead camera, shows the purple gown spreading in the floor as blood would have spread. No blood is shown—only the gown. What a brilliant shot from Hitchcock and cameraman Jack Hildyard! The second remarkable facet of the movie is the performance of Phillip Noiret as a French bureaucrat and spy. The lunch sequence (a typical Hitchcock food event) may look simple but the montage of shots capturing Noiret's apparent interest in the food than the conversation is truly engaging. Noiret is a fine actor. So is Michel Piccoli. The two of them outshine Frederick Stafford and John Forsythe.

The third most fascinating shot is post-torture interrogation of Mrs Mendoza—the whispered response from a posture that reminds one of Michelangelo's Pieta—with her dead husband replacing the dead Christ.

Hitchcock's perseverance with "marriage" continues. Andre blandly tells his daughter of his wife "She left me. I did not leave her" after a tryst with his lover in Havana. The Michel Piccoli character says of Andre's wife "Andre, his wife and I were very close. She married him." We know later that Andre's wife was cheating on him as she recognizes the Piccoli character's phone number at his secret love nest.

The defection sequence in Copenhagen might look clumsy—but Hitchcock's style is everywhere—faces in mirrors, close up of a porcelain figure about to be dropped with no music in the background, etc. What was most amusing was the criticism of the American espionage agents: "We would have done it better" and the exchange of words by the defector in Washington, D.C. Andre's outburst to his bosses on the outcome of French intervention in the defection would lead to the defector's assassination is equally poignant had the film ended with the French spy defecting to Russia (one of the alternate endings).

Finally, Hitchcock's use of the newspaper headlines during key scenes in the background was interesting: The Pieta shot had the newspaper shot in the background and the newspaper left behind on a bench in Paris is the final shot. The alternate endings—the duel and the departure of the spies to two cold-warring countries would not have served well as well the suicide of the spy suggested by the gunshot in his house.

Good but no great Hitch film that maintains suspense level , including constant shift of scenarios keeps spectators on their toes . A French intelligence agent named Andre Deveraux (Frederick Stafford) befriends American official called Michael Nordstrom (John Forsythe) and both of whom become involved in the Cold War politics to dig out info , first with uncovering the events leading up to the 1962 Cuban Missle Crisis, and then back to France to discover a secret conspiracy . Andre travels to La Habana to obtain evidences of the Missiles , there meets his lover named Juanita Cordoba (Karin Dor who wears marvelous gowns by Edith Head and dubbed her own voice in the German Version) who is secretly embroiled with a local underground resistance whilst also being entangled in another way with Parra (John Vernon) . Meanwhile, an ex-KGB official defector flees to USA where he is interviewed and tells him about Topaz, the codename for a group of French officials in high circles who work for the Soviet Union , as the protagonists attempt to break up an international Russian spy ring (Philippe Noiret , Michel Piccoli) infiltrated in French government .

This suspenseful Hitchcock film contains cloak-and-dagger intrigue , whirlwind plot , thrills , twists and results to be pretty entertaining . Hitchcock takes you behind the actual headlines to expose the most explosive spy scandal of the century, though this was reportedly one of his most unhappy directing jobs , being Alfred's biggest failure , as it cost approximately $4,000,000 to make and received only $1,000,000 at the box office. According to Donald Spoto's book "The Art of Alfred Hitchcock: Fifty Years Of His Motion Pictures", Universal Pictures executives forced this project on Alfred Hitchcock. Overlong film as a running at 143 minutes, this is Alfred Hitchcock's longest film . The first draft of the script was hired Leon Uris to adapt his own novel , but Uris didn't care for Hitchcock's eccentric sense of humor, nor did he appreciate the director's habit of monopolizing all of his time as they worked through a script. Hitchcock was disappointed that Uris seemed to ignore his requests to humanize the story's villains , in his opinion the novel painted them as cardboard monsters , with only a partial draft completed, Uris left the film. Alfred declared it unshootable at the last minute and called in Samuel A. Taylor , writer of Vertigo , to rewrite it from scratch , as some scenes were written just hours before they were shot. According to Alfred Hitchcock, this was another of his experimental movies ; in addition to the dialogue, the plot is revealed through the use of colors, predominantly red, yellow and white , he admits that this did not work out. Good support cast mostly formed by European actors who give nice interpretations such as : Dany Robin as Nicole Devereaux , Vernon as Rico Parra , gorgeous Karin Dor as Juanita Cordoba , Michel Piccoli a Jacques Granville , Philippe Noiret as Henri Jarre , Claude Jade as Michèle Picard and Roscoe Lee Browne as Philippe Dubois . Of course , habitual Director Cameo , as Alfred Hitchcock appears about 30 minutes in at the airport getting out of a wheelchair . Emotive and sensitive score by Maurice Jarre , Jean Michel Jarre's father ; knowing that he had no ear for music, Alfred Hitchcock didn't even bother listening to Maurice Jarre's completed score for the film, slotting it onto the images without a quibble . Colorful and bright cinematography by excellent cameraman Jack Hildyard who photographed 'Bridge on the river Kai' and David Lean's usual . Appropriate production design by Henry Bumstead , Hitch's ordinary . This is a medium-to-rare Hitchcock picture in which was shot three versions with completely different endings , all are included in the Laserdisc , video , DVD and BluRays reissues.

.

It's 1962, and the United States suspects the Russians are getting too cozy with the Cubans. French agent Frederick Stafford (as Andre Devereaux) is recruited, by the Americans, to find out what's going on between the Socialist allies - and, as it turns out, the Soviets are secretly installing offensive nuclear missiles in Cuba. Go figure. Which country knows what, and how much they know, leads the film's characters to a spy ring called "Topaz". Surprising "romantic" entanglements move the plot along.

The sexual affairs, storyline, and "___location" footage are only 50% plausible; the "multiple choice" endings are on even shakier ground. "The Airport" seems to be the current authorized (by Universal) ending, but none of the three work because there is no climatic pursuit, or conversation about the revelatory love affair involving the "Topaz" leader. Still, this is a marvelously directed and nicely performed film. Director Alfred Hitchcock knows how to shoot light bulbs, staircases, and Karin Dor in a purple dress.

******* Topaz (12/17/69) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Frederick Stafford, Dany Robin, Michel Subor, Michel Piccoli

The film begins very good with the Russian family brought safely from the States although the father not to sure. There is a moment of suspense and thrilling but it rather becomes less thrilling. The stuff about the Cuban missile crisis is interesting, not filmed there of course, and then it becomes not so wonderful although Karin Dor is great, alas not so Frederick Stafford who has a big role but is wooden. At the end it rather goes on although it is good to see Michel Piccoli and Phillippe Noiret and would have been happy see them earlier.

While Topaz might not be in the top tier of Hitchcock's films, it is nonetheless a very engrossing espionage thriller. The aura of the Cold War intrigue in the various locales of America, Europe, and Cuba provides a very satisfying international flavor to the picture. The cast, although not star-studded, is more than competent. I felt myself transfixed on every development in the plot and felt that I enjoyed a two worthwhile hours of entertainment. 8/10.

Clearly one of Alfred Hitchcock's more experimental movies, "Topaz" focuses on Frenchman Andre Devereaux (Frederick Stafford) getting involved in espionage right before the Cuban Missile Crisis. The plot is actually somewhat convoluted. Something that nowadays makes us cringe is the casting of white people as Hispanics. An example is John Vernon - that's right, crotchety old Dean Wormer! - as Cuban agent Rico Parra. I have to admit that the only other cast members whom I recognized were Philippe Noiret and John Forsythe...unless you also count the footage of Fidel Castro speaking. All in all, sort of confusing, but worth seeing.

I guess judgement? Because when it comes to Hitchcock, he himself set a standard that some felt he didn't reach anymore in certain movies and towards the end of his career also. Now depending on how you see the spy films in general, especially ones that are not as ... I guess fascinating, you might have quite a few issues with this movie and its pacing.

But Hitchcock still made something out of a story that is quite hard to handle to say the least. Based on Cuba and the crisis, this may feel like he tried to dabble with something his fans or audiences in general had not interest in. But even when you can say he wasn't on top of his game, even when he had to change and or cut his movie (I watched the longer cut, not the one that was originally released) or change his ending (he actually filmed them, not like in Birds where you only had script notes on a different way the movie could have ended) because of test screenings ... well mostly nothing too good can come of that. Interesting that he had not the final word - at least not here aparently.

Flawed as it is, it still is suspensful it still manages to keep you hooked, if you let it.

This is a review of the 2 hour, 16 minute version. After a Russian defector provides them with a lead, American and French intelligence agents have to find out the secret of Operation Topaz. I haven't read the novel, so I can't rate this as an adaptation. The script is a letdown... when I tell you that this is a Cold War spy-thriller complete with gadgets(and just try not to smirk when you see the size of a remote control back then), you'll think it's much more exciting than it is. In reality, it's kinda chatty(granted, the dialog can be really good and clever), the climax is weak and the pacing is uneven. With that said, Hitchcock does work his magic, and this is filmed and edited very nicely(in spite of obeying some traditions of storytelling). The suspense and tension are masterful; the pay-off is reasonable. At its best, this is gripping. Basically everyone delivers a great performance; I don't know any of these actors, and would say that two of them look far too alike and are easy to confuse for one another. Also, not everyone supposed to be Cuban actually looks it. At all. Juanita is stunning and hot. Other female characters, especially the younger ones, are made to look curious and naive. It's cool that they actually clearly went here, to Denmark, Copenhagen, to shoot the beginning. There is a little bloody violence and disturbing content in this. The DVD comes with a half hour long documentary with Leonard Maltin(that I will review on its own page here on the site), three(well, two) alternative endings(they're decent), storyboards, production photographs and the trailer(possibly the least memorable for any picture by Alfred, R.I.P.). I recommend this to big fans. 7/10

Topaz is good movie with steady taut pace and well planned out scenes. The start is slow and takes sometime to get to the main plot but gives continuity and credibility to the story . Once the story gains momentum it moves at steady but not boring pace. Some of the shots are brilliant and go on to show genius of Hitchcock. I believe the problem is in the second part of movie, when action takes place in France. The screenplay gets slack, the editing is jarring and ending is abrupt and unsatisfactory. I watched the movie on DVD and saw all the three endings.All seemed inadequate. Overall I enjoyed the movie and was riveted till last 15 min or so. I believe it should be seen at least once.

So I just got done watching Topaz (1969) for the first time and it was good enough, but it was still a little disappointing coming from Alfred Hitchcock.

Positives for Topaz (1969): It was interesting watching a movie about the Cold War directed by Alfred Hitchcock. The performances from the cast were all very good and these are people who I have never seen. And finally, there is some decent enough spy espionage things going on in this movie.

Negatives for Topaz (1969): This movie is way too long and that's something I haven't said about a lot of Alfred Hitchcock's movies. Usually, this guy is a master with the pacing in his movies, but the runtime with this movie feels stretched out for no reason. Unfortunately because of that decision, I ended up losing interest in watching this movie multiple times throughout the runtime. I also barely remembered anything that happened in this movie.

Overall, Topaz (1969) is a little better than Torn Curtains (1966), but it was still a disappointing movie to watch especially coming from Alfred Hitchcock.

Hitchcock ventures into politics in this spy drama and it doesn't really work to perfection. Part of the problem is that at this stage in his life, we had such incredible expectations for his movies. Here he thrusts us into the middle of the Cuban missile crisis, creating danger for the principles involved. The whole point is to find evidence of the wrong-doing of the communists and bring it to the world. A Castro like dictator is at the center and when things go wrong it costs people their lives. I think that the shortcoming here is dealing with newsworthy issues and contemporary history. I don't know that Hitchcock ever got that specific in any of his other movies. Obviously, he has done spy dramas before but they don't get into caricatures of political leaders.

When the "Master of Suspense was Nearing the End of a Long and Highly Acclaimed Career,

He Showed Signs of Weariness, Ill-Health, and an Atypical Loss of Interest In His Well Honed Craft .

He Schooled His Peers on Utilizing the Many Manipulations and Machinations that Movie-Making Offered Creative and Talented Directors. Through Most of His Career He was on the Cutting-Edge, Laser-Focused on Cinema as Art, Propaganda, and Entertainment.

Hitch's Waning Years, Post "Psycho" (1960), had the Hitchcock "Name" Showing Signs of Severe Criticism from Fans and Critics that All of a Sudden the Director's Director was Being Whispered as an "Out of Touch", Former Movie-Making "God", Slipping and was Now Vulnerable as as Imperfect.

Almost Un-Utterable and Considered Formerly Blasphemous Among Film-Buffs, Now Becoming a Flawed Film-Maker that was No Longer the Reliable "Hitch".

The 60's and On were Not Kind to Conqueror and "Topaz" was One of those Films Sighted as Front Row Evidence that the "King is Dead".

It's a Minor Work from a Major Artist.

It Suffers from Many Things.

A Detached Director in the Beginnings of Major Health Problems. Meddling from the Money-Men.

The Changing Times and Trends.

The Overload of the Spy-Genre and the Public Losing the Fascination.

The Movie is at Best "By-the-Numbers" Hitchcock that didn't Add Up. The Film has an Outstanding Slick and Seek Look that Hitch Practically Invented. A Few Stand-Out and Interesting Scenes. But Overall it seems Dated, Flat, and Ho-Hum.

However, All Hitchcock Films are... Worth a Watch (this one with low-expectations)

As cold war films go, this is unheralded and certainly far better than the more recent film that covered the same subject, the Cuban Missile Crisis.

A Frenchman is co-opted to do some spying work for the Americans in Cuba and, in what is largely an unheralded cast, you are absolutely gripped as he works to uncover exactly what is going on with a Russians inflitrating the French secret service at the same time.

The casting of the Cuban characters really did impress, as they were very Castro-esque.

Not a usual Hitchcock thriller, but very well done all the same.

I am fond of "old", Cold War spy movies and I try to watch/re-watch them bit by bit. True, they have multiple similar type of characters and solutions, particularly with the entrance of James Bond movies, but in the event of smooth plot and pleasant performances, you will not have blah feelings. I can't remember I have seen Topaz before, but, on the alike many other viewers here, I was not "put off" by the name of Alfred Hitchcock; as I knew the plot briefly, I did not expect any thrilling suspension in the style of Psycho.

Nevertheless, I liked the movie in general, particularly direction and cinematography; as for the cast, there were no excelling performances, Frederick Stafford as André Devereaux was not very charismatic, and the French actors made conversations in English even if talking to themselves (a feature seldom visible in recent movies where dubbing or subtitles are used in scenes concerned). The plot was okay as well, especially the places I have visited, but decades later, and if we consider that the Cuban-Western crisis is not totally over until now... The events were nicely round-up, twists were explained at some point, and general logic was maintained throughout the movie. And last but not least: Topaz is a color movie, enabling to enjoy beautiful landscapes and city space.