NOTE IMDb
5,5/10
397
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA British foreign intelligence spy, posing as an executive of a toy company, has his cover blown, and enemy agents try to force him to reveal the identities of his fellow operatives.A British foreign intelligence spy, posing as an executive of a toy company, has his cover blown, and enemy agents try to force him to reveal the identities of his fellow operatives.A British foreign intelligence spy, posing as an executive of a toy company, has his cover blown, and enemy agents try to force him to reveal the identities of his fellow operatives.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Carl Möhner
- Inspector
- (as Carl Moehner)
Avis à la une
A surprisingly stylish spy flick, based in Munich and London.
It has a few twists (some of them predictable) but the aspect that intrigued me most was the information exchange.
It's all done with tremendous subtlety, and you could easily watch the entire film and miss most of the exchanges.
I had a similar experience with "Funeral in Berlin".
That's what I like about a spy film, when you can watch it superficially and miss what is really going on. So the film becomes a shill for real life spying, where the public see relative normality, but the spies, though present in the normal life of the public around them, are functioning on a completely different level.
I would have to watch this film several times to pick out and understand all of the communications.
The film was made in 1968, and is very much of that era (which I like).
It has a few twists (some of them predictable) but the aspect that intrigued me most was the information exchange.
It's all done with tremendous subtlety, and you could easily watch the entire film and miss most of the exchanges.
I had a similar experience with "Funeral in Berlin".
That's what I like about a spy film, when you can watch it superficially and miss what is really going on. So the film becomes a shill for real life spying, where the public see relative normality, but the spies, though present in the normal life of the public around them, are functioning on a completely different level.
I would have to watch this film several times to pick out and understand all of the communications.
The film was made in 1968, and is very much of that era (which I like).
It has zippy music, attractive locations and Camilla Sparv as an affable boytoy, but that world is not enough. Hits all the action man buttons of the 60s, race car driver, MI6, spy, playboy, and on. But he's not Bond and not Harry Palmer, and therein lies the problem.
Stephen Boyd miscast so the tone of the movie was not dark enough to sustain strong interest. The ending was good as she plays both Scott and Harris off each other and gets both of them, and her cohorts, out of the spy game. A better script would have concealed then revealed complex betrayals and alliances and, perhaps, who Sparv really worked for and to what purpose. Forty or so years later Casino Royale got it right.
Stephen Boyd miscast so the tone of the movie was not dark enough to sustain strong interest. The ending was good as she plays both Scott and Harris off each other and gets both of them, and her cohorts, out of the spy game. A better script would have concealed then revealed complex betrayals and alliances and, perhaps, who Sparv really worked for and to what purpose. Forty or so years later Casino Royale got it right.
Stephen Boyd, with all the on screen charisma of a G I Joe, is a spy-cum-toy manufacturer. Really. They go a long way round before revealing his espionage activities for sure, but we're clued in.
The great Michael Redgrave shows up about three-quarters of an hour into the piece and altogether racks up three short scenes. Too bad. He always has screen charisma.
Other interesting actors come and go, including Jane Merrow and Jeremy Kemp. The big baddie is the always interesting Leo McKern. With Redgrave on a short leash and Merrow, Kemp and McKern on the side of evil, the movie suffers a severe charisma imbalance.
The case is baffling, that's for sure. But after about an hour one loses interest in it.
Oh, Camilla Sparv, sex appeal's answer to vanilla, is on hand as Boyd's convenient main squeeze who quickly falls onto the hands of his enemies.
Being no Boyd fan, I had a tedious time waiting for Redgrave's paltry appearances.
The great Michael Redgrave shows up about three-quarters of an hour into the piece and altogether racks up three short scenes. Too bad. He always has screen charisma.
Other interesting actors come and go, including Jane Merrow and Jeremy Kemp. The big baddie is the always interesting Leo McKern. With Redgrave on a short leash and Merrow, Kemp and McKern on the side of evil, the movie suffers a severe charisma imbalance.
The case is baffling, that's for sure. But after about an hour one loses interest in it.
Oh, Camilla Sparv, sex appeal's answer to vanilla, is on hand as Boyd's convenient main squeeze who quickly falls onto the hands of his enemies.
Being no Boyd fan, I had a tedious time waiting for Redgrave's paltry appearances.
This film essentially involves a man by the name of "Philip Scott" (Stephen Boyd) using his position as an executive at a toy company as a cover for operating his own independent spy organization to help the British Secret Service in Europe. In this particular case he has been tasked to retrieve some microfilm from sources behind the Iron Curtain which detail Soviet missile technology. To that effect, this requires him to travel to both West Germany and Austria and while there he becomes attracted to a beautiful Swedish woman by the name of "Antonia 'Toni' Peters" (Camila Sparv) and while getting better acquainted with her also uses their relationship to further conceal his clandestine activities. What he doesn't know, however, is that another secret organization has developed suspicions about him and are following his every move with the hope of turning the tables on him to their own advantage as well. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was a rather dull and mundane spy film which seemed to focus too heavily upon quite normal and routine activities. Admittedly, both Stephen Boyd and Camila Sparv performed their roles in a solid manner but the overall lack of action and suspense was much too noticeable and for that reason I have rated this film accordingly. Average.
You expect a spy film to start with a bang,this starts with a whimper. Nothing happens for half an hour, when someone is killed. However both before and after the film concentrates interminable on the romance between Boyd and Sparv. Boyd is amiable enough but he is no Connery. This is one of the poorer attempts to ride on the coattails of the Bond films.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesDespite having being billed third and above the title in the main credits, Sir Michael Redgrave only has three scenes. Redgrave made this film at a time when he needed to make some money rather quickly because of a tax demand, and Stephen Boyd recommended strongly that he be cast; Redgrave had been a great help to Boyd when the latter was a struggling actor.
- ConnexionsReferenced in Changes (1970)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Assignment K?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Assignment K
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée
- 1h 37min(97 min)
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant