L'agente speciale Mackintosh

John Huston directed this little-seen thriller that stars Paul Newman as Joseph Reardon, a member of British Intelligence sent on an undercover mission by his boss Mr. Mackintosh(played by Harry Andrews) in a prison where he is given a fictitious criminal background in order to infiltrate a criminal gang where the leaders are imprisoned. He assists in their eventual escape which leads from Ireland to Malta. His contact(played by Dominique Sanda) is a beautiful but aloof woman who has her own personal reasons for the assignment, which includes a Parliament member(played by James Mason) who isn't what he pretends to be... OK espionage thriller with good cast and direction, though the plot does seem overly complicated at times.

A well-made espionage thriller, THE MACKINTOSH MAN has all the necessary elements for a real knockout spy yarn – only it's never quite as involving as it should be. The screenplay by highly-respected writer Walter Hill features a solid premise and plenty of interesting twists and turns, and the various UK locations are used to great effect, bringing a character of their own to the film. The cast is also well-chosen, and portray their roles with respectable conviction, yet something still seems off about the picture. It's almost as if the whole enterprise lack that special "oomph" that is necessary to really sell a spy picture.

Perhaps the problem is that, after years of James Bond movies and various Cold War thrillers, too many of the film's elements have simply been done before and done better, and the ominous feeling of déjà vu is too immense for the film to survive. Or maybe the problem is that we expect a lot more from a director with clout of John Huston, who seems to take a strangely apathetic approach to the material which makes the film's recycled elements feel even more trying. For whatever reason, the film never seems to grip us in the way a good thriller is supposed to. As a whole, THE MACKINTOSH MAN is a fine film for a rainy evening, but it stands as not only a wasted opportunity, but also as possibly the least distinctive film of director Huston.

John Huston ("The African Queen" "The Maltese Falcon" "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre") directs this spy thriller scripted by Walter Hill ("The Driver" "48 Hrs." "Undisputed") which stars a top tier cast that includes Paul Newman, Dominique Sanda, James Mason, and a host of British actors who you're sure to recognize. There's also photography by Oscar winning cinematographer Oswald Morris and music by multiple Oscar winning composer Maurice Jarre. Sadly, what ends up on screen is dullsville. Newman plays a British secret agent who pretends to be an Australian criminal who later pretends to be Canadian, in order to infiltrate a secret spy organization run by villainous James Mason. The dullness of the film may be explained by some behind-the-scenes politics. Walter Hill was in the process of suing Warner Bros. but came to an agreement to adapt this book, which he halfheartedly did in order to complete his obligation. Hill later stated he only wrote the first half of the film and the rest was re-written by Huston and others, with the script not even completed two weeks into shooting. Cinematographer Oswald Morris also reported that Huston was rather disinterested in the film, showing up late to set and that Morris and crew were the ones who had to set up the shots for the day and catch up the unprepared Huston when he did finally show up. Newman was also reportedly disappointed at Huston's lack of enthusiasm for the project. Given all that, it's understandable that this spy thriller is rather lifeless. Still, Mason and Newman are compulsively watchable and even a disinterested Huston is still a better than most, so although lackluster, "The MacKintosh Man" is still watchable. Also, I think this is probably the first and only time you'll ever see Paul Newman coldcock a dog and drown it.

Hitchcock appears to be the ghost that is haunting John Huston in this flick. Or should we say that it is Huston's homage to Hitchcock that we have here, and which seems to either spice up, or overburden the film, depending on who the viewer is. The cinematography, lowkey brown color palette and restrained performances -- allowing the vivid "action" to move the plot-- all have shades of the later Hitchcock movies like "Topaz" or the one with Newman himself in it, "Torn Curtain." In fact Hitchcock made only one more film after the 1973 date of "Mackintosh Man," so we are witnessing something which could be interpreted as an effort on Huston's part to continue that legacy. Some specific parallels are, for example, Newman's struggle in the river to strangle the killer-dog set on him during his escape echoing the struggle in the farmhouse to kill the Russian agent ("Torn Curtain"). Or the mad car chase over rocky Irish roads by Newman and Sanda, mimicking the inevitable car chases patented by Hitch in various of his early b/w films, such as "The Man who Knew too Much (w/ Donat)" or "Young and Innocent".

Another parallel can be seen in the casting. Besides Newman himself, there is Huston's selection of the mysterious Dominique Sanda, one of Europe's most sensuous stars, whose appeal mirrors Hitchcock's obsession with the cool blonde beauty of Grace Kelly, Eva Marie Saint or Tippi Hedren.

Then, too, we have the eloquent James Mason in a late role commanding the opening of the film in the House of Lords by holding forth in the grand manner. But we should guess that he is here a Hitchcockian anti-hero, one in the mold of Phillip Vandamm from Hitch's monumental "North by Northwest." More parallels could be drawn, but for the mise-en-scene, Huston does one up on Hitch by actually filming in Ireland and Malta.

As for the plot it appears to have the tempting multilayered complexity of a typical English thriller, such as those in which Michael Caine appeared before he was swallowed up by Hollywood. If there are plot densities, we are after all, dealing with agents and double-agents, and things can get knotted up. In what other country than England could upperclass spies -- traitors-- be celebrated in literature and movies like the agents Philby or Blunt? Newman's adversaries are gentlemen, but not what they seem to be. We even get an idea of what an English prison is like and the quantities of laundry that they do. Last of all, who is Mrs. Smith? A name deliberately chosen for its opaqueness. Is she convincing as Mackintosh's daughter, or is she merely an agent, and not even a double agent? Yes, there are holes in the plot, but overall, the performances and Newman's Great Escape make up for the plot weaknesses.

Of four ****, three and a half. Still a must for fans of the director Huston, or the stars Newman, Mason or Sanda, and the many supporting stalwarts of British b/w postwar movies and Masterpiece Theatre productions.

While never actively bad, this thriller just isn't exceptional. The first half isn't bad (we keep wondering why Newman is doing these things, and we wonder where he's going and what's going to happen), though it somehow lacks "oomph" to everything. In the second half, it starts to get dull. You won't be clear on everything in the end, and the climax came off more as a whimper than a bang. Nowhere near the worst movie in the world, but you can give it a miss despite Huston directing and Newman starring. This didn't do very well at the box office when it first came out, and it's easy to see why.