Julgamento de um Traidor

I liked this film; because even though the film is 50 years old, the picture provides a very interesting and vivid panorama of people and society during the Cold War.

I think this film also depicts very well the intellectual clash between Western- and Soviet Intelligence during the Cold War; both sides being guilty of unscrupulous and unethical conduct, by using innocent people as pawns to further their own respective agendas. On the other hand, these negative policies by Intelligence Agencies during the Cold War probably also helped a bit to avoid another world war; conventional diplomacy having failed between the West and the Soviet Union during that time - before the Cold War ended and the Iron Curtain was finally lifted. Regrettably though, it would seem that those times are not quite over yet. Although spies and diplomats are much more gently disposed and peace loving than in the Cold War; there is still some work to do concerning International Peacebuilding and diplomacy. Hence we should do everything in our power to make sure that human rights are no longer infringed upon; and to convince British, American, Russian, French, German and Chinese Intelligence agencies - and all other Intelligence Agencies in the world - to get those rogue factions from the International Intelligence Community in line, so that human rights can fully be upheld - and that all intelligence agencies in the world finally make peace with each other, so that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) can be manifested in the International Community.

On another note, I think this film shows very well that gender issues are very much a topic in the intelligence community. In this film the British MI5 agent John Shay (George Peppard) suspects a colleague of his to be a double agent, who happens to be the husband of a girl he loves - and this causes all kinds of problems in the close-knit MI5 intelligence community; with three highly trained British agents wanting to have a romantic relationship with the kind and lovely Sarah; played by Joan Collins. As it turns out, Sarah is a bit of a Femme fatale; having a bit of fun with MI5 agents - perhaps because out of boredom, or perhaps because Sarah is not as kind and lovely as she appears to be, having some unresolved psychological issues - even though she is not a Russian spy, but just a misguided soul, lacking the mystic power to manifest joy, love and harmony in her life.

In short, this is a great film with a remarkable resemblance of today's world; highlighting human frailties in the Intelligence Community - of yesterday and today :)

I recently watched The Executioner (1970) on YouTube after spotting the movie poster at Alamo Drafthouse. The film follows a British secret service agent assigned to determine whether one of his colleagues is a double agent. Despite being warned not to investigate, he becomes personally invested when he discovers that a former lover is now the suspected agent's wife.

Directed by Sam Wanamaker (Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger), the film stars George Peppard (Breakfast at Tiffany's), Joan Collins (Dynasty), Judy Geeson (The Lords of Salem), and Charles Gray (Diamonds Are Forever).

This is one of those films that follows the Bond formula-espionage, beautiful women, and larger-than-life obstacles for the hero to overcome, all while maintaining a suave and sophisticated demeanor. The cast fits their roles well and is entertaining, though they don't quite command the screen like in a Bond movie. The villain also could have been a bit more imposing. That said, the film's aesthetics-attire, cars, planes, backdrops, and props-fully immerse you in its world. The storyline is fairly straightforward but engaging, and the action sequences are well executed.

Overall, The Executioner is a solid espionage thriller that fans of the genre should check out. I'd give it a 7/10.

Severe and merciless penalties should be given to people who dare to write a screenplay that is titled "The Executioner" and then subsequently deliver a film that is indescribably boring and almost doesn't contain any action whatsoever; let alone executions! I read in a few reviews that this is the more intelligent espionage thriller… You know, the type of film that gives realistic insights in the true world of secret agents rather than the contemporary James Bond movies that were all about stunts, flamboyance and gadgetry. Well, it may or may not be true that "The Executioner" is realistic but it's certainly NOT entertaining and certainly NOT the least bit memorable, unlike the vast majority of James Bond episodes. To make things even worse: the movie starts out extremely promising, with Peppard strolling around in the garden of a luxurious villa where just a bloody massacre took place. There are bloodied corpses left, right and at the bottom of the pool. Unfortunately, the boring 100 minutes that follow are a giant flashback clarifying the building up towards this massacre. American actor George Peppard depicts British secret agent John Shay. He explains at least a dozen times that his Yankee accent comes from the fact that he was raised in America. Shay suspects that his colleague Adam Booth is a double- agent who betrays the Queen by passing secret information to the Russians. Shay's superiors don't believe him, or perhaps they are protecting Booth, and he even gets suspended. Shay remains certain that he's right and seeks for further evidence in Greece, although it may also just be that he's jealous, because Booth is married to the beautiful Sarah with whom Shay once had an affair. "The Executioner" is a long – seemingly endless, in fact – and dreadfully tedious series of pointless dialogues and newly introduced characters of which you don't know who they are and why they are relevant to the plot. There isn't any suspense or mystery, and you don't feel the least bit connected with any of the lead characters, especially John Shay because he behaves like an arrogant and stubborn little boy. I was never a big fan of George Peppard, apart from his roles in the movies "Damnation Alley" and "Race for the Yankee Zephyr". His performance here is one of the most monotonous and indifferent I've ever seen. I can't write anything positive about "The Executioner", except that Judy Geeson is cute and that it's always a pleasure to watch Charles Gray (although his role is immensely dull as well)

Espionage dramas which depend on bureaucratic characters engaged in prolonged conversations rarely make good movies and this is no exception. It's competent but never sparks any real interest and the plot seems a bit muddled.

There are a number of good names in the cast and they do the best they can with pedestrian material. Top billing goes to George Peppard who plays an Englishman but his American accent is explained by saying that he grew up in the United States. He's involved, in a vaguely romantic way, with two different women -- Joan Collins and Judy Geeson -- but not much comes of this. The ads hint at some hot bedroom action between Peppard and Collins but most of these scenes must have been left on the cutting room floor.

Location work in Greece and Istanbul is, like the rest of the movie, strictly routine.

I watched this film last night on YouTube and although there was a lot to like...the film also seemed choppy...especially at the beginning. As a result, the context for what was happening felt missing for some time as things were not clearly spelled out by the script.

George Peppard is VERY oddly cast as a British secret service agent. The film says he was British but was raised in America in order to explain his lack of a British accent...which he never even approximated. I don't know why they did this...perhaps they were thinking adding an American would make the film more marketable...but also confusing.

The story begins with the communists capturing a bunch of British agents. Obviously someone was a traitor but when John Shay (Peppard) wants to investigate this, his superiors are strangely antagonistic towards him. So, he decides on his own to investigate...and this ends up meaning killing the man he suspects of being the turncoat. What else? See the movie.

Peppard's character is easy to like or hate. On the negative side, he's extremely terse and you learn very little about him. But, on the positive, you might assume an agent would be exactly that way...in order to prevent them from saying the wrong thing.

So is it any good? Well, I liked the story but just felt that Peppard was a bit too flat. Not a terrible film by any stretch...but I couldn't help but think it could have been better.