Enquête à Venise

A private detective is sent to Italy by an insurance company to locate a man so that he may be rewarded for his gallantry during WWII. However, soon it becomes obvious that this is all a ruse and they want to find the man for ulterior motives. Yet, despite this and a group of killers who want to stop him, the handsome detective (Richard Todd) doggedly continues his investigation in the town of Venice. Will he find what he's looking for...and, does the audience really care?

It's odd, but for a mystery/suspense film, "The Assassin" is amazingly unexciting. Most of the problem is that the film is so very talky. Again and again, instead of SHOWING the plot unfold, the film relies on HEARING people talking about it--a very static way to do such a film. The other problem is that although Richard Todd is a suave and handsome guy, he just seemed to sophisticated and nice for such a role. It played very much like if Dirk Bogarde or Cary Grant had played the part--all good actors but all too smooth and 'nice'. Overall, it's not a terrible film but it sure could have been a lot better.

Many of these detective series had to be formulaic. That is the nature of a series. So if you want to differentiate, one strategy is to introduce exotic locations. When this was made, that was still rare. The location has to be highlighted in the name, so we have Charlie Chan, the Saint, the Falcon and so in such and such a city.

The place here is Venice. Unfortunately it is not captured well. For some reason, the texture of the city escapes the usual camera. (I did like the color you got in the Clooney "The Job" and the Bond "XXX").

So the setting is largely wasted by the clumsy camera, except for a visit to a Murano glassworks. The glass factories are located on an island near the city because of the ancient fear of fire. These for hundreds of years have been a wonder of the world, once secret, now a bit tired. When this film was made, Chihuly had not yet brought Murano to our attention and the polluting effect of tourism had not occluded its magic.

It is only a few minutes in this otherwise ordinary adventure. And it is just background motion. But you might as I, hold it a dear experience to just see.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

This film, although not as well-crafted as THE THIRD MAN or THE MAN BETWEEN, is definitely in their league; it's a taut, post-war mystery in which a European city (in this case, Venice) is one of the most important characters. The main human character, Edward Mercer (Richard Todd), is a Hitchcockian protagonist: a man trying to prove his innocence in ever more dire circumstances.

The plot does get convoluted at times, but director Ralph Thomas always keeps your eyes interested with wonderful location shots. The cast is solid, and Sid James is given a rare dramatic role. The ending, also with Hitchcockian overtones, is thrilling and a fine bit of camera work and direction. (May I recommend that after you finish the film, go back and watch the first few minutes again. You'll see how cleverly the motifs of the film are tied together.)

PI Richard Todd comes to Venice to locate a man who rescued an American flyer during the Second World War; there's a reward for him. It turns out he's dead.

Except that people take a lot of interest in Todd when the bleeding man who came to him saying he knew how to find the dead man, turns up dead himself. After Todd explains himself to local Chief of Police George Coulouris, Todd goes hunting for the dead man, and finds clues. It all leads up to the man's widow, a local nobleman, and a assassination.

It's certainly competently written and performed, but the real star of this movie by Ralph Thomas -- who was about to make his bones with DOCTOR IN THE HOUSE -- is the city of Venice, shot in its black-and-white glory by Ernest Steward. Steward had become a regular DP the previous year, and would stick with Thomas for a few years; this would lead him into the mirthful more of the Carry On films, and along career in which he was never able to distinguish himself again. Ah, well. Sometimes a steady job is better than fading glory.

As another reviewer says this is something of an underrated film. More so since it was made in 1952. At that time exchange controls would have limited the amount of filming that could be done overseas and so much of it was studio filmed in England.

The story is intricate and the full meaning is not revealed until the final 20 minutes. If Venice seems harsh and cold its very much in the recovery from war mode yet the back drop is excellently atmospheric. The absence of tourists is refreshing. The films high contrast back and white rendition is also noteworthy.

Good cast....

Not hard to see why some say Bond meets 3rd man! Even some classy looking femmes fa tales!