Marseille contrat

Considering this film stars Anthony Quinn, Michael Caine AND James Mason, you probably would expect even more from this movie. Well, it's not a bad film but clearly it could have been better had the script been more interesting.

Despite Michael Caine being listed first in the credits, he doesn't even appear in the film until the 25th minute. And, clearly, the star is Quinn as the story really centers on him and he's in much more of the movie.

The story is set in Europe and is about Steven Ventura (Quinn) and his hatred for Brizard (Mason). It seems Brizard is a drug lord and is responsible for the deaths of one of Steve's friends in the opening scene. But even though he is a US intelligence agent working for the Justice Department, Brizard seems legally untouchable. So, in desperation he hires a hitman to take out Brizard. Coincidentally, the killer turns out to be one of Steve's old friends, John Derey (Caine). So what's next? Watch the film.

The story looks real nice thanks to its location shooting throughout France. It also has a mildly interesting plot. But what kept it from being better for me was a decided lack of energy in the film....which is amazing considering all the killing, drugs and mayhem. I think the film's pacing tended to be too slow for the material. Still, it is interesting and worth seeing....even if Mason had a very odd French-ish accent!

The plot sounds intriguing and we know Caine can play a hit man, but he lacks any of the bite we saw as Harry Palmer. It was his mega busy period, and this was appears to have been just another gig.

James Mason is underused, having little to do,and Anthony Quinn, despite sharing several scenes with Caine, appears to be in a different film. He looks ill at ease throughout, and a nonsensical plot twist undermines his honest cop routine.

Considering the salary bill for just these three the studio could surely have hired a director who could breath some sort of life into the limp script, hang on, why was it green lighted with that script at all? A waste.

Police officer Steve Ventura has tried and failed to catch Jacques Brizard – a respectable businessman who deals drugs. In his frustration he hires a hitman to kill Brizard – the hitman turning out to be old friend John Deray. As Deray starts to get close to Brizard, Ventura strengthens his case.

I watched this back to back with another Michael Caine movie – Without a Clue. In that his presence lifted an average film into something better….however here he can't manage it. In fact, three big names can't do it. The plot is straightforward and is similar to many other 1970's thrillers. The action and the characters could also be in any other of hundreds of cheap thrillers. There are few scenes that make the film interesting – Deray showing how ruthless he is on top of a building site is one of the highlights, the car chase/romance is also interesting as it was copied (but extended) for Mission: Impossible 2.

Caine appears to be in a different movie from Quinn – he's happy go lucky, enjoying romantic dinners etc while Quinn is gritting it out on the streets with informers etc. It creates a split feel to the movie – but it's better when the two come together. Neither are good enough to make the film better than average – nor is James `The Voice' Mason, who looks like he's asleep for most of it.

Overall, there are plenty of good 1970's thrillers out there that contain these actors separately (Quinn in Across 110th Street for one) – here the three can't manage to lift this out of being average and a bit dull.

Unlike some other reviewers, I found this little known piece to be very entertaining. Yes, Tony Quinn over-emotes on occasion (e.g., poker scene) and his affair with Rita (Alexandra Stewart) goes undeveloped, but the story line itself is well paced, interesting and suspenseful. If you're looking for an esoteric, psychologically penetrating example of the crime drama genre, this film is probably not for you. It is, however, a 90 minute "straight, no chaser" crime caper with the obligatory chase scenes, double-crosses, romantic entanglements, etc. Is it Caine and Mason at their best? No, but they don't need to be to fulfill their contribution, individually and collectively, to the flow of the story line. Also, the not-so-well known French actors (to American audiences) cast in the film were up to the task at hand.

In conclusion, great camera shots of Paris, southern France and Marseille. In no small manner, they augmented the film's overall thrust and added an extra dimension of cinematic flavor.

I'll start by saying this is not a good film. This was probably good enough for audiences in the 1970s but it really creaks along today. The acting is often wooden. The cinematography makes poor use of the south of France location. James Mason makes no attempt to be play a French gangster and reverts to his usual film persona - he doesn't even bother with an accent. Antony Quinn is great though, particularly with the material he has to work with. His rage in the scene at the after work poker game is electric. The plot has holes but at least it sort of makes sense in the end. Overall it seems a waste of the talent in this film and the stunning locations. Having said all that I secretly enjoyed it.