Featured Audience Ratings

• Chris W

  
  Well, considering that this was based on some works by W. Somerset Maugham, directed by Alfred Hitchcock, and starred John Gielgud and Peter Lorre that it would be one terrific WWI spy thriller. Surprisingly as it turns out, this film is pretty bad. It's bland, dull, but worst… More
  Well, considering that this was based on some works by W. Somerset Maugham, directed by Alfred Hitchcock, and starred John Gielgud and Peter Lorre that it would be one terrific WWI spy thriller. Surprisingly as it turns out, this film is pretty bad. It's bland, dull, but worst of all boring. Gielgud looks bored and uninterested, Lorre feels out of place, and the plot (three agents join up to take out an undercover spy, but things get complicated when two of them suffer crises of conscience) should be awesome, but I just couldn't get involved or care about it. On top of that, the poicture and sound quality are both really pretty bad at times. I know that not everything Hitch did was good (at least), but this is just alarmingly terrible. It's as if while making this he had overdosed on apathy pills and stopped trying. The big train crash climax isn't great, mostly because of the silly and bad effects, but it at least got my attention since it was something happening, instead of lots of nothing taking place. Even if you're a Hitch diehard, just spare yourself a mess and skip this.

• AJ V

  
  I love Lorre, but his character wasn't that great in this movie. Plus, I didn't get the plot. Maybe I should see it again, but the movie quality is so horrible it's hard to watch.

• jay n

  
  Decent early Hitchcock with all his classic elements here but also still in their nascent form. As with most of his beginning films the picture itself is very dark and murky, probably due to age of the film and budget constraints at the time. Good performances from all the cast, Lorre… More
  Decent early Hitchcock with all his classic elements here but also still in their nascent form. As with most of his beginning films the picture itself is very dark and murky, probably due to age of the film and budget constraints at the time. Good performances from all the cast, Lorre stands out as usual.

• Bruce B

  
  You have to love really classic Hitchcock to enjoy this. The usual Hitchcock Twist, easy to guess as I did half way through. Its from 1936, opening Credits, had Ireland free State listed. A very Young Robert Young and Peter Lorre. What shade is Lorre??? Anyway a Spy vs Spy Thriller,… More
  You have to love really classic Hitchcock to enjoy this. The usual Hitchcock Twist, easy to guess as I did half way through. Its from 1936, opening Credits, had Ireland free State listed. A very Young Robert Young and Peter Lorre. What shade is Lorre??? Anyway a Spy vs Spy Thriller, film was decent quality. It came with 11 other hitchcock movies. 2 1/2 stars.

• Mike T

  
  Very stylishly shot and lit - better to look at than to listen to.

• Brian R

  
  I don't really know what to make of this picture. It is not one of Hitchcock's best or is it any thrilling. All I know is that it is a spy drama set in the first world war. John Gielgud plays British novelist Edgar Brodie who discovers that a government agency has faked his… More
  I don't really know what to make of this picture. It is not one of Hitchcock's best or is it any thrilling. All I know is that it is a spy drama set in the first world war. John Gielgud plays British novelist Edgar Brodie who discovers that a government agency has faked his own death. Brodie is then given orders to go to Switzerland to kill a German agent. Brodie travels with secret agent Elsa Carrington (Madeleine Carroll), who poses as his wife. Richard joins professional killer the General (Peter Lorre) to look for clues. That is all I know...I was mostly lost in the film's plot my mind kept on wondering as key information passed by. "Secret Agent" isn't a bad film but I wish it was more intriguing just as intrigued I was when watching "Easy Virtue". Still, this is a film I would recommend. Just try not to be bored.

• Patrick D

  
  I'd have to say it's a minor Hitchcock, but still carries alot with it. The plot is interesting and peculiar, and Peter Lorre pulls a performance that's both racist, goofy, and very creepy. Some of the humor is strange as hell, but in the end you have an interesting… More
  I'd have to say it's a minor Hitchcock, but still carries alot with it. The plot is interesting and peculiar, and Peter Lorre pulls a performance that's both racist, goofy, and very creepy. Some of the humor is strange as hell, but in the end you have an interesting conclusion.

Read all 7 featured audience ratings