Topaz (1969)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Graham J

  
  Hitchcock most European film is very interesting look at the Cold War.

• Anthony L

  
  Topaz isn't all bad but it's certainly not one of Hitchcock's best. I liked the way the agent with a double life was portrayed in the film and unlike a lot of the critics at the time, I'm glad it starred reasonably unknown actors for a change. The lunch scene… More
  Topaz isn't all bad but it's certainly not one of Hitchcock's best. I liked the way the agent with a double life was portrayed in the film and unlike a lot of the critics at the time, I'm glad it starred reasonably unknown actors for a change. The lunch scene towards the end of the film was quite good as was the 'florist' scene but these are all just echos from a director who just wasn't as great towards his later films.

• AJ V

  
  For the most part this movie is incredibly dull, and deals with politics, war, and spies. Although Hitchcock has done spy movies before, none were ever as boring as this one. And where did he find his cast? I don't think I've heard of anyone in this cast list before. It… More
  For the most part this movie is incredibly dull, and deals with politics, war, and spies. Although Hitchcock has done spy movies before, none were ever as boring as this one. And where did he find his cast? I don't think I've heard of anyone in this cast list before. It was an interesting idea to not use the same stars he'd been using before, but none of them really stand out as great actors you'd like to see again. The story too is unknown, I mean we do find out what Topaz is, but then we don't get a very clear ending, and we wonder why everything we saw happen happened. Overall, not a good movie, but it could've been worse, at least there were a few action packed scenes.

• Pierluigi P

  
  Even a Hitchcock misfire has more to offer than other director's best attempts. Yes, the plot may be dull, uneven, unexciting but it has some brilliant touches of pure cinema scattered all over it. Artificiality in the sceneries and no presence of big hollywood stars were two… More
  Even a Hitchcock misfire has more to offer than other director's best attempts. Yes, the plot may be dull, uneven, unexciting but it has some brilliant touches of pure cinema scattered all over it. Artificiality in the sceneries and no presence of big hollywood stars were two things that hurt this film irreparably. It was more like a thinking man's thriller with a european feel and a clinical view of espionage as a dirty business that went completely misunderstood and neglected by the critics and public of its time. A masterful dominion of visual storytelling can lift anything from mediocre to interesting.

• Conner R

  
  A half great film and a half mediocre film. The beginning of Topaz is brilliant, itâ??s Hitchcock at his finest. Some beautiful visuals, a perfect setup and some very interesting characters and plot points. However, the second half follows with a terrible lead and a lot of corny and… More
  A half great film and a half mediocre film. The beginning of Topaz is brilliant, itâ??s Hitchcock at his finest. Some beautiful visuals, a perfect setup and some very interesting characters and plot points. However, the second half follows with a terrible lead and a lot of corny and recycled clichés. I think had Hitchcock broken away from the so/so novel and done his own interpretation, it wouldâ??ve been an amazing Cold War film.

• Randy T

  
  Several factors come together here to adversely affect the appeal of <i>Topaz</i>. First, there is a noticeable absence of star power. Gone are the Cary Grants and the Jimmy Stewarts, replaced by Frederick Stafford (who?) and Philippe Noiret (who?). Missing still are… More
  Several factors come together here to adversely affect the appeal of <i>Topaz</i>. First, there is a noticeable absence of star power. Gone are the Cary Grants and the Jimmy Stewarts, replaced by Frederick Stafford (who?) and Philippe Noiret (who?). Missing still are the Kim Novaks and the Grace Kellys, instead we find Karin Dor (who?) and Dany Robin (who?). Topaz also seems to suffer from a decline in the quality of cinematography. There are no memorable shots of characters clinging to Mount Rushmore or the Statue of Liberty. No Vertigo-ish disembodied heads or Psycho-ish falls down flights of stairs. And last but not least, the scoring. There was a time when you could close your eyes and listen to the music of the picture and just know it was an Alfred Hitchcock film. About the only thing you can discern from the orchestrations of <i>Topaz</i> is that it was made in the late 60's or early 70's. All in all, the film isn't horrible, in fact it's not really bad at all, it just isn't up to the standards we've come to expect from one of the world's greatest directors.

• jay n

  
  A miss for Hitch.

• Cassandra M

  
  While Leon Uris' book is a good read, Hitchcock's adaptation of the book for cinema captures much of the book's selling points. The killing of Juanita by Rico Parra is central to book and the film. The book has a sensual scene where Juanita distracts Parra to allow… More
  While Leon Uris' book is a good read, Hitchcock's adaptation of the book for cinema captures much of the book's selling points. The killing of Juanita by Rico Parra is central to book and the film. The book has a sensual scene where Juanita distracts Parra to allow Andre to escape before she is killed. In the film, Hitchcock dispenses with the sexual distraction to go directly to the killing. The killing of Juanita captured by the overhead camera, shows the purple gown spreading in the floor as blood would have spread. No blood is shown?only the gown. What a brilliant shot from Hitchcock and cameraman Jack Hildyard! The second remarkable facet of the movie is the performance of Phillip Noiret as a French bureaucrat and spy. The lunch sequence (a typical Hitchcock food event) may look simple but the montage of shots capturing Noiret's apparent interest in the food than the conversation is truly engaging. Noiret is a fine actor. So is Michel Piccoli. The two of them outshine Frederick Stafford and John Forsythe. The third most fascinating shot is post-torture interrogation of Mrs Mendoza?the whispered response from a posture that reminds one of Michelangelo's Pieta?with her dead husband replacing the dead Christ. Hitchcock's perseverance with "marriage" continues. Andre blandly tells his daughter of his wife "She left me. I did not leave her" after a tryst with his lover in Havana. The Michel Piccoli character says of Andre's wife "Andre, his wife and I were very close. She married him." We know later that Andre's wife was cheating on him as she recognizes the Piccoli character's phone number at his secret love nest. The defection sequence in Copenhagen might look clumsy?but Hitchcock's style is everywhere?faces in mirrors, close up of a porcelain figure about to be dropped with no music in the background, etc. What was most amusing was the criticism of the American espionage agents: "We would have done it better" and the exchange of words by the defector in Washington, D.C. Andre's outburst to his bosses on the outcome of French intervention in the defection would lead to the defector's assassination is equally poignant had the film ended with the French spy defecting to Russia (one of the alternate endings). Finally, Hitchcock's use of the newspaper headlines during key scenes in the background was interesting: The Pieta shot had the newspaper shot in the background and the newspaper left behind on a bench in Paris is the final shot. The alternate endings?the duel and the departure of the spies to two cold-warring countries would not have served well as well the suicide of the spy suggested by the gunshot in his house.

• Eric B

  
  I was in utter disbelief at just how dull this film was. Wow. And the score is so bad, it's laughable -- it's as if the studio saw the rough cut, realized the film was a snooze and instructed the composer to goose the action as aggressively as possible. Meanwhile,… More
  I was in utter disbelief at just how dull this film was. Wow. And the score is so bad, it's laughable -- it's as if the studio saw the rough cut, realized the film was a snooze and instructed the composer to goose the action as aggressively as possible. Meanwhile, there's a puzzling lack of star power for an Alfred Hitchcock film. John Forsythe, Roscoe Lee Browne and Dean Wormer? Really? That's the best he could do?

• Brian R

  
  In 1962, the highly ranked Russian intelligence officer Boris Kusenov defects to the United States of America with his wife and his daughter under the protection of CIA agent Michael Nordstrom. In Washington, Boris discloses the Russian movement in Cuba, and Nordstrom asks the French… More
  In 1962, the highly ranked Russian intelligence officer Boris Kusenov defects to the United States of America with his wife and his daughter under the protection of CIA agent Michael Nordstrom. In Washington, Boris discloses the Russian movement in Cuba, and Nordstrom asks the French agent and his friend Andre Devereaux to get further documents from the Cuban leader Rico Parra using his anti-American corrupt secretary Luis Uribe. Then Devereaux travels to Cuba to get additional evidence of the Cuban Missiles with his mistress Juanita de Cordoba. When Devereaux returns, he receives orders from the French government to return to France to explain his participation in Cuba. However Nordstrom schedules a meeting of Devereaux with Boris and the ex-KGB official tells him about Topaz, the codename for a group of French officials in high circles who work for the Soviet Union. Further, he tells that the French NATO representative Henri Jarre is the second in the chain of command of the spy ring Topaz, leaking classified information to the soviets, and the head of spies in known only by the codename of Columbine. Devereaux realizes that he can not reveal the truth before finding who the traitor is. "Topaz" is not one of Hitchcock's best but it's not a bad film. The problem has to do with the ending and the film's pace, audiences (including myself) will have a difficult time understanding the secret agent lingo. The movie is very well casted and the performances is well acted. I especially enjoyed watching the scenes between the late actor Frederick Stafford and the beautiful Karin Dor. Hitchcock had problems with the studio and the test audiences, and reshoots. Hitchcock was also unhappy taking the job of directing a film about the Cold War. "Topaz" is still very enjoyable to watch and one of my fav Hitchcock pictures.

Read all 10 featured audience ratings