Le pacte Holcroft

The Holcroft Covenant have as far I know only received bad reviews... Knowing that, I nonetheless bought the film on DVD out of curiosity. I've a fondness for bad movies and I have an affection for the espionage genre.

The Holcroft Covenant is based on the novel by Robert Ludlum . I've read a couple of his novels and they can be, if one is in the right sort of mood, exciting.

The thing one has to remember is that Ludlum's novels is about conspiracies and complicated plots and not about characters. They are plot driven. And that more than often does not make for a compelling movie experience. Somehow that was not taken into account when the transition from novel to screenplay was made.

When you go to the movies you want to care about the people in it. That's basically a film's measure of success. And thus The Holcroft Covenant fails.

But John Frankenheimer is not the one to blame. Based on the material he was given, he made a fairly interesting movie which showcases his talent as an action director. At times excellent, but not overwrought like most of the action movies are today. But apart form the scenery and the action-sequences, the films weak point lies in its characters.

They are neither very believable nor interesting enough to hold your attention. Even the star of the movie Michael Caine, a seasoned heavyweight in the espionage genre, seems out of sync in this one.

If you don't expect too much , you'll be moderately entertained. But knowing that the film is made by veteran craftsmen like John Frankenheimer and George Axelrod, one tends to be a bit disappointed.

All in all I gave The Holcroft Covenant 6 out 10

Kind regards, paul

Decent premise, but it's just a bit of a slow watch for me.

That's despite 'The Holcroft Covenant' having moments that either should be or are enjoyable, but in between lies iffy pacing and uninteresting characters. I also found the cinematography lacking, for instance they visit a fair few different countries and yet I never got a feeling for the film's world itself - just scene, cut, scene, cut etc.

Michael Caine is entertaining though, as he always seems to be. I enjoyed his performance, some of his humour early on is good. As for those around Caine, I liked Victoria Tennant, Bernard Hepton and Michael Lonsdale. It is a fairly solid cast, to be honest.

With that said, I finished watching and just felt like it was missing something. 2½*.

All of the elements for a great thriller are there. An outstanding director, John Frankenheimer, An excellent source author, Robert Ludlum and a great leading man for thrillers, Michael Caine. What went wrong? The biggest problem I had with this film was the cinematography. The film was grainy and the sub-titles were very hard to read when the actors were speaking German. There were plenty of the usual Ludlum plot twists and misdirections, but somehow the feel of this film was not up to the usual standards of Frankenheimer or Caine. A lot of it is just too kinky for most people, but an accurate portrayal of Berlin during the cold war years. It would have faired better had it been released ten years earlier rather than later. It does deserve an E for effort.

I have not read the novel(though I'd like to, as well as other books by Ludlum), so I cannot draw comparisons, but I do understand that this adaptation does not stick that closely to the source material. And this continues my running tradition of me getting the lesser of the films that Frankenheimer directed. Seriously, Ronin, Reindeer Games, and now this... on the plus side, Ambush was awesome, and Path to War was excellent. This one is fine, not great. Editing and cinematography are reasonable, and this does have a couple of sophisticated moments. The plot is interesting enough. This is well-paced, and there are exciting and tense scenes. The music helps to ensure that the mood is established, and it arguably tries too hard at times, revealing itself to be manipulative. Caine is impeccable, as usual, and the acting in general is quite good. The dialog holds numerous well-delivered lines that are marvelous, memorable and worth quoting. There is moderate to strong language in this, a little disturbing content and some mild violence. I recommend this to the biggest fans of John and Michael. 6/10

After reading nothing more than bad reps, I can see why. I find director John Frankenheimer to be a very capable action director, but here he's lost in a sea of murky conspiracies (involving a fourth Reich) and idle performances (Victoria Tennant and Anthony Andrews are unconvincing) in this very lukewarm, but drearily complicated political thriller. The problem mainly was contributed to the confounded screenplay (a Robert Ludlum adaptation), which lacked probability; efficient enough thrills and consisted of one-note characters. For most part it's about globe trotting (some striking international scenery), Michael Caine looking like a fish out of water, meeting up with important figures, those involved reminding each other how much danger they are in and shady scheming being set in motion for this 4.5 billion dollar Nazi fund. Too bad it's not as exciting and gripping, as it might sound. It lumbers along in quite an repetitive manner, even though a committed Frankenheimer tries his best to inject some stylishly, go-for-broke action suspense; when he does (and this few and far between) it shows his great eye for details and precision with the camera (he loved the tilting camera). Nonetheless he can only work what he has and what the source material allows (one or two stirring moments occur). No one really stands out from the cast; but Bernard Hepton has some amusing dialogue exchanges with Caine and Lilly Palmer has a small role. A frustratingly, unsatisfying mystery thriller.