The Executioner

A dour little spy thriller which acts as a corrective to the James Bond school of spy movies, and benefits from an excellent performance by George Peppard as an exhausted, stressed out Ango-US agent searching for a mole in British Intelligence (just the one?). The atmosphere of post-swinging London is interesting from a modern standpoint, as is the unusual flashback plot structure.

Trivia for Gerry Anderson fans: Both Paul Maxwell (the voice of Steve Zodiac in Fireball XL5) and Peter Dyneley (the voice of Jeff Tracy in Thunderbirds) have quite major roles in The Executioner.

Espionage dramas which depend on bureaucratic characters engaged in prolonged conversations rarely make good movies and this is no exception. It's competent but never sparks any real interest and the plot seems a bit muddled.

There are a number of good names in the cast and they do the best they can with pedestrian material. Top billing goes to George Peppard who plays an Englishman but his American accent is explained by saying that he grew up in the United States. He's involved, in a vaguely romantic way, with two different women -- Joan Collins and Judy Geeson -- but not much comes of this. The ads hint at some hot bedroom action between Peppard and Collins but most of these scenes must have been left on the cutting room floor.

Location work in Greece and Istanbul is, like the rest of the movie, strictly routine.

THE EXECUTIONER is one of those dark and dour ultra-realistic spy films that came out in the wake of THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THE COLD, directed by Sam Wanamaker and starring THE A-TEAM's George Peppard. The story sees Peppard being tasked with finding a double agent by his superiors Nigel Patrick and Charles Gray, but most of the running time consists of him lurking around with his vibrant assistant Judy Geeson and later meeting Joan Collins. It's a dismal piece, devoid of warmth and humanity, punctuated by the occasional shocking moment, and one that ends with something of an anticlimax. Where's the spark?

Severe and merciless penalties should be given to people who dare to write a screenplay that is titled "The Executioner" and then subsequently deliver a film that is indescribably boring and almost doesn't contain any action whatsoever; let alone executions! I read in a few reviews that this is the more intelligent espionage thriller… You know, the type of film that gives realistic insights in the true world of secret agents rather than the contemporary James Bond movies that were all about stunts, flamboyance and gadgetry. Well, it may or may not be true that "The Executioner" is realistic but it's certainly NOT entertaining and certainly NOT the least bit memorable, unlike the vast majority of James Bond episodes. To make things even worse: the movie starts out extremely promising, with Peppard strolling around in the garden of a luxurious villa where just a bloody massacre took place. There are bloodied corpses left, right and at the bottom of the pool. Unfortunately, the boring 100 minutes that follow are a giant flashback clarifying the building up towards this massacre. American actor George Peppard depicts British secret agent John Shay. He explains at least a dozen times that his Yankee accent comes from the fact that he was raised in America. Shay suspects that his colleague Adam Booth is a double- agent who betrays the Queen by passing secret information to the Russians. Shay's superiors don't believe him, or perhaps they are protecting Booth, and he even gets suspended. Shay remains certain that he's right and seeks for further evidence in Greece, although it may also just be that he's jealous, because Booth is married to the beautiful Sarah with whom Shay once had an affair. "The Executioner" is a long – seemingly endless, in fact – and dreadfully tedious series of pointless dialogues and newly introduced characters of which you don't know who they are and why they are relevant to the plot. There isn't any suspense or mystery, and you don't feel the least bit connected with any of the lead characters, especially John Shay because he behaves like an arrogant and stubborn little boy. I was never a big fan of George Peppard, apart from his roles in the movies "Damnation Alley" and "Race for the Yankee Zephyr". His performance here is one of the most monotonous and indifferent I've ever seen. I can't write anything positive about "The Executioner", except that Judy Geeson is cute and that it's always a pleasure to watch Charles Gray (although his role is immensely dull as well)

Sam Wanamaker did a very good job of directing this excellent Cold War spy drama, back in the days when no one imagined the Cold War would ever end. The story is essentially British, so the excuse for using the American star George Peppard in the lead is that 'he grew up in America', hence has the accent. Peppard was always good in these parts as the good guy struggling against the forces of darkness, whether Nazis or Communists. He is romantically involved with the popular ingénue actress of the day, Judy Geeson. Sam must have thought she looked a bit too cute in real life, so he stuck some studious spectacles on her face to give her a bit of gravitas. Judy really was extremely cute, and a very sweet-natured person as well. I met her back then along with her parents and sister, and what a 'cute clan' they all were. They were great art lovers and liked to go to private views, which is how I met them all together like that. They had a particular favourite artist whom they always patronised, but I can't remember who he was. Judy's greatest asset was that lovely look around her eyes, which made her such an irresistible sight for any camera, or any fellow, for that matter. Good old Oscar Homolka is here called upon for the n-th time to play a defecting Russian spy, and does even better than usual. Joan Collins does a good job of acting, playing a difficult and amorous ex-lover (type casting?), and generally Sam could be said to get the best out of his actors because he was one himself, so he knew how to treat them and understood the pressures they were under. This is a rollicking good tale of the times, not as sophisticated and profound as le Carré of course, then then who was? There are the usual deceptions, twists, double-crosses and triple-crosses, all good stuff.