The MacKintosh Man

Hitchcock appears to be the ghost that is haunting John Huston in this flick. Or should we say that it is Huston's homage to Hitchcock that we have here, and which seems to either spice up, or overburden the film, depending on who the viewer is. The cinematography, lowkey brown color palette and restrained performances -- allowing the vivid "action" to move the plot-- all have shades of the later Hitchcock movies like "Topaz" or the one with Newman himself in it, "Torn Curtain." In fact Hitchcock made only one more film after the 1973 date of "Mackintosh Man," so we are witnessing something which could be interpreted as an effort on Huston's part to continue that legacy. Some specific parallels are, for example, Newman's struggle in the river to strangle the killer-dog set on him during his escape echoing the struggle in the farmhouse to kill the Russian agent ("Torn Curtain"). Or the mad car chase over rocky Irish roads by Newman and Sanda, mimicking the inevitable car chases patented by Hitch in various of his early b/w films, such as "The Man who Knew too Much (w/ Donat)" or "Young and Innocent".

Another parallel can be seen in the casting. Besides Newman himself, there is Huston's selection of the mysterious Dominique Sanda, one of Europe's most sensuous stars, whose appeal mirrors Hitchcock's obsession with the cool blonde beauty of Grace Kelly, Eva Marie Saint or Tippi Hedren.

Then, too, we have the eloquent James Mason in a late role commanding the opening of the film in the House of Lords by holding forth in the grand manner. But we should guess that he is here a Hitchcockian anti-hero, one in the mold of Phillip Vandamm from Hitch's monumental "North by Northwest." More parallels could be drawn, but for the mise-en-scene, Huston does one up on Hitch by actually filming in Ireland and Malta.

As for the plot it appears to have the tempting multilayered complexity of a typical English thriller, such as those in which Michael Caine appeared before he was swallowed up by Hollywood. If there are plot densities, we are after all, dealing with agents and double-agents, and things can get knotted up. In what other country than England could upperclass spies -- traitors-- be celebrated in literature and movies like the agents Philby or Blunt? Newman's adversaries are gentlemen, but not what they seem to be. We even get an idea of what an English prison is like and the quantities of laundry that they do. Last of all, who is Mrs. Smith? A name deliberately chosen for its opaqueness. Is she convincing as Mackintosh's daughter, or is she merely an agent, and not even a double agent? Yes, there are holes in the plot, but overall, the performances and Newman's Great Escape make up for the plot weaknesses.

Of four ****, three and a half. Still a must for fans of the director Huston, or the stars Newman, Mason or Sanda, and the many supporting stalwarts of British b/w postwar movies and Masterpiece Theatre productions.

A very stylish opening with James Mason as holier and smoother than thou top-politician making a high speech instantly gives a feeling of things not being quite how it seems. And quite rightly so, most things in the story have a feeling of being very cool and calculated. And with Huston's experience it is all handled very well. Compared to Huston's many sanctified classics this film has been seen as more of a minor work of his. But it does have things boiling underneath its cool surface and deserves a deeper look and maybe several viewings. This movie is largely not in-your-face action, but gets parts of the mood and style from earlier movie works and periods. For example the music reminds me of 'The Third Man'. And when action and violence finally occur, it gets surprisingly tense and raw in its effect.

The movie crosses interestingly several genres, like a cold war spy thriller and prison movies. Some of the scenes manage to catch something familiar from early Hitchcock, specially the runaway and chase scene on an Irish moor. The locations in London and Ireland with real local people add much to the realism and fascination of the story. Even the car chases use old beaten up vehicles keeping far away from usual top agent style.

Paul Newman as Joseph Rearden does a strong role but the cool center of the story is Dominique Sanda as an almost emotionless beauty whose appearance covers secrets and surprises. The plot holds up very well all the way to the final moments with some nasty surprises. A film worth seeing for Huston fans and others.

John Huston ("The African Queen" "The Maltese Falcon" "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre") directs this spy thriller scripted by Walter Hill ("The Driver" "48 Hrs." "Undisputed") which stars a top tier cast that includes Paul Newman, Dominique Sanda, James Mason, and a host of British actors who you're sure to recognize. There's also photography by Oscar winning cinematographer Oswald Morris and music by multiple Oscar winning composer Maurice Jarre. Sadly, what ends up on screen is dullsville. Newman plays a British secret agent who pretends to be an Australian criminal who later pretends to be Canadian, in order to infiltrate a secret spy organization run by villainous James Mason. The dullness of the film may be explained by some behind-the-scenes politics. Walter Hill was in the process of suing Warner Bros. but came to an agreement to adapt this book, which he halfheartedly did in order to complete his obligation. Hill later stated he only wrote the first half of the film and the rest was re-written by Huston and others, with the script not even completed two weeks into shooting. Cinematographer Oswald Morris also reported that Huston was rather disinterested in the film, showing up late to set and that Morris and crew were the ones who had to set up the shots for the day and catch up the unprepared Huston when he did finally show up. Newman was also reportedly disappointed at Huston's lack of enthusiasm for the project. Given all that, it's understandable that this spy thriller is rather lifeless. Still, Mason and Newman are compulsively watchable and even a disinterested Huston is still a better than most, so although lackluster, "The MacKintosh Man" is still watchable. Also, I think this is probably the first and only time you'll ever see Paul Newman coldcock a dog and drown it.

A well-made espionage thriller, THE MACKINTOSH MAN has all the necessary elements for a real knockout spy yarn – only it's never quite as involving as it should be. The screenplay by highly-respected writer Walter Hill features a solid premise and plenty of interesting twists and turns, and the various UK locations are used to great effect, bringing a character of their own to the film. The cast is also well-chosen, and portray their roles with respectable conviction, yet something still seems off about the picture. It's almost as if the whole enterprise lack that special "oomph" that is necessary to really sell a spy picture.

Perhaps the problem is that, after years of James Bond movies and various Cold War thrillers, too many of the film's elements have simply been done before and done better, and the ominous feeling of déjà vu is too immense for the film to survive. Or maybe the problem is that we expect a lot more from a director with clout of John Huston, who seems to take a strangely apathetic approach to the material which makes the film's recycled elements feel even more trying. For whatever reason, the film never seems to grip us in the way a good thriller is supposed to. As a whole, THE MACKINTOSH MAN is a fine film for a rainy evening, but it stands as not only a wasted opportunity, but also as possibly the least distinctive film of director Huston.

The Mackintosh Man is taken from the excellent novel The Freedom Trap by Desmond Bagley. The book is far, far better than the film.

Paul Newman plays Reardon, a spy who poses as a convict. He goes to prison and befriends Slade, a Russian double agent played by Ian Bannen. When Slade is sprung from prison by a secret organisation, Reardon goes with him and infiltrates their gang.

The action moves from Ireland to Malta, and there's lot of intrigue and double-crosses. You'd think with all that going for it, the film would be entertaining, but it isn't. For one thing, it has a murky look throughout. For another, it is badly scripted and leaves out far too much of the important explanatory information that makes it work in the novel. The result is intolerable, because it is a confusing mess. Owing to the script's muddled nature, the actors give downbeat performances which further hurt an already disappointing film.