Political intrigue in the tropics spurs secret agent John Drake as he poses as "The Galloping Major" while trying to ensure the integrity of the upcoming election in an African country modeled after Rhodesia or South Africa---newly independent but with a fresh British legacy. David Stone's workmanlike script can't avoid stereotype as it slugs earnestly down a familiar narrative although the climax turns on a neat double-cross that lends this modest episode an adequate payoff.
Flying in on the eve of the election, Drake finds that a number of sources are aware of his cover as Major Sullivan, brought in to help ensure order following an assassination attempt against current Prime Minister Kamunga (William Marshall), with suspicion falling on his rival, Dr. Manudu (Edric Connor). Indeed, as Drake explores the political landscape, he finds himself confronting the martial Colonel Nyboto (Errol John) and unctuous Belgian business mogul Lasalle (Arnold Diamond), who appear to be spearheading a coup to put Manudu into power. But just as Drake is set to return to Britain, he discovers that all is not what it seems to be.
Stone's thin story, which doesn't flesh out Kamunga's rationale for summoning Drake in the first place, is instead padded to fill the running time while he populates the background with near-caricatures including Mrs. Manningham (Nora Nicholson), the tippling British widow with the imperial attitude nostalgic for the colonial days, and Suzanne, Lasalle's itchy wife who takes a fancy to Drake, with sultry Jill Melford making the most of a decorative part while providing Stone's final plot contrivance. Marshall, too, with his booming voice, plays to the back of the theater during his florid, mannered performance. Patrick McGoohan seems only intermittently engaged but maintains his cool professionalism throughout.
With an opening recognition gambit that recalls a previous episode, "The Galloping Major," a sobriquet Lasalle pins on Drake, does trot from one plot point to another, although director Peter Maxwell tries to preserve the momentum even if the engagement is lacking. A professional if undistinguished effort.
REVIEWER'S NOTE: What makes a review "helpful"? Every reader of course decides that for themselves. For me, a review is helpful if it explains why the reviewer liked or disliked the work or why they thought it was good or not good. Whether I agree with the reviewer's conclusion is irrelevant. "Helpful" reviews tell me how and why the reviewer came to their conclusion, not what that conclusion may be. Differences of opinion are inevitable. I don't need "confirmation bias" for my own conclusions. Do you?
