Passable spy thriller that's a disappointment considering the talent on display. While it isn't a dud, there's nothing particularly outstanding about it and it emerges as a fairly routine and forgettable film.
There are some enjoyable aspects to the film however. I admired Yul Brynner for delivering a lead character that was so uncompromising, cold and ruthless while he was hardly an admirable hero he was believable and convincing and therefore more interesting as a character. I'm sure if this film were made today the character would've had some more 'likable' elements inserted into him during the film.
The weakest aspect is Ernie Freeman's dreadful score cornball and overdone, regularly undermining the potential suspense in key scenes.
For mine, while the film itself isn't particularly noteworthy, in a broader context it has a curious interest. Despite being made by a major studio, having a major star and a director who delivered many top-notch films in this period (especially a certain ape film made the same year), it didn't make much impact at the time and is totally forgotten today, even for a film made four decades ago. Why is this? I actually think it would be much more remembered if it had been filmed as a flashy, goofy spy film that is now considered to be representative of late 1960s film style and culture the likes of which were spoofed in the Austin Powers films. For example, while imo 'In Like Flint' is a dreadful film, clearly inferior to TDM, because of its glossy and spoofy style I can see how its much more remembered and referenced today.
Of course, TDM could've still been remembered on the basis of sheer quality but apart from Brynner's performance, it just doesn't have enough of it.
There are some enjoyable aspects to the film however. I admired Yul Brynner for delivering a lead character that was so uncompromising, cold and ruthless while he was hardly an admirable hero he was believable and convincing and therefore more interesting as a character. I'm sure if this film were made today the character would've had some more 'likable' elements inserted into him during the film.
The weakest aspect is Ernie Freeman's dreadful score cornball and overdone, regularly undermining the potential suspense in key scenes.
For mine, while the film itself isn't particularly noteworthy, in a broader context it has a curious interest. Despite being made by a major studio, having a major star and a director who delivered many top-notch films in this period (especially a certain ape film made the same year), it didn't make much impact at the time and is totally forgotten today, even for a film made four decades ago. Why is this? I actually think it would be much more remembered if it had been filmed as a flashy, goofy spy film that is now considered to be representative of late 1960s film style and culture the likes of which were spoofed in the Austin Powers films. For example, while imo 'In Like Flint' is a dreadful film, clearly inferior to TDM, because of its glossy and spoofy style I can see how its much more remembered and referenced today.
Of course, TDM could've still been remembered on the basis of sheer quality but apart from Brynner's performance, it just doesn't have enough of it.