Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Prismark10 Christopher Plummer a respected stage and screen actor won an Oscar for best supporting actor at the age of 82. A victim of the curse of Canadian actors who tend not to get Oscar nominated, he was only nominated for his first Oscar at the age of 80!With director Terence Young who also made Dr No and several actors who have appeared in Bond movies, I wonder if Christopher Plummer was auditioning for 007 in case Connery stepped down at short notice? The film has certain Bond elements, Triple Cross is based on true facts. Burglar and explosive expert Eddie Chapman is imprisoned in Jersey. When the Nazis invade the island, amoral Chapman requests to work for the Germans. However one Nazi suspects he has been put there by British intelligence. Chapman has guile, cunning, he charms the ladies, quick witted and thinks on his feet. Apparently Chapman used his position to trick the Nazis by giving them the wrong information.Unfortunately the film wastes its interesting premise and intriguing opening. It soon becomes rather confusing, not helped by choppy editing and flat storytelling. Some strong support by Yul Brynner, Gert Frobe and Trevor Howard. Brynner steals the film as a conflicted Nazi aristocrat.

chaswe-28402 Seems like a potential winner: multi-international star names, interesting settings, cast of hundreds, great Germans. I've been told that it's the director who makes the film, but personally I believe he's also got to have a good script, even if he has to write it himself. Sometimes a competent director gets burdened with an uninspired book, and I think that must be the problem here. Three names are connected with developing the story: Frank Owen, René Hardy, and William Marchant, but they could hardly be said to have delivered.The narrative lumbers along, but never bursts into life. Brynner is good, Frobe is OK, but Plummer doesn't fit the part. He was great as Kipling, superb as Wellington, and magnificent as Atahualpa, but as a dodgy North-East England Geordie crook ? No. A part more suited to Michael Caine, perhaps, as suggested by another reviewer ? Throughout the movie I didn't once believe what was supposed to be happening, and that has to be because Plummer didn't convince. Nor did Terence Young. Romy Schneider didn't convince either, and Trevor Howard had to be wearing the most unimpressive beard of all time. It looked as if it might have been his own.The picture persuaded me to buy a paperback about Eddie Chapman, so perhaps in time I'll find out what really happened. Agent Zigzag: a cracking good read, and much better than this film. Its author, Ben Macintyre reveals that Terence Young knew Chapman quite well, and Macintyre also refers to "a rather poor film, Triple Cross, starring Christopher Plummer". Page 318. It may be that Young was deliberately trying to conceal the truth.

blanche-2 These international films were big in the '60s, and Triple Cross is no exception. It stars Christopher Plummer, Romy Schneider, Trevor Howard, Yul Brynner, Gert Frobe, and Claudine Auger.Triple Cross is loosely based on the exploits of Eddie Chapman, a successful thief who becomes an agent for the Germans and then an agent for the English, though he keeps working for the Germans.The story is even more fascinating because it's true, but somehow, the film falls flat. Instead of being on the edge of your seat, you relax on the couch. Its pace was somewhat slow, the editing jumpy, and the film is short on action.Christopher Plummer is a wonderful actor, but one gets the feeling that Eddie Chapman was scrappier and lower class than he's portrayed here. The beautiful Romy Schneider is wasted.The film is directed by Terence Young, responsible for some wonderful films: Wait Until Dark and some James Bond films, and then some not as successful, such as one of the worst films ever made, Bloodline, and another bomb, Mayerling. So one can say he was inconsistent. Unfortunate.There are apparently two books on Chapman which are probably more interesting.

Gareth Cook Quite right, it is definitely not a German plane. The aircraft is a 1946 French SNCAC Martinet.This was enjoyable to watch on a quiet evening at home. It was particularly interesting for me because I knew nothing of Edward Chapman's charmed life and wartime exploits so now I would like to know more about him and I'll be tempted to read up a bit and do some research about him.The film was well made with good production values and direction. My complaint is with the editing which was off kilter at times. The story line was abrupt and frequently resulted in too many fast changes. For instance we needed to see how Edward Chapman got passage on the vessel to Lisbon.