CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

GazerRise Fantastic!

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Leofwine_draca TRIPLE CROSS is a slightly unwieldy but generally workable WW2 thriller with a starring role for Christopher Plummer, hot off the success of THE SOUND OF MUSIC. The film is directed by Terence Young and has a bright and breezy feel to it which makes it feel like a Bond imitation, particularly in the early scenes of Plummer's womanising. However, it also happens to be based on a true story and sees Plummer's safebreaker recruited by the Nazis to work as a spy against the British; little do they know he's a double agent informing on them as well. Plummer feels a bit awkward as the lead, but a Euro-centric supporting cast keeps the interest high, with good turns for Jess Hahn (dubbed with a Yorkshire accent!), Howard Vernon, Claudine Auger, Gert Frobe, Romy Schneider, Trevor Howard, and the great Yul Brynner in an interesting role. The story is all over the place tonally, but interesting and unique enough to see you through until the end.

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.

Wizard-8 I see from previous user comments that "Triple Cross", allegedly based on the true story of Eddie Chapman, bears little resemblance to what actually happened in real life. That's not surprising - this has been done with countless other movies supposedly based on true stories. But I decided to view the movie as entertainment, and with that viewpoint, the movie is occasionally entertaining. There are some flaws - the narrative has some bothersome gaps, like it's never revealed how Eddie Chapman was tracked down and caught by the police. The movie could have used a bit more action and suspense (it's quite talky at times). And the movie fails to reveal what happened to Eddie Chapman in the years after the war ended. But all the same the movie has some interest, one being that Christopher Plummer with the script's help portrays Eddie Chapman as quite selfish and self-centered, yet interesting enough that you'll wonder what will happen to this person. And while the movie is somewhat slow, there's always a kernel of interest to keep you watching. This is not a prime thriller, but patient viewers with an interest in World War II espionage will probably find it decent, no more or less.

OJT Right from the start I was captivated by this story which is fiction inspired by a true story of the the undercover agent Chapman, used from the book by Frank Owen. We're introduced to a British bank robber, or more like jewelry thief, which gets caught and put in prison while on holiday on the island of Jersey, which not much later is occupied by Germans during the outbreak of the 2nd world war. After some time he convinces the Germans that he is not a patriot. The film has the feel as an James Bond film from the 60'ies. Christopher Plummer is just as horny as Bond, the the film makers is probably doing too much out of that. No wonder, though, since director Terence Young was a main director of the James Bond films. He was the director of "Dr. No" in 1962 and the following "From Russia with love" and "Thunderball", before this one. The film language is very alike.I find the film very cozy and entertaining watching. With a good good feel of the 60'ies film making. Which I'm not old enough to remember, but which I've seen depicted on film a thousand times., though I'd is mad of being the 40'ies.This film wasn't very popular in the British intelligence, which allegedly tried to drop this bring made. It was also mean to be directed by Alfred Hitchcock, this story, but he was advised not to do so. Terence Young was handles the script, and made a quite different film from what Hitchcock would have made. Young has used a lot of former Bond actors in this, in addition to a good Christopher Plummer, and when Yul Brunner as a German commandant.On the nag entice side, the story will be, like many agent stories, a bit confusing to many. I also find the women stories less charming than they are made to be. So it ends if as an well made and entertaining watch, but by far a classic. To be a classic, it way to tedious and too much of a rip-off f the earliest Janes Bond-stories.