Skip to main content

It’s always possible to find a good moral reason for killing anybody.

The Assassination Bureau
(1969)

(SPOILERS) The Assassination Bureau ought to be a great movie. You can see its influence on those who either think it is a great movie, or want to produce something that fulfils its potential. Alan Moore and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. The just-released (and just-flopped) The King’s Men. It inhabits a post-Avengers, self-consciously benign rehearsal of, and ambivalence towards, Empire manners and attitudes, something that could previously be seen that decade in Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines (and sequel Monte Carlo or Bust, also 1969), Adam Adamant Lives!, and even earlier with Kind Hearts and Coronets, whilst also feeding into that “Peacock Revolution” of Edwardian/Victorian fashion refurbishment. Unfortunately, though, it lacks the pop-stylistic savvy that made, say, The President’s Analyst so vivacious.

Ivan: Unfortunately, I have no monopoly on the assassination business.

I have to put that down to the director, as The Assassination Bureau gets most of its choices on target. It’s true that the screenplay, based on Jack London’s unfinished (until Robert L Fish did in 1963) The Assassination Bureau Ltd. rather wanders off course during the third act, with too much business involving political manoeuvring and a set piece on a zeppelin, but when it’s maintaining focus on the simple conceit of the titular organisation putting out a hit on its own chairman (Oliver Reed’s unflappable Ivan Dragomiloff), the material is irresistible.

Maybe someone like Jerzy Skolimowski in the euro pudding mode of the following year’s The Adventures of Gerard – a movie he virtually disowned, but which is brimming with stylistic invention and wit – would have been a better fit. Basil Dearden had made his share of comedies, including several with Will Hay back in the ’40s, The Smallest Show on Earth and the previous year’s Only When I Larf (or wince). Now in his late fifties, however, he was hardly coming to the project with the energy or irreverence of, say, a Richard Lester. The project was actually Michael Relph’s baby (a producer foremost, usually for Dearden and going back to Kind Hearts, but also writer – as here – production designer – as here – art director and director), so perhaps heshould have had a punt at helming it.

Geoffrey Unsworth fresh-ish off 2001: A Space Odyssey offers serviceable lensing, the costuming is of an expected standard, but the real MVP in terms of production value is Ron Grainer, whose magnificent score is vaguely suggestive of a similar bolstering accompaniment exceeding the actual content found in The Wrong Box a few years prior (Pete and Dud come up a few times in these affectionate Empire demolitions).

Ivan: Kill me, kill my Bureau. Is that it? What a marvellous idea.

The plot finds journalist and suffrage campaigner Sonia Winter (Diana Rigg) engaging the Bureau to off Ivan, who proves exceedingly pro the idea, since it will put the mettle of his aging colleagues to the test. Besides which, he suspects the purity of motive of the organisation may have faltered (the “betterment of the world – purging evil, striking down tyranny”). Neither he nor Sonya is aware that the bureau’s vice chairman, Lord Bostwick (Telly Savalas), also a newspaper publisher with “a genuine concern for the political wellbeing of the world”, is the motivating force behind ousting Ivan, as he believes he can bring the organisation’s influence to bear in the interests of his greater cause.

Ivan: Human life is the most expendable commodity we possess.

The Bureau is presented, then, as a well-intentioned force, its motivations underlined by the debate running through the picture regarding the notional difference between murder and assassination. Ivan admits to being “born and bred for a job”, and believes in the essential honour of his profession; in contrast, Bostwick submits that the “romantic notion of moral killing is out of date”, and that it is “a political weapon or it is nothing”. While they can both be wrong, of course, the screenplay blurs this in order to allow Ivan heroic stature; Sonya too is incriminated by her motives, her action (murder for a greater good) rather equating to that of the Bureau (“My dear, you don’t go to a butcher to buy a steak and then question the morality of the butcher in killing the cow”).

Bostwick: You’d be astonished if I told you of the courts in Europe where I wield power. Behind the scenes, of course.

It would seem Bostwick wishes to utilise the Bureau in a manner not so far from the Elite, puppeteering the players on the world stage as he sees fit. His plan, buying stocks in arms companies and then starting a world war, is very much of such a bent – and is pretty much the kind of thing Anthony Sutton documented in terms of the causative nature twentieth-century for-profit conflicts, rather than, you know, an actual beef. As he says: “One death or a million. What’s the difference?

Unfortunately, there’s little texture or intrigue attached to any of this, which means The Assassination Bureau rather peters out when this grand scheme becomes the primary focus. Hitherto, the succession of assassination attempts Ivan encounters in Paris (in a brothel, where Miss Winters is left in only her undergarments), a train (death by fiery brandy), in Zurich (blowing up a bank), Vienna and Venice (where Ivan fakes his death) are colourful and varied for the most part. They recall Ealing or Ealing-esque antics in Kind Hearts and Coronets and The Naked Truth, along with more recent, hipper ones found in everything from The AvengersLegacy of Death to The President’s Analyst, to The Prisoner’s The Girl Who Was Death and subsequently The Pink Panther Strikes Again.

A tremendous asset to these proceedings is Oliver Reed, occupying a very small window when he was considered a viable mainstream leading man. A year earlier, he was waiting on his uncle to give him a big part in Oliver! and a few months later, Ken Russell would push him in the direction of his better-known and bigger ’70s persona (where the closest he’d come to Hollywood would be supporting turns in Lester’s Musketeers movies). 1969 had him both as Ivan and Hannibal Brooks (his fourth teaming with gourmet auteur Michael Winner). Seeing Reed as a romantic lead, dashing and urbane, with an inevitable hint of the brute (it’s in his nature), one can’t help but consider his prospects as a potential Bond, and what might have been.

Cubby Broccoli did consider him, it seems, but was put off by the untameable nature of the beast: “With Reed we would have had a far greater problem to destroy his image and re-mould him as James Bond. We just didn’t have the time or money to do that”. It’s a fascinating prospect, and one whereby one wonders, even if he had won the part and managed to behave himself, how much of that lurking violence he exudes would have ultimately imbalanced the essential weightlessness of the franchise. Either way, I’m left wishing we had more of Oli as we see him here, playing against type, if you like.

Miss Winters: There can be no sexual equality while women exploit their physical appearance.

Not so much playing against type is Rigg, also that year’s (doomed) Bond girl. Rigg had just left The Avengers at this point, and like Honor Blackman before her, she dived straight into 007 (so to speak). It’s notable that only this and On Her Majesty’s Secret Service really register in her “bid” for transatlantic/ movie stardom. There were some later tentative explorations in the following decade, including a very short-lived US sitcom.

This may simply have been down to her performative preferences, but I’d suggest Rigg more naturally exudes a certain sternness over the kind of warmth that makes a movie star; she worked so well with Patrick Macnee because there was dynamite chemistry, Here, playing into clipped reserve as a rigid feminist, she more than holds her own, but the role is fairly thankless. Indeed, it’s not so different to the less-rigid Emily Blunt in the recent Jungle Cruise; a similar kind of part, except with more “heroics” latterly, since movie women can obviously now kick ass.

Compared to Mrs Peel – or even Tracy in OHMSS, which stood out as a genuinely felt romantic liaison – Sonya is somewhat functional and silly, required to show shock and outrage and prudishness until she duly discovers the lure of provocative attire and provocative Ivan. It’s impossible to tell whether she and Reed got on, although one can’t help but note Ivan’s reproof of Sonya’s renouncement of spirits: “Taken in moderation, it can greatly clarify the mind”. And not in moderation…?

Popescu: Murderers? We are assassins!

There are many notables in the cast besides two OHMSS stars (Rigg and Savalas). A clutch of former Avengers faces show up including Roger Delgado, Peter Bowles, Jeremy Lloyd, Warren Mitchell and Vernon Dobtcheff. Then there’s The Prisoner’s Kenneth Griffith. Later Bond villain Curd Jürgens is the Bureau’s German representative. We see Beryl Reid and Phillipe Noiret in the brothel scene – only one of them manages to be convincingly French.

Madame Otero: No! Do not shoot the customers!

The script offers more than enough visual gags, from the attempt to kill Ivan before the initial meeting is even over (“One should always applaud initiative”) to the bomb in a bratwurst (“A sausage – this is indeed a place of fun!”) It’s also notable for trendy lost tech (zeppelins, which were enjoying something of a revival around this time – see also The Hindenberg, Zeppelin, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and The Island at the Top of the World) that again would find retro-favour later on.

I’d almost suggest The Assassination Bureau could withstand a remake, if you didn’t know they’d make a hash of it. It’s a picture that, thanks to its lustre – the score, Reed, Rigg –lingers in the mind as more rewarding than it actually is. It had no shortage of potential.




Popular posts from this blog

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

Just because you are a character doesn't mean that you have character.

Pulp Fiction (1994) (SPOILERS) From a UK perspective, Pulp Fiction ’s success seemed like a fait accompli; Reservoir Dogs had gone beyond the mere cult item it was Stateside and impacted mainstream culture itself (hard to believe now that it was once banned on home video); it was a case of Tarantino filling a gap in the market no one knew was there until he drew attention to it (and which quickly became over-saturated with pale imitators subsequently). Where his debut was a grower, Pulp Fiction hit the ground running, an instant critical and commercial success (it won the Palme d’Or four months before its release), only made cooler by being robbed of the Best Picture Oscar by Forrest Gump . And unlike some famously-cited should-have-beens, Tarantino’s masterpiece really did deserve it.

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

Poetry in translation is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.

Paterson (2016) (SPOILERS) Spoiling a movie where nothing much happens is difficult, but I tend to put the tag on in a cautionary sense much of the time. Paterson is Jim Jarmusch at his most inert and ambient but also his most rewardingly meditative. Paterson (Adam Driver), a bus driver and modest poet living in Paterson, New Jersey, is a stoic in a fundamental sense, and if he has a character arc of any description, which he doesn’t really, it’s the realisation that is what he is. Jarmusch’s picture is absent major conflict or drama; the most significant episodes feature Paterson’s bus breaking down, the English bull terrier Marvin – whom Paterson doesn’t care for but girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani) dotes on – destroying his book of poetry, and an altercation at the local bar involving a gun that turns out to be a water pistol. And Paterson takes it all in his stride, genial to the last, even the ruination of his most earnest, devoted work (the only disappoint

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.