MovieChat Forums > The Ipcress File (1965) Discussion > They don't make them like this anymore.....

They don't make them like this anymore...

posted 14 years ago by paul-gambrill
18 replies | jump to latest

It was so refershing to rewatch this movie the other night. It's so rare to see a film like this anymore. They should make more like it.

I loved the fact that you only learn what's happening as Harry does. I really liked the camera work and the rather odd framing giving the feeling of unease in certain scenes. It was acted out well and was pretty gripping throughout.

There's not many modern films I can say any of that about!

I'll be watching the rest of the Harry Palmer films now to see if they are any where near as good.

- We are all entitled to our own oppinions.This is mine. -http://paulgambrill.blogspot.com/ -

[–] babettegillette 14 years ago

Sve your money. The sequels are inferior to this gem.

[–] unclecessna 14 years ago

The sequels are interesting as they were all directed by different people which gives them all a different tone to one another - and a lot of people don't like that. There is certainly no ''Ipcress File 2'' among the sequels but I think they are very good personally and worth a look.

[–] christomacin 14 years ago

I think "Funeral In Berlin" was actually quite good. The music was also fairly effective, though neither the film nor the music was quite so good as the original Ipcress Files. The Billion Dollar brain was watchable, but I found it very campy, and the musical score was a bit grating at times.

[–] junk-monkey 14 years ago

"I loved the fact that you only learn what's happening as Harry does."

Not true. There are several scenes (conversations between Ross and Dalby) that take place without Harry being present or knowing what is going on.

And the other two are not nearly as good. Funeral in Berlin is okay but The Billion Dollar Brain is just another *beep* Ken Russell movie.

----------
"Look! - it's the Invisible Man!"

[–] screenman 14 years ago

This is one of my favourite movies.

I particularly like the sly camerawork. We see these curious takes in which characters are filmed through telephone-box windows, the body in Palmer's pad is observed from the light-fitting. Palmer himself is depicted through the spectacles of an American agent he has just gunned down.

It's as if the director is drawing the viewers themselves into the world of spying.

Some similar techniques show up in `The Pelican Brief'.

[–] clivey6 12 years ago

The recent Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy movie with Gary Oldman had something of this about it, but I found that too stylised, it didn't seem grounded in reality somehow. The characters were subordinate to it. Nice looking flick though.

[–] spookyrat1 10 years ago

And thank God they don't!

The recent Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy movie with Gary Oldman had something of this about it...

Not a patch on any of the Le Carre films.

[–] mattohmss 9 years ago

Not a patch on any of the Le Carre films.

...Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy IS Le Carre, you idiot.

[–] spookyrat1 9 years ago

...Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy IS Le Carre, you idiot.

What an absolute moron you are mattohmss! I commented that IMO The Ipcress File is not a patch on any of the Le Carre inspired films.

That's an awful big foot to get out of that orifice you call a mouth meathead! Keep working away. I'll check back on you in a year or so. LOL!🐭

[–] cgrady-2 9 years ago

To be honest, I don't think they made them like this back then, either. 'The Ipcress File' is something of a one-off. I think that's why it remains so enjoyable. The style isn't diluted.

The only film I can think of that came before and that seems an explicit influence is, 'The Third Man': That atmosphere of down-to-earth locations made surreal with tilted camera angles, a distinctive score and colourful characters. But where 'The Third Man' feels pacy, 'The Ipcress File' feels pleasantly languid and lazy. I love them both.

[–] kenny-164 8 years ago

Yes, this film has great style and pacing. Rather unique in that regard. Not a perfect film, but a very good one. I gave it a 9, after coming back to it many years after my first viewing. Michael Caine is a great actor.

For those who liked Caine very much here, I would recommend the different kind of film Alfie for his great performance there. His work in particular with Jane Asher (then Paul MacCartney's GF) was quite good.

[–] jhpen22 9 years ago

"They don't make them like this...." Thank heaven! Sydney Furie might have had a long career, and he may have gone through a bad patch with this and the Appaloosa. But his direction in these two films is annoying in the extreme. In this one, we get shots from inside a lamp shade. We get a shot of Harry dressing through the slats of a chair, placed in the extreme foreground. We get multiple shots with somebody's out-of-focus back in the foreground and the subject in one corner of the screen--or through slots of various kinds. I'm so glad I can't think of any more perverse camera placements than Furie could. He's in love with wide angle lenses, and it's all extremely mannered.

[–] spookyrat1 9 years ago

Too true! Don't forget about the weird out of focus fight shot through the window of a telephone booth (if my memory serves me correctly). Avant-garde? No, just dumb.🐭

[–] jhpen22 9 years ago

I think Furie saw Citizen Kane one too many times. Welles mastered deep focus before anyone else--also the extreme low angle shot, making his characters seem outsized. Furie uses extreme deep focus throughout this film. Then he mixes it with shots with the foreground, which means nothing in the shot at all, out of focus. Sometimes, the camera seems to be on the floor. All of it is mannered, derivative, self-aggrandizing, disruptive, and as you say, dumb. And juvenile: he's like a little boy saying, "Mommie, look at me! Look at what I can do."

[–] Rz2010 9 years ago

I love the way the movie was shot.

[–] cgrady-2 9 years ago

I agree with all of the comments that point out how the camera setups in this film are mannered. The fact that Sidney Furie did little else of interest suggests that he was doing all of this just for the sake of it. But where I differ is that I think these things work in this film.

The strangeness of the camera angles coupled with the very British setting and a complicated story creates, for me, a very compelling atmosphere. The style of the movie is as self contained and hermetically sealed as the world these people live in. Michael Caine, about as down-to-earth and working-class as one can imagine, seems comfortable and familiar in this weird setting (as does Gordon Jackson), where he's mingling with toffs and Philby style traitors and so there's something of the sixties about it all too.

[–] jhpen22 9 years ago

I follow your first paragraph just fine. And if Furrie's shenanigans work for you, that's great. No two people view the same thing the same way. But I lose you when you turn to Caine's and Jackson's characters. I think your conclusion that he was this mannered simply because he could be is probably correct. He did the same things in The Appaloosa, a pretty bad western, without any of the reasons you argue for in this movie.

He actually had a very large body of work, according to this site. He's still at it this year! If you review his listed works, you might be as surprised as I was to see the first three episodes of Lonesome Dove. He also did The Lady Sings the Blues, which I've never seen. Maybe he was going through some weird phase with The Appaloosa and The Ipcress File, which back-to-back. I guess he thought he had style.

[–] angelikafauve 7 years ago

I don't like at all espionage movies, but if that film is so good as you describe it, it's worthy watching it, except of course, excellent Michael Caine as Harry Palmer secret agent! 🎥