Arabesque (1966)

Fresh and Exciting

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

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

Love thriller with a touch of comedy and have a lot of respect for Gregory Peck, Alan Badel, Sophia Loren, Stanley Donen and Henry Mancini. Plus the comparisons to 'Charade', a wonderful film and the very definition of the distinction "The Hitchcock film that Hitchcock never made". So 'Arabesque' had a lot going for it.Getting the inevitable and often made comparisons to 'Charade', and any made out to Hitchcock (such as 'North By Northwest') quickly out of the way, 'Charade' is the much better film. Neither is 'Arabesque' in the same league with Hitchcock at his best, like 'North By Northwest' is. Donen has also done better, with 'Charade' being one of them. With that being said, 'Arabesque' to me was a good enjoyable film in its own right, with lots to admire but it is not hard to see why it won't be everybody's cup of tea.'Arabesque' could have been better. As good an actor Peck was, amazing at his best (like his performance for the ages as Atticus Finch in 'To King a Mockingbird'), he is completely out of his depth in this film. 'Roman Holiday' showed that he could handle comedy and romance well, but here he looks continually puzzled and is at his most uncomfortable looking since 'The Parradine Case', lacking the suavity, smoothness and urbane charm needed, things that, as much as it is regrettable that it's being said, Cary Grant would have pulled off perfectly (being the king of that acting style).Story-wise, 'Arabesque' is intriguing and entertaining, but it is also over-convoluted with parts not feeling explored enough. There are too a few nonsensical scenes (like the fainting guard) that seemed to be an indication of parts being written or re-written in a rush. Kieron Moore's dialogue jars a little bit somewhat.However, 'Arabesque' looks a dream, late 60s Technicolor has rarely looked this incredible. Have not seen cinematography this inventive in a long time, while the colours dazzle and the settings and costumes define glamorous to a tee. Henry Mancini's music score is typically luscious and jaunty in Mancini's own unmistakable way. Donen directs at a good pace.The script crackles in wit and sophistication while the story has enough entertainment value, tense suspense and intrigue to stick with it. Thanks to some memorable scenes, especially the incredibly clever opening titles sequence, the shower scene and the truly exciting climax.Excepting Peck, the performances are very good. Sophia Loren has never looked more stunning or been this classy, while Alan Badel is oily menace incarnate. Moore is fun in his role despite some jarring dialogue.Overall, good glamorous fun but with such amazing ingredients and assets it had the makings of a great film. 7/10 Bethany Cox

An Odd Title draws attention to this bit of Fluff from Director Stanley Donen as He Followed Up the Enormous Success of the Similar "Charade" (1964), this time it's Gregory Peck and Sophia Loren.1966 was a Time of Hollywood in Flux being Swept up in Cultural and Political Turmoil. "The Times They Were a Changin" and hardly Anyone or Anything was Untouched. The Studio System and the Star System was No Exception. Perhaps Embodying the entrenched Old School, Peck and Loren Deliver what was Expected. Charm and Class.Putting People in Seats as They Tended, both were Professionals. Peck Shows a bit of Strain in the Comedy Bits but does manage to Pull it Off. Loren's Acting Ability matched Her Stunning Glamour and She Fares somewhat Better.Director Donen Experiments Wildly here and there with Psychedelic Visuals and Montage and that is a Good Thing because it Adds some Flare to the Convoluted Plot. Drawing Inspiration from Hitchcock, James Bond, and His Own "Charade", Donen was a Good enough Artist to make most of it Fanciful and Fresh but some of the Stale Parts are Unwelcome.It's Heady at times and Not All of the Wise Cracking Works, but like the Film as a whole, there is Enough to Enjoy to keep it from Failing if Not all together Succeeding Either. Worth a Watch for Fans of the Stars and a Look-See at Old Hollywood testing the New Pop-Culture with Mixed Results.

Professor David Pollock (Gregory Peck) is an ancient hieroglyphics expert. There is a plot against a Middle Eastern Prime Minister Hassan Jena. Wealthy Beshraavi (Alan Badel) wants Pollock's help but he rejects him at first. However Jena convinces Pollock to infiltrate Beshraavi's organization to uncover the plot. Beshraavi hires him to translate a piece of hieroglyphic code which another professor was killed for. Beshraavi seems to threaten Pollock. Beshraavi's mistress Yasmin Azir (Sophia Loren) is a mysterious figure who seems to have ulterior motives. This is all style over substance. Pollock jumps right in without much deliberations. He is way too clueless. The story is questionable at best. It is trying very hard to be stylish. I have to say that it is cool to have Gregory Peck and Sophia Loren together. However it is trying so hard. Beshraavi is basically a Bond villain. It is more comedy than thrilling. If not for the two stars, this would be an unwatchable mess.

is it good ? is it bad ? really, I do not know. the presence of Sophia Loren and Gregory Peck, precise pieces from Hitchcock style, the romance crumbs and the ball of adventures does a not boring result. sure, it can be version for Charade or soft Bond slice but, in fact, it remains itself. charming, not always credible, a little crazy, with few nice exotic drops, chain of masks and noble feelings, smart and ironic, pink and serious, authentic show from good times. it is a kind of meeting with an old friend. a delight and entertainment like cherry jam from a lost age. so, final verdict - it is really inspired story. is it enough ?