Gene Barry plays an American secret agent who comes to London to meet a British informer who has something important to tell him. By the time he arrives there, his contact has already been killed and Barry gets kidnapped. He escapes with the help of a local agent (Tom Adams), and is asked to investigate a leak in the British secret service. To do that, he has to get close to the agent's wife (Joan Collins). Romance ensues. Actually, that romance may be the weakest aspect of "Subterfuge": Barry and Collins don't exactly set the world on fire as a couple. There is a rather sadistic bad girl, played by Suzanna Leigh, who is much more exciting to watch than the bland Collins, but doesn't have enough screen time. On the positive side, the film boasts some amusing fight scenes, a fairly twisty plot and lots of on-location London footage, so it just about gets a passing grade. ** out of 4.
9 Reviews
Joan Collins is easily the best thing Subterfuge has going for it.
bensonmum212 September 2018
Very briefly, Subterfuge's plot goes something like this: U.S. spy MIchael Donovan (Gene Barry) is enlisted by his British counterparts to ferret out a mole hiding in their midst. Donovan decides to use the marital difficulties facing one of his suspects to his advantage. Donovan cosies up to Anne Langley (Joan Collins) to gain information on his target. As you might have guessed, things get complicated when Donovan ends up falling for Anne
Subterfuge should have worked on me. It's got a lot of what I normally enjoy: spy shenanigans, interesting locations, kidnappings, double-agents, double crosses, chase scenes, fight scenes, and Joan Collins. The problem is that the movie doesn't have much of a plot - at least one that's interesting. Subterfuge is deathly dull. I'll admit that the last act does get a bit interesting, but by that point, I was really struggling to stay awake. The baddies are boring, the plot is confusing, and Gene Barry isn't very exciting. That's not much of a recipe for success. Joan Collins is easily the best thing Subterfuge has going for it. She shines in every instance she appears on-screen. Unfortunately, though, she's stuck with Barry. Their relationship and chemistry is as lacking as the plot. Overall, there's not much here to recommend. A generous 4/10 from me.
Subterfuge should have worked on me. It's got a lot of what I normally enjoy: spy shenanigans, interesting locations, kidnappings, double-agents, double crosses, chase scenes, fight scenes, and Joan Collins. The problem is that the movie doesn't have much of a plot - at least one that's interesting. Subterfuge is deathly dull. I'll admit that the last act does get a bit interesting, but by that point, I was really struggling to stay awake. The baddies are boring, the plot is confusing, and Gene Barry isn't very exciting. That's not much of a recipe for success. Joan Collins is easily the best thing Subterfuge has going for it. She shines in every instance she appears on-screen. Unfortunately, though, she's stuck with Barry. Their relationship and chemistry is as lacking as the plot. Overall, there's not much here to recommend. A generous 4/10 from me.
60s spy caper - worth a look
milliefan16 June 2013
Subterfuge is quite an elusive title to track down, however it was released on VHS in the US, and DVD copies have recently become available. The cast is pretty starry, however the plot is rather confused, and Peter Graham Scott's direction couldn't be described as anything other than workmanlike. Of chief interest are the location shots of the London of 1968 - fascinating for those who know the capital well - and the luminous Joan Collins, who, clearly realising the weak script wasn't going to give the audience much for their money, and that her good-girl role lacked much substance, sets about creating a one-woman style festival. So we get Joan in hats, leotards, thigh-high leather boots, evening dresses, mini-dresses, furs ... you name it - if it was 'in' in 1968, Joan is wearing it and looking as glorious as always (and slimmer than ever). And for the more sombre scenes when her character's life is in turmoil, Joan isn't afraid to deglamourise her look. As for the rest of the cast, the only performances of note are Marius Goring (his name way down in the credits!) as the chief villain, and Suzanna Leigh being surprisingly good as a somewhat psycho villainess. Top-billed Gene Barry resembles a walking store-window dummy: devoid of any emotion or talent whatsoever, he seems disinterested and disconnected from the action and the actors around him, and he is the main reason the film fails. A poor script can be enlivened by a star turn such as that of Miss Collins, or a fun and campy characterisation such as that of Miss Leigh, but with a leading man as uninspired as Gene Barry, Subterfuge is beyond saving.
Old-fashioned spy entry to be avoided
vjetorix10 November 2002
Here's one that tries to be cynical and hip but fails on both accounts. Director Peter Graham Scott was involved with both the Danger Man and The Avengers television series' but drops the ball here, churning out a staid but not altogether lifeless espionage non-thriller.
Uninteresting And Dull
Lechuguilla12 February 2015
Generic 1960s spy story about an American "security agent" named Michael Donovan (Gene Barry) who goes to London to meet an important professional contact. But when Donovan arrives he finds that his contact has been murdered. What follows is kidnapping, falling in love, and danger in dealing with high level thugs. The visuals are a bit dreary and the plot seems muddled.
The main problem here is the script. There are too many characters and too many villains. It's hard to tell who is doing what to whom. And I could not figure out the motivation of the villains. Further, none of the characters are interesting. They're all cold, impersonal, and have little to no sense of humanity or individuality. They're just stick figures inserted into the script in service to a contrived story. Who are these people? Do we care about them? I don't.
The visuals are drab. Indoor scenes are too dark. Outdoor scenes trend repetitive, with too many camera shots of those English double decker buses, subway trains, and expensive cars. Characters spend a lot of time talking shop while imbibing expensive liquors. The film tries to be worldly and sophisticated. However, "Subterfuge" is no James Bond movie. And Gene Barry is no Sean Connery.
Casting and acting are not very good. Gene Barry may be debonair but his persona and acting are boring. Joan Collins may be glamorous but in this film she shows why she never won any major acting awards. The rest of the cast is perfunctory and dull.
My impression is that the producers were trying to cash in on all the international intrigue that was such a hot film topic in the 1960s. But "Subterfuge" lacks suspense and mystery. Characters are cold and impersonal. Performances are lackluster. There are some good spy films out there. This is not one of them.
The main problem here is the script. There are too many characters and too many villains. It's hard to tell who is doing what to whom. And I could not figure out the motivation of the villains. Further, none of the characters are interesting. They're all cold, impersonal, and have little to no sense of humanity or individuality. They're just stick figures inserted into the script in service to a contrived story. Who are these people? Do we care about them? I don't.
The visuals are drab. Indoor scenes are too dark. Outdoor scenes trend repetitive, with too many camera shots of those English double decker buses, subway trains, and expensive cars. Characters spend a lot of time talking shop while imbibing expensive liquors. The film tries to be worldly and sophisticated. However, "Subterfuge" is no James Bond movie. And Gene Barry is no Sean Connery.
Casting and acting are not very good. Gene Barry may be debonair but his persona and acting are boring. Joan Collins may be glamorous but in this film she shows why she never won any major acting awards. The rest of the cast is perfunctory and dull.
My impression is that the producers were trying to cash in on all the international intrigue that was such a hot film topic in the 1960s. But "Subterfuge" lacks suspense and mystery. Characters are cold and impersonal. Performances are lackluster. There are some good spy films out there. This is not one of them.
Highly recommended espionage
Bladerunner10110 November 2013
A very satisfying, taut 70's spy yarn, unaccountably overlooked. Well-written with some decent dialogue and many plot twists, it's fairly late in the film when the true loyalties and back stories are revealed.
Gene Barry is his usual wooden self but he does a good job as the uncompromising tough guy. Tom Adams hams it up, maybe he didn't like playing a foil to the action hero (having some form himself).
Joan Collins is on a different planet from the rest, she raises the overall quality with some real class as the icy, fiery, aristocratic, sensitive wife dragged into an espionage world she despises.
Gene Barry is his usual wooden self but he does a good job as the uncompromising tough guy. Tom Adams hams it up, maybe he didn't like playing a foil to the action hero (having some form himself).
Joan Collins is on a different planet from the rest, she raises the overall quality with some real class as the icy, fiery, aristocratic, sensitive wife dragged into an espionage world she despises.
Subterfuge
CinemaSerf3 June 2023
Gene Barry is "Donovan", a CIA agent sent to London to help uncover a cold war espionage ring. He is pretty much captured upon arrival, but luckily manages to quickly escape from his country house prison with the help of "Peter Langley" (Tom Adams) and together with the assistance of "Col. Redmayne" (Richard Todd) they embark on an investigation to find the spy! Most of this reminded me of an episode of "Bewitched" only it wasn't anyone's nose that was twitching. The production is cheap, the script woeful and the performances might legitimately be described as truly worthy of the occasional appearance from Joan Collins ("Anne") at her most glamorously sterile. The plot plods along with an inevitability to it that leaves no room for any suspense, and the fight scenes are so expertly choreographed as to be little more than gymnastics with tomato sauce. London in the late 1960s was a colourful, bustling city and the film at least manages to convey some of that vibrancy, but otherwise this is really just duff.
Once again, a '60s spy drama that overestimates its intelligence.
mark.waltz27 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
When you've got a spy drama featuring Joan Collins wearing lots of glamorous outfits (reunited with Richard Todd from "The Virgin Queen"), fooling around with American CIA agent Gene Barry on husband Tom Adams, a Bond girl toss-off (Susannah Leigh), tossed in with a mop topped Beatles look alike, you know you're going to have a campy 60's film. The problem it is that it takes forever after the initial setup for everything exciting to happen, and with the Collins plot developments goes off track quite often.
Collins is always delightfully watchable, and she seems to be looking into the future with her campy film roles and of course "Dynasty" later on. This wasn't one of the highlights of her career, but she's quite good in it,, wearing furs like a fox, leather like a dominatrix's boot, and gowns and hats accompanying chick ensembles that the 60's version of Alexis would have been wearing in whatever alternate universe they lived in. Leigh in her smaller part makes you wish she was on more.
But Barry is not very charismatic, and Todd and Adams play characters not fully developed, definitely an issue of the screenplay. The interesting location footage is aided by plenty of action, and a sequence at a British zoo is particularly memorable, although the shots of the individual animals move rather fast, awkwardly so. The plot itself is immediately forgettable, with the spy aspects forced and not really interesting. Only when Collins and Adams' son is kidnapped does it really bring in any real danger. So it's on occasion intriguing, but like a fast food meal, not something worth repeating, especially since it's so familiar to what other films had already done.
Collins is always delightfully watchable, and she seems to be looking into the future with her campy film roles and of course "Dynasty" later on. This wasn't one of the highlights of her career, but she's quite good in it,, wearing furs like a fox, leather like a dominatrix's boot, and gowns and hats accompanying chick ensembles that the 60's version of Alexis would have been wearing in whatever alternate universe they lived in. Leigh in her smaller part makes you wish she was on more.
But Barry is not very charismatic, and Todd and Adams play characters not fully developed, definitely an issue of the screenplay. The interesting location footage is aided by plenty of action, and a sequence at a British zoo is particularly memorable, although the shots of the individual animals move rather fast, awkwardly so. The plot itself is immediately forgettable, with the spy aspects forced and not really interesting. Only when Collins and Adams' son is kidnapped does it really bring in any real danger. So it's on occasion intriguing, but like a fast food meal, not something worth repeating, especially since it's so familiar to what other films had already done.
Spot The Pigeons
cutterccbaxter10 March 2023
Warning: Spoilers
If you like pigeons, then I think you will, at the very least, enjoy the opening scene of this motion picture. If you like pigeons and Joan Collins, then there is the strong possibility that you will like the entire film.
I was confused most of the time. A lot of people spoke with British accents and I had trouble telling them apart. Luckily Gene Barry spoke with an American accent so I could always tell it was him as long as he was talking.
He was a spy and he was looking for a rodent or something. That's where I got kind of confused. At one point he got the snot beat out of him and was tortured by a nasty but attractive blond chick. If I am ever going to be tortured, I want to be tortured by someone like her. Luckily Gene made a quick recovery from all the abuse he suffered and was able to romance Joan Collins, who looked simply marvelous in this motion picture. Almost as good as the pigeons.
I was confused most of the time. A lot of people spoke with British accents and I had trouble telling them apart. Luckily Gene Barry spoke with an American accent so I could always tell it was him as long as he was talking.
He was a spy and he was looking for a rodent or something. That's where I got kind of confused. At one point he got the snot beat out of him and was tortured by a nasty but attractive blond chick. If I am ever going to be tortured, I want to be tortured by someone like her. Luckily Gene made a quick recovery from all the abuse he suffered and was able to romance Joan Collins, who looked simply marvelous in this motion picture. Almost as good as the pigeons.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
