70 reviews
Lehman's screenplay is deft, amusing, witty and a bit of a rip-off...
Ernest Lehman can be excused for borrowing liberally from himself in the course of writing the script for THE PRIZE, since he gets us hooked by setting up the tale with some very clever exposition in the first fifteen minutes by having waiters delivering a special guest tray to the various recipients of the Nobel Prize in Sweden at the Grand Hotel, with a sense of irony and humor in their shenanigans.
The sophisticated wit and humor doesn't stop there. As soon as the character of PAUL NEWMAN (as Andrew Craig, literature winner) is introduced, we're treated to another version of the sort of character Cary Grant played in NORTH BY NORTHWEST--a man who suddenly finds himself in a situation where he becomes the target of assassins who want him out of the way because he knows too much.
The similarities don't end there. There's a nudist convention that Newman has to barge into in order to escape two killers and he tries in vain to get them apprehended by the authorities. (Sound familiar?) There are people who refuse to believe his story of an attempted kill where he was thrown off a balcony and into the sea by a man trying to knife him to death. Another familiar moment occurs when he revisits a murder scene with the police--but the scene has been cleaned up and a woman denies that there was ever a dead body on the floor or that they owned a TV set (which is missing), as Newman claims.
Furthermore, every situation Newman is thrown into has its humorous side, mostly because of some stinging one-liners he gets to bandy around at the bad guys, like the waiter who only hours before is the one who threw him off the balcony. "How are the crepe suzettes? Is there a body in there?" Lehman keeps the yarn spinning along in dangerous territory, but always with a good deal of humor in the words and actions of DIANE BAKER (as a mysterious woman), EDWARD G. ROBINSON (in a pivotal role as a Nobel scientist replaced by a double), KEVIN McCARTHY, LEO G. CARROLL and others.
Handsomely photographed in Widescreen and color, it's no NORTH BY NORTHWEST as far as the suspense is concerned, but it is almost as diverting despite some mighty far-fetched escapes that only a writer as talented as Ernest Lehman could manage to make credible. Never read the Irving Wallace book, but I'm sure the crisp dialog can be attributed to Lehman, not Wallace, since it sounds so much like NORTH BY NORTHWEST at certain moments.
Nice jobs by PAUL NEWMAN and ELKE SUMMER as the foreign assistant assigned to be his aid during his stay in Stockholm and with whom, of course, he becomes romantically involved. Newman's breezy performance is full of cocky ease and he's clearly at home in this sort of caper.
The sophisticated wit and humor doesn't stop there. As soon as the character of PAUL NEWMAN (as Andrew Craig, literature winner) is introduced, we're treated to another version of the sort of character Cary Grant played in NORTH BY NORTHWEST--a man who suddenly finds himself in a situation where he becomes the target of assassins who want him out of the way because he knows too much.
The similarities don't end there. There's a nudist convention that Newman has to barge into in order to escape two killers and he tries in vain to get them apprehended by the authorities. (Sound familiar?) There are people who refuse to believe his story of an attempted kill where he was thrown off a balcony and into the sea by a man trying to knife him to death. Another familiar moment occurs when he revisits a murder scene with the police--but the scene has been cleaned up and a woman denies that there was ever a dead body on the floor or that they owned a TV set (which is missing), as Newman claims.
Furthermore, every situation Newman is thrown into has its humorous side, mostly because of some stinging one-liners he gets to bandy around at the bad guys, like the waiter who only hours before is the one who threw him off the balcony. "How are the crepe suzettes? Is there a body in there?" Lehman keeps the yarn spinning along in dangerous territory, but always with a good deal of humor in the words and actions of DIANE BAKER (as a mysterious woman), EDWARD G. ROBINSON (in a pivotal role as a Nobel scientist replaced by a double), KEVIN McCARTHY, LEO G. CARROLL and others.
Handsomely photographed in Widescreen and color, it's no NORTH BY NORTHWEST as far as the suspense is concerned, but it is almost as diverting despite some mighty far-fetched escapes that only a writer as talented as Ernest Lehman could manage to make credible. Never read the Irving Wallace book, but I'm sure the crisp dialog can be attributed to Lehman, not Wallace, since it sounds so much like NORTH BY NORTHWEST at certain moments.
Nice jobs by PAUL NEWMAN and ELKE SUMMER as the foreign assistant assigned to be his aid during his stay in Stockholm and with whom, of course, he becomes romantically involved. Newman's breezy performance is full of cocky ease and he's clearly at home in this sort of caper.
"The Prize" is rather entertaining, though silly
- Nazi_Fighter_David
- Jun 30, 2005
- Permalink
Homage to the Master
Imitation in the film world is not always a bad thing. We can all think of movies that are eminently watchable despite owing an obvious debt to an earlier film or to the work of a particular director. Alfred Hitchcock is one director who has always attracted his fair share of imitators. Films such as Henry Hathaway's 'Niagara', J. Lee Thompson's 'Cape Fear' or Brian de Palma's 'Dressed to Kill' all owe an obvious debt to the master's work (even down to the trademark blonde heroine) but are nevertheless good films in their own right.
All the above films were influenced by the darker side of Hitchcock's work; the strongest influence on 'Dressed to Kill', for example, seems to have been 'Psycho'. He did, however, have a lighter side, often seen in his spy films which frequently blend suspense with humour. Examples are 'The Lady Vanishes', with its two eccentric cricket-loving English gentlemen, 'The Thirty-Nine Steps' and, most importantly for our purposes, 'North by North-West'.
'The Prize' clearly shows the influence of the lighter Hitchcock. The setting is the Nobel Prize ceremony in Stockholm, and the central character is the winner of the prize for literature, Andrew Craig, an alcoholic American novelist suffering from writer's block. (As numerous figures in the American literary establishment around this time did indeed have a drink problem, it is interesting to speculate who might have been the model for the character). Craig discovers a Soviet-block plot to kidnap Dr Stratmann, the German-born American winner of the physics prize, and to replace him with a double who will use ceremony to announce his defection to East Germany. Like the Hitchcock films mentioned above, the film mixes tension with humorous moments. The tension arises from Craig's attempts to thwart the kidnap plot and to convince the sceptical Swedish authorities of its existence. The humour mostly arises from the scenes featuring the other prize-winners. The French husband-and-wife team who have shared the chemistry prize have done so despite the fact that they cannot stand each other. (The husband has insisted on his mistress accompanying him under the guise of his 'secretary', while the wife enjoys flirting with Craig). The American and Italian co-winners of the prize for medicine constantly bicker about which of them has plagiarised the other's work. (The peace prize winner does not appear to feature in the film, although a pacifist is sorely needed to keep the peace among the others).
Even the scenes featuring Craig are not always to be taken seriously. Although there are genuine moments of suspense, such as the scene with the car on the bridge, there are humorous moments as well. As other reviewers have pointed out, the scene at the nudist convention owes much to the auction scene in 'North by North-West', also written by Ernest Lehman. The humour here arises from the contrast between the seeming absurdity of Craig's actions and their underlying serious purpose- he is trying to attract the attention of the police because he is in danger from the villains.
There are a number of effective performances, especially from Paul Newman as Craig and Edward G. Robinson as both Dr Stratmann and his double. The result is a superior piece of entertainment, not quite as good as Hitchcock at his best, but better than most of his sixties movies except 'Psycho' and possibly 'Marnie'. It is certainly closer to authentic Hitchcock than his last two spy films, 'Torn Curtain' and 'Topaz'. 8/10.
All the above films were influenced by the darker side of Hitchcock's work; the strongest influence on 'Dressed to Kill', for example, seems to have been 'Psycho'. He did, however, have a lighter side, often seen in his spy films which frequently blend suspense with humour. Examples are 'The Lady Vanishes', with its two eccentric cricket-loving English gentlemen, 'The Thirty-Nine Steps' and, most importantly for our purposes, 'North by North-West'.
'The Prize' clearly shows the influence of the lighter Hitchcock. The setting is the Nobel Prize ceremony in Stockholm, and the central character is the winner of the prize for literature, Andrew Craig, an alcoholic American novelist suffering from writer's block. (As numerous figures in the American literary establishment around this time did indeed have a drink problem, it is interesting to speculate who might have been the model for the character). Craig discovers a Soviet-block plot to kidnap Dr Stratmann, the German-born American winner of the physics prize, and to replace him with a double who will use ceremony to announce his defection to East Germany. Like the Hitchcock films mentioned above, the film mixes tension with humorous moments. The tension arises from Craig's attempts to thwart the kidnap plot and to convince the sceptical Swedish authorities of its existence. The humour mostly arises from the scenes featuring the other prize-winners. The French husband-and-wife team who have shared the chemistry prize have done so despite the fact that they cannot stand each other. (The husband has insisted on his mistress accompanying him under the guise of his 'secretary', while the wife enjoys flirting with Craig). The American and Italian co-winners of the prize for medicine constantly bicker about which of them has plagiarised the other's work. (The peace prize winner does not appear to feature in the film, although a pacifist is sorely needed to keep the peace among the others).
Even the scenes featuring Craig are not always to be taken seriously. Although there are genuine moments of suspense, such as the scene with the car on the bridge, there are humorous moments as well. As other reviewers have pointed out, the scene at the nudist convention owes much to the auction scene in 'North by North-West', also written by Ernest Lehman. The humour here arises from the contrast between the seeming absurdity of Craig's actions and their underlying serious purpose- he is trying to attract the attention of the police because he is in danger from the villains.
There are a number of effective performances, especially from Paul Newman as Craig and Edward G. Robinson as both Dr Stratmann and his double. The result is a superior piece of entertainment, not quite as good as Hitchcock at his best, but better than most of his sixties movies except 'Psycho' and possibly 'Marnie'. It is certainly closer to authentic Hitchcock than his last two spy films, 'Torn Curtain' and 'Topaz'. 8/10.
- JamesHitchcock
- Mar 27, 2004
- Permalink
Hitchcock Robson Style
To say that this is an Alfred Hitchcock movie made by Mark Robson is not a put down, it's just a fact of life. Look at the framing and you'll know immediately that we're not in Hitchcockian territory. But the the Hitchcockian ingredients are there even if not mixed or cooked at the wrong temperature, or something. Paul Newman, absolutely gorgeous and funnily enough he'll make a spy film with Hitchcock set in Sweden during the Nobels. Elke Sommer is like an imitation Hitchkcock ice blonde made in Germany. Diane Baker was the brunette in Hitchcock's Marnie and she's a real delight. Edward G Robinson, of course, always a pleasure but then Mr Robson casts Micheline Presle, Micheline Presle from "Devil And The Flesh" and ignores her. She is framed as if Robson didn't know who she was. Another unforgivable bit of business, Sergio Fantoni's Italian mamma. What was he thinking. All that aside. It's entertaining and Paul Newman can take me anywhere, anytime.
- danielledecolombie
- Apr 30, 2018
- Permalink
The Prize is Some Kind of Amusing Winner ***
Consistently entertaining
Andrew Craig, studly, anti-establishment and slightly tipsy Nobel Prize winner of literature, suspects that nationalized American physicist Stratman is not who he claims to be, and that Communist East Germany is coercing him into disowning the US.
Mark Robson is no Hitchcock, but then again, quite often even Hitchcock wasn't. 'The Prize' is certainly a consistently entertaining and worthy effort, its key scenes playing almost exactly like Hitch counterparts. Among others I loved the scene where Craig, played tongue in cheek by Paul Newman, seeks refuge from his pursuers at a nudist conference, and in order to disguise himself has an excuse to display his bronzed sixpack. And the film's climax is certainly suspenseful in the way that Hitch taught us to expect.
Quite a wonderful film, then, well-acted and well-paced. Stockholm is a beautiful venue, and the blondes seem to have fun.
Mark Robson is no Hitchcock, but then again, quite often even Hitchcock wasn't. 'The Prize' is certainly a consistently entertaining and worthy effort, its key scenes playing almost exactly like Hitch counterparts. Among others I loved the scene where Craig, played tongue in cheek by Paul Newman, seeks refuge from his pursuers at a nudist conference, and in order to disguise himself has an excuse to display his bronzed sixpack. And the film's climax is certainly suspenseful in the way that Hitch taught us to expect.
Quite a wonderful film, then, well-acted and well-paced. Stockholm is a beautiful venue, and the blondes seem to have fun.
Deserves a Prize
I absolutely enjoyed this 2+ hour-long movie, and the fact that, as others have mentioned, it's inspired by Hitchcock doesn't change anything.
I liked Newman's character. A man who is more interested in women and drink rather than the Nobel Prize, who has a devil-may-care attitude towards everything, decides to endanger his own life when he realizes his colleague is in trouble. Maybe he does it partially because he is bored and partially because he has been writing detective stories for the past few years, but it is interesting to watch his behavior anyway.
Although the plot is pretty simple, there is something that gets you hooked from the very beginning and doesn't let you go until the very last phrase. The film is very interesting, and the supporting characters play a significant role here.
I liked Newman's character. A man who is more interested in women and drink rather than the Nobel Prize, who has a devil-may-care attitude towards everything, decides to endanger his own life when he realizes his colleague is in trouble. Maybe he does it partially because he is bored and partially because he has been writing detective stories for the past few years, but it is interesting to watch his behavior anyway.
Although the plot is pretty simple, there is something that gets you hooked from the very beginning and doesn't let you go until the very last phrase. The film is very interesting, and the supporting characters play a significant role here.
A diverting tale, if you overlook many plot inconsistencies
- JohnHowardReid
- Jul 4, 2017
- Permalink
Turning an Irving Wallace story into a homage to Hitchcock?
If you have read the book, what the film has to offer is unfortunately a replay of what Hitchcock created in 1959.
Ernest Lehman was the script writer for Hitchcock's "North by northwest." I was surprised that two scenes from the classic were modified by Lehman for "The Prize". The famous scene of Cary Grant being almost killed by a plane in the open field is replayed here with Paul Newman being terrorized by a car on an empty bridge at night. A few minutes later into the film Lehman replaces the auction sequence in the Cary Grant film with Newman in a nudist conference. If you have seen the Hitchcock film you know what follows. Was it a homage to Hitchcock or was Lehman suffering a bout of creativity loss? Or was Director Mark Robson a die hard Hitchcock fan?
The book, pulp fiction at its best, made good casual reading. The film is good to pass the time, watching Paul Newman and Edward G. Robinson re-enacting roles similar to what they have enjoyed playing so often. The wisecracks (thanks to Irving Wallace) make the otherwise dumb and predictable film worth your time.
Ernest Lehman was the script writer for Hitchcock's "North by northwest." I was surprised that two scenes from the classic were modified by Lehman for "The Prize". The famous scene of Cary Grant being almost killed by a plane in the open field is replayed here with Paul Newman being terrorized by a car on an empty bridge at night. A few minutes later into the film Lehman replaces the auction sequence in the Cary Grant film with Newman in a nudist conference. If you have seen the Hitchcock film you know what follows. Was it a homage to Hitchcock or was Lehman suffering a bout of creativity loss? Or was Director Mark Robson a die hard Hitchcock fan?
The book, pulp fiction at its best, made good casual reading. The film is good to pass the time, watching Paul Newman and Edward G. Robinson re-enacting roles similar to what they have enjoyed playing so often. The wisecracks (thanks to Irving Wallace) make the otherwise dumb and predictable film worth your time.
- JuguAbraham
- Jan 23, 2003
- Permalink
Obviously inspired by Hitchcock, but as Hitchcock-imitations go this one is absolutely terrific.
Director Mark Robson tilts his hat to Hitchcock with this adaptation of an Irving Wallace novel. A slick, light-hearted thriller of international intrigue, with a dash of sex and humour thrown in, "The Prize" is actually BETTER than some of the stuff Hitchcock was making around that time (eg Torn Curtain and Topaz). No doubt, part of the reason for the Hitchcockian similarities is due to the fact that this film was scripted by Ernest Lehmann, who just a few years previously had written North By Northwest. Anyone who remembers North By Northwest will probably recollect the famous auction house scene, and here, in "The Prize", Lehmann has written-in an almost identical scene in which the hero narrowly evades capture by creating a stir at a nudists' conference!
American writer Andrew Craig (Paul Newman) is in Stockholm for the Nobel Prize Ceremony, for which he has won the Literature award. Known for his boozy antics, as well as his distinct lack of respect for those in authority, Craig is assigned a personal assistant, Inger Lisa Andersson (Elke Sommer), to keep him in check during his stay. Less well-known is the fact that Craig has been suffering from writer's block for several years, and has been writing cheap crime novels under a pseudonym in order to make ends meet. With his nose for a mystery he soon sniffs out some very curious goings-on at the ceremony. He becomes increasingly convinced that the Physics Prize Winner, Dr Max Stratman (Edward G. Robinson) has been kidnapped and replaced by a double. Since no-one will believe him, it is left to Craig and his pretty Swedish assistant to uncover the truth.
"The Prize" actually starts quite slowly, with an amount of time set aside for character introductions and plot exposition that impatient viewers might find excessive. However, the build-up pays off brilliantly once the action gets underway and all the jigsaw pieces of the plot drop into place. Modern film-makers seem to be of the opinion that the best approach is to hurl the audience straight into the action, but "The Prize" proves conclusively that audiences get far more excitement and enjoyment when the plot and characters have been constructed with care and detail. In particular, the relationship between the various Nobel prizewinners is an utter joy (especially the husband-and-wife chemistry winners who actually hate each other; and the co-winners of the medical award who accuse each other of stealing their best ideas). There are a great variety of suspenseful and humorous moments in "The Prize". Add to that the game performances, excellent location work, Jerry Goldsmith's good music score, and the general sense of solid, old-fashioned entertainment.... and you're looking at a Hitchcock pastiche par excellence.
American writer Andrew Craig (Paul Newman) is in Stockholm for the Nobel Prize Ceremony, for which he has won the Literature award. Known for his boozy antics, as well as his distinct lack of respect for those in authority, Craig is assigned a personal assistant, Inger Lisa Andersson (Elke Sommer), to keep him in check during his stay. Less well-known is the fact that Craig has been suffering from writer's block for several years, and has been writing cheap crime novels under a pseudonym in order to make ends meet. With his nose for a mystery he soon sniffs out some very curious goings-on at the ceremony. He becomes increasingly convinced that the Physics Prize Winner, Dr Max Stratman (Edward G. Robinson) has been kidnapped and replaced by a double. Since no-one will believe him, it is left to Craig and his pretty Swedish assistant to uncover the truth.
"The Prize" actually starts quite slowly, with an amount of time set aside for character introductions and plot exposition that impatient viewers might find excessive. However, the build-up pays off brilliantly once the action gets underway and all the jigsaw pieces of the plot drop into place. Modern film-makers seem to be of the opinion that the best approach is to hurl the audience straight into the action, but "The Prize" proves conclusively that audiences get far more excitement and enjoyment when the plot and characters have been constructed with care and detail. In particular, the relationship between the various Nobel prizewinners is an utter joy (especially the husband-and-wife chemistry winners who actually hate each other; and the co-winners of the medical award who accuse each other of stealing their best ideas). There are a great variety of suspenseful and humorous moments in "The Prize". Add to that the game performances, excellent location work, Jerry Goldsmith's good music score, and the general sense of solid, old-fashioned entertainment.... and you're looking at a Hitchcock pastiche par excellence.
- barnabyrudge
- Nov 8, 2005
- Permalink
If only the Nobel Prize ceremonies were always this intriguing
One of my all time favourite movies, still not released on dvd...
The Prize by Mark Robson is a hugely underrated but very entertaining movie. In fact this movie is so enjoyable that I count it among my twenty (or so) favourite movies of all time. Paul Newman (witty and recalcitrant as always) plays an American writer who is about to receive the Nobel Prize for literature in Stockholm. Although his work is highly praised, he has to make a living by writing detective novels. Known for his drinking problem and his aversion to authority the Swedish Nobel organisation provides Newman with a personal host (Elke Sommer looking prettier than ever!) to keep him from doing foolish things... and ofcourse that's exactly what happens! Newman, with his fine nose for crime, discovers a case of mistaken identity (Edward G. Robinson in a fine double role) and witnesses a murder. What happens next is very similar to other great movies from the same period of time like North By Northwest or Charade. If you like those, if you like Paul Newman or Elke Sommer or... if like me you like ALL these things than this is y
- billwolters
- Jan 18, 2004
- Permalink
Suspenseful and intriguing movie with frankly good main and support cast
As the Nobel Prize winners come to Stockholm to receive their valuable awards . For some reason , this year's Nobel prize in literature has been awarded to the young author named Andrew Craig (Paul Newman) , who pretending to be a great seducer has fun by Stockholm nights . Another laureate results to be Dr. Max Stratman (Edward G Robinson) , the notorious German-American physicist who comes to Stockholm for the award ceremony with his young and beautiful niece Emily (Diane Baker) . The Foreign Department also assigns him a helper during his stay , the wonderful Miss Andersson (Elke Sommer) . Craig soon notices that Dr. Stratman is acting rarely , and he subsequently does not even recognize him , after that , he starts investigating . Once again our protagonist get an information that comes across something what place them in jeopardy and winds up being chased all over the town ; in addition , he shows up at a nudist meeting .
Tense/suspense/mystery abounds in this Hithcockian style thriller , in fact it bears a certain resemblance to ¨Torn curtain¨(1966) by Alfred Hitchcock , it combines the elements of spy-genre with romance , drama , comedy and pursuits . Concerning Stockholm's stay of some Nobel candidates , whose lives are disturbing , overturned and perturbed when a terrible event happens . This good thriller with all-star-cast made by a fine craftsman preys on the senses and keeps the suspense at feverish pitch . Newman is pretty good as the awarded writer who seems to be more interested in women and drinking than writing , he gives one of his most likeable interpretations , while falls for both , Emily nicely played by Diane Baker and Miss Andersson: gorgeous Elke Sommer . As the German Elke Somer plays the fiancée whose tidy life is disrupted when she becomes involved in the twisted caper . And top-drawer support cast , such as : Micheline Presle , Gérard Oury ,Sergio Fantoni , Kevin McCarthy , Sacha Pitoëf, Leo G. Carroll , Don Dubbins, Virginia Christine , Karl Swenson and many others .
By time the film and acting received negative reviews ; however , today is better considered. Colorful cinematography by William H. Daniel , habitual cameraman from Greta Garbo films and her main photographer . Special mention for the stirring and suspenseful musical score by the great Jerry Goldsmith .The motion picture was professionally directed by Mark Robson , though it has some flaws and gaps . In the early 40s Mark Robson was much involved with the low-budget terror unit in charge of producer Val Lewton , for whom made ¨Seventh victim¨, ¨The ghost ship¨, and ¨Island of the dead¨. In the late 1940s Robson joined Stanley Kramer's independent company and directed his biggest commercial hit to date with ¨The champion¨. Years later Robson made another good film about corruption in boxing world titled ¨The harder they fall¨ with Humphrey Bogart. In the late 1960s, his work did decline . And of course , ¨Von Ryan Express¨ was one of his best films ; this one is certainly one of the best movies ever made about the WWII escapes . And his last one was ¨Avalanche Express¨ turned out to be an unfortunate film in which Robson and his main star , Robert Shaw, died suddenly from heart attacks . Thanks to a top-notch cast , spectacular frames , tense images and action , all of them make this one a good effort of its kind . Rating : 6 . Acceptable and passable but no extraordinary .
Tense/suspense/mystery abounds in this Hithcockian style thriller , in fact it bears a certain resemblance to ¨Torn curtain¨(1966) by Alfred Hitchcock , it combines the elements of spy-genre with romance , drama , comedy and pursuits . Concerning Stockholm's stay of some Nobel candidates , whose lives are disturbing , overturned and perturbed when a terrible event happens . This good thriller with all-star-cast made by a fine craftsman preys on the senses and keeps the suspense at feverish pitch . Newman is pretty good as the awarded writer who seems to be more interested in women and drinking than writing , he gives one of his most likeable interpretations , while falls for both , Emily nicely played by Diane Baker and Miss Andersson: gorgeous Elke Sommer . As the German Elke Somer plays the fiancée whose tidy life is disrupted when she becomes involved in the twisted caper . And top-drawer support cast , such as : Micheline Presle , Gérard Oury ,Sergio Fantoni , Kevin McCarthy , Sacha Pitoëf, Leo G. Carroll , Don Dubbins, Virginia Christine , Karl Swenson and many others .
By time the film and acting received negative reviews ; however , today is better considered. Colorful cinematography by William H. Daniel , habitual cameraman from Greta Garbo films and her main photographer . Special mention for the stirring and suspenseful musical score by the great Jerry Goldsmith .The motion picture was professionally directed by Mark Robson , though it has some flaws and gaps . In the early 40s Mark Robson was much involved with the low-budget terror unit in charge of producer Val Lewton , for whom made ¨Seventh victim¨, ¨The ghost ship¨, and ¨Island of the dead¨. In the late 1940s Robson joined Stanley Kramer's independent company and directed his biggest commercial hit to date with ¨The champion¨. Years later Robson made another good film about corruption in boxing world titled ¨The harder they fall¨ with Humphrey Bogart. In the late 1960s, his work did decline . And of course , ¨Von Ryan Express¨ was one of his best films ; this one is certainly one of the best movies ever made about the WWII escapes . And his last one was ¨Avalanche Express¨ turned out to be an unfortunate film in which Robson and his main star , Robert Shaw, died suddenly from heart attacks . Thanks to a top-notch cast , spectacular frames , tense images and action , all of them make this one a good effort of its kind . Rating : 6 . Acceptable and passable but no extraordinary .
Inferior North by Northwest Redux
Paul Newman as a likable heel...it almost works
Adaptation of Irving Wallace's bestseller stars Paul Newman as a hard-drinking, womanizing writer who once showed great promise but who now turns out detective stories to pay the bills; nevertheless, he's been chosen as one of the recipients of the Nobel Prize for Literature, and sobers up just in time for an exciting adventure in Stockholm. Newman comes to suspect that one of the other winners is a ringer, but can't get anyone to believe him (only Foreign Ministry worker Elke Sommer, who ends up in his arms!). Ernest Lehman, the screenwriter of Alfred Hitchcock's "North By Northwest", was a terrific choice to take on Wallace's far-fetched but enjoyable tale...and though director Mark Robson may never be confused with Hitchcock, the overall look, pacing, and feel of "The Prize" are quite similar to "Northwest". It's a handsome piece of work despite some minor deficiencies: the opening introductions are amusing but a bit pedantic, while an overlong sequence with Newman escaping killers by hiding out at a nudist convention lands with a thud (Cary Grant may have been able to pull this off, but Newman is still too callow). Supporting cast is first-rate, though Lehman tries to have it both ways with Diane Baker's mysterious character, and one ends up not understanding much about her actions or motivations. Newman, shuffling along with a bemused smile, has some nice moments with Sommer, while Edward G. Robinson does a fantastic actors' turn playing both sides. **1/2 from ****
- moonspinner55
- Jan 27, 2010
- Permalink
Fitfully, mildly entertaining.
"The Prize" is a fitfully entertaining, slickly made Hitchcock-like thriller. The premise is somewhat reminiscent of "The Lady Vanishes" and screenwriter Lehman, who also wrote the script for "North By Northwest", includes a scene here - the one involving a convention of nudists - that plays like a direct homage to the unforgettable auction sequence of the 1959 Hitchcock classic. The film stars Paul Newman, who is nearly as enjoyable to watch in his role as Cary Grant, and it's full of lively dialogue and colorful performances. But it goes on too long and the pace seems slack at times; if the storytelling was tighter, the film would be much more exciting. Now, it's only a mild entertainment.
Paul Newman wins a Nobel Prize?
- JasparLamarCrabb
- Dec 9, 2009
- Permalink
Cheesy, but I like it.
The first half of the film did nothing for me, however the last half, seemed very cheesy and corny, and I shudder at how utterly awful it was, but when you see Paul Newman being chased by people wanting to kill him, when you see him in the Nudist convention, and when you realise that there are striking similarities between this film and the whole plot of Naked Gun 2 and a half, with the physicist, the award, and the evil twin, you have to forgive the first half.
Worth watching for light entertainment and cinematic history
The Prize falls somewhere between North by Northwest and the Pink Panther as a mix of mystery thriller and comedy. It should be viewed as light entertainment, much like a Poirot or Agatha Christie mystery.
I had not seen this before, and looked it up for the early Jerry Goldsmith score, which is colorful, but more of a nondescript background piece than most of his work.
What I found interesting is the place of The Prize in the many mystery- thrillers of the period, along with the Ernest Lehman script. Beginning with Hitchcock's North by Northwest (with script by Lehman), the thrillers mixed in some subtle humor to make the films seem cool and hip. The James Bond series, which began in 1962 with Dr. No followed by Goldfinger, is a classic example, but you also see it in Mirage, and later The Ipcress File and Gambit.
But it is never slapstick humor in the main body of the genre. Then, with The Pink Panther, A Shot in the Dark, and Casino Royale the humor becomes dominant, using the thriller only as a foundation.
In The Prize you see an attempt at about a 60-40 mix of thriller and humor. Does it work? The viewer must be the judge. But if it had been a 90-10 mix like Northwest, it would have failed, at least without mixing in more danger and believability, and this would have been a different movie, not so family oriented for the time. I don't think the plot is strong enough to be a straight thriller, and neither, apparently, did the director.
Ernest Lehman turned in a good script that puts the pieces of the complex jigsaw puzzle together efficiently, but without the snappy, memorable dialog of his other work. It is worth watching twice to look for the subtle cues and red herrings he throws in.
But I think the director, Mark Robson, did not demand enough from most of the A-list actors to give the movie realism. I guess he was going for light comedy, and it is funny enough. The bad guy with the pointed hat was a nice touch, an allusion to Mad Magazine's Spy vs. Spy comic series, which he looked like. The light style and format, with its almost random romantic interaction, seems to anticipate Love Boat.
But I feel better directing could have raised the movie a notch. I wonder what Hitch would have done differently? I wonder if he was offered the movie, but turned it down?
Compared to some modern movies in this genre, such as Flawless, I think The Prize's plot and script are far more complex, tight and interesting. But modern audiences might be disappointed by the relative lack of adrenaline-driving action.
The movie opens saying it is set sometime in the future. The only indications of this are the nature of the prizes, which, presciently, include Nobels for in vitro fertilization, organ transplants by suppressing the immune response, and solar energy. I don't know whether Irving Wallace or Lehman deserve the credit, but someone did their homework, and got the future right by about 20 years.
As to Paul Newman's performance, I think it is just fine. You see him change as the plot progresses from a cynical, depressed writer, to a revitalized man who has found his groove and his girl. Anyone who views this performance as evidence that Newman was an egotist is confusing the role with the person. Newman, who never lived in Beverly Hills, was one of those great actors who never let fame go to his head.
I couldn't help wondering what Richard Feynman thought of this movie. He discusses his feelings about accepting the Nobel Prize in his memoirs. I wonder if he mentioned this movie?
I also couldn't help but wonder to what extent the real life version of Leo G. Carroll's character does worry about scenarios such as impersonation? But I assume security matters are secret.
As to the nudist scene, which echoes Lehman's Northwest auction scene, the curious part is that it precedes the nudist camp scene in Peter Seller's A Shot in the Dark. I have the feeling the publicity department might have had something to do with it, as "Sweden" and "nudist" certainly would have gotten the public's attention back then. There was apparently a lot of cross fertilization of ideas within the genre of the period, sometimes with improved effect. The classic Peter Sellers nudist scene is far funnier, and about the only worthwhile part of the movie.
But I would loved to have seen Hitchcock's face when he saw the nudist scene. And Lehman's face when he was writing it!
In short, I give The Prize an A for originality of concept, a B for tightness of plot, and a C for directing.
I had not seen this before, and looked it up for the early Jerry Goldsmith score, which is colorful, but more of a nondescript background piece than most of his work.
What I found interesting is the place of The Prize in the many mystery- thrillers of the period, along with the Ernest Lehman script. Beginning with Hitchcock's North by Northwest (with script by Lehman), the thrillers mixed in some subtle humor to make the films seem cool and hip. The James Bond series, which began in 1962 with Dr. No followed by Goldfinger, is a classic example, but you also see it in Mirage, and later The Ipcress File and Gambit.
But it is never slapstick humor in the main body of the genre. Then, with The Pink Panther, A Shot in the Dark, and Casino Royale the humor becomes dominant, using the thriller only as a foundation.
In The Prize you see an attempt at about a 60-40 mix of thriller and humor. Does it work? The viewer must be the judge. But if it had been a 90-10 mix like Northwest, it would have failed, at least without mixing in more danger and believability, and this would have been a different movie, not so family oriented for the time. I don't think the plot is strong enough to be a straight thriller, and neither, apparently, did the director.
Ernest Lehman turned in a good script that puts the pieces of the complex jigsaw puzzle together efficiently, but without the snappy, memorable dialog of his other work. It is worth watching twice to look for the subtle cues and red herrings he throws in.
But I think the director, Mark Robson, did not demand enough from most of the A-list actors to give the movie realism. I guess he was going for light comedy, and it is funny enough. The bad guy with the pointed hat was a nice touch, an allusion to Mad Magazine's Spy vs. Spy comic series, which he looked like. The light style and format, with its almost random romantic interaction, seems to anticipate Love Boat.
But I feel better directing could have raised the movie a notch. I wonder what Hitch would have done differently? I wonder if he was offered the movie, but turned it down?
Compared to some modern movies in this genre, such as Flawless, I think The Prize's plot and script are far more complex, tight and interesting. But modern audiences might be disappointed by the relative lack of adrenaline-driving action.
The movie opens saying it is set sometime in the future. The only indications of this are the nature of the prizes, which, presciently, include Nobels for in vitro fertilization, organ transplants by suppressing the immune response, and solar energy. I don't know whether Irving Wallace or Lehman deserve the credit, but someone did their homework, and got the future right by about 20 years.
As to Paul Newman's performance, I think it is just fine. You see him change as the plot progresses from a cynical, depressed writer, to a revitalized man who has found his groove and his girl. Anyone who views this performance as evidence that Newman was an egotist is confusing the role with the person. Newman, who never lived in Beverly Hills, was one of those great actors who never let fame go to his head.
I couldn't help wondering what Richard Feynman thought of this movie. He discusses his feelings about accepting the Nobel Prize in his memoirs. I wonder if he mentioned this movie?
I also couldn't help but wonder to what extent the real life version of Leo G. Carroll's character does worry about scenarios such as impersonation? But I assume security matters are secret.
As to the nudist scene, which echoes Lehman's Northwest auction scene, the curious part is that it precedes the nudist camp scene in Peter Seller's A Shot in the Dark. I have the feeling the publicity department might have had something to do with it, as "Sweden" and "nudist" certainly would have gotten the public's attention back then. There was apparently a lot of cross fertilization of ideas within the genre of the period, sometimes with improved effect. The classic Peter Sellers nudist scene is far funnier, and about the only worthwhile part of the movie.
But I would loved to have seen Hitchcock's face when he saw the nudist scene. And Lehman's face when he was writing it!
In short, I give The Prize an A for originality of concept, a B for tightness of plot, and a C for directing.
Brilliant!!! One of Paul Newman's best roles!
- Harry_Galvin
- Jan 14, 2006
- Permalink
A Ringer At The Nobel Prize Ceremony
This light adaption of Irving Wallace's novel The Prize serves as yet another Hitchcock wannabe production. I'm sure Paul Newman's performance here got him cast later on with Alfred Hitchcock himself in Torn Curtain.
Irving Wallace's Cold War novel was a good deal more dramatic than what we see here, though the plot centers around the serious business of kidnapping. It takes place at Stockholm during the Nobel Prize Awards ceremony. Edward G. Robinson, a defector from behind the Iron Curtain, is to receive the Nobel Prize for physics. But the Russians have other ideas.
Robinson has twin brother who they plan to substitute after they kidnap Robinson. Robinson is to denounce the capitalist warmongers at the ceremony and then go back to Russia. Or both Robinsons will, willingly or unwillingly. Assisting them in their plans is Diane Baker, the daughter of the Commie Robinson and niece of the defector.
One of those small things that usually happen in Hitchcock type films trips up the plans. Before he's kidnapped Robinson has a casual encounter with Paul Newman who is receiving the Nobel Prize for literature. Later on Robinson doesn't seem to remember it at all, or Newman for that matter.
It's probably the writer's curiosity that gets him aroused, but Newman with the help of Swedish Foreign office attaché Elke Sommer starts to unravel the whole dirty scheme.
Newman does fine work here as a Norman Mailer type iconoclastic author, but I'm still wondering why he goes into that Reginald Van Gleason type voice on occasion in the film. I guess working with Jackie Gleason in The Hustler must have had a more profound impact than anyone thought.
There's a nice sidebar plot going with the dual recipients for the Prize for Medicine, Sergio Fantoni and Kevin McCarthy, each of whom thinks they should get sole credit for a discovery. And there's the modern day Curie husband and wife team from France, Gerald Oury and Michelline Presle, who are keeping up appearances, but leading quite separate lives except for work.
The real star of the film however is the Swedish capital city of Stockholm and we get to see many fine shots of it during the course of the story.
The Prize might be too light a treatment for devoted fans of Irving Wallace, but it's all right as a Hitchcock light type of film.
Irving Wallace's Cold War novel was a good deal more dramatic than what we see here, though the plot centers around the serious business of kidnapping. It takes place at Stockholm during the Nobel Prize Awards ceremony. Edward G. Robinson, a defector from behind the Iron Curtain, is to receive the Nobel Prize for physics. But the Russians have other ideas.
Robinson has twin brother who they plan to substitute after they kidnap Robinson. Robinson is to denounce the capitalist warmongers at the ceremony and then go back to Russia. Or both Robinsons will, willingly or unwillingly. Assisting them in their plans is Diane Baker, the daughter of the Commie Robinson and niece of the defector.
One of those small things that usually happen in Hitchcock type films trips up the plans. Before he's kidnapped Robinson has a casual encounter with Paul Newman who is receiving the Nobel Prize for literature. Later on Robinson doesn't seem to remember it at all, or Newman for that matter.
It's probably the writer's curiosity that gets him aroused, but Newman with the help of Swedish Foreign office attaché Elke Sommer starts to unravel the whole dirty scheme.
Newman does fine work here as a Norman Mailer type iconoclastic author, but I'm still wondering why he goes into that Reginald Van Gleason type voice on occasion in the film. I guess working with Jackie Gleason in The Hustler must have had a more profound impact than anyone thought.
There's a nice sidebar plot going with the dual recipients for the Prize for Medicine, Sergio Fantoni and Kevin McCarthy, each of whom thinks they should get sole credit for a discovery. And there's the modern day Curie husband and wife team from France, Gerald Oury and Michelline Presle, who are keeping up appearances, but leading quite separate lives except for work.
The real star of the film however is the Swedish capital city of Stockholm and we get to see many fine shots of it during the course of the story.
The Prize might be too light a treatment for devoted fans of Irving Wallace, but it's all right as a Hitchcock light type of film.
- bkoganbing
- Nov 16, 2007
- Permalink
Give it a chance -- it will surprise you
Paul Newman and Edward G. Robinson struck me as a curious combination, so I chose to watch "The Prize" not having any idea what it was about.
This story about a number recipients in Stockholm about to receive their Nobel Prize, will show how their lives are intertwined in the days prior to the annual event. It is a mystery story that I almost gave up on after a handful of minutes -- my own fault for being impatient. A flower takes time to blossom, and so does a movie that is over 40 years old. But I am glad I didn't switch it off.
The intrigue does start to capture after a while and the insights the viewer is granted are satisfying, while our hero is denied these sensations as no one believes him. The 21st century participant of this drama may find parts predictable, but it is very enjoyable, even if a little dated.
Paul Newman gives everything you would expect. And you could say the same for Elke Sommer, since I wouldn't expect anyone to describe her as a terrific actor -- good performance for her, and she always wonderful to look at. I would have enjoyed more screen time by Edward G. Robinson in this role that had him more timid than I am accustomed to.
I recommend this movie to everyone that enjoys these actors, although one viewing is probably enough.
This story about a number recipients in Stockholm about to receive their Nobel Prize, will show how their lives are intertwined in the days prior to the annual event. It is a mystery story that I almost gave up on after a handful of minutes -- my own fault for being impatient. A flower takes time to blossom, and so does a movie that is over 40 years old. But I am glad I didn't switch it off.
The intrigue does start to capture after a while and the insights the viewer is granted are satisfying, while our hero is denied these sensations as no one believes him. The 21st century participant of this drama may find parts predictable, but it is very enjoyable, even if a little dated.
Paul Newman gives everything you would expect. And you could say the same for Elke Sommer, since I wouldn't expect anyone to describe her as a terrific actor -- good performance for her, and she always wonderful to look at. I would have enjoyed more screen time by Edward G. Robinson in this role that had him more timid than I am accustomed to.
I recommend this movie to everyone that enjoys these actors, although one viewing is probably enough.
"A fool and his Nobel reputation are soon parted."
In Sweden to be awarded the Nobel Prize in literature, author Andrew Craig (Paul Newman) jokes that fellow laureate Dr. Max Stratman (Edward G. Robinson) might be an impostor and no one would know. Turns out the joke is closer to reality than Craig realizes as Dr. Stratman has been replaced by a Communist lookalike. Craig becomes suspicious of the impostor and soon his suspicions put his life in danger.
Mark Robson's enjoyable spy movie has Hitchcockian elements but doesn't quite reach the level of the master. The pieces are there, though. Newman's his usual charming self and has good chemistry with Elke Sommer and Diane Baker. Robinson's always great. It's a little overlong and the first hour could use a trim. Hitchcock would have jumped into the main plot a lot sooner, I think. But that's just one of the many differences between a decent director and a great one.
Mark Robson's enjoyable spy movie has Hitchcockian elements but doesn't quite reach the level of the master. The pieces are there, though. Newman's his usual charming self and has good chemistry with Elke Sommer and Diane Baker. Robinson's always great. It's a little overlong and the first hour could use a trim. Hitchcock would have jumped into the main plot a lot sooner, I think. But that's just one of the many differences between a decent director and a great one.
A quagmire. Very difficult to believe.
I know that Paul Newman was a great actor. His body of work includes some very highly regarded films. In this film, he really portrays a person who could not be real. It is demeaning to see him perform such poorly written, produced and directed work. The story is choppy. The circumstances just too comedic. The film's texture is very nice because of where it was done. But the premise and the story are so awful. Edward G. Robinson, Elke Sommer just to name 2 of a cast full of beautiful women. They brighten up the scenery. I don't want to say more because if you are a fan of comedy/drama you might love it. Have patience if you decide to watch it.
- bronxite-1
- Jan 26, 2010
- Permalink
A Hitchcockian thriller and Newman playing himself !!
Newman paved a solid career with your usual mannerism, here he enforces it on strong colors, first as a snobbish guy, boozing behavior, egocentric, he as Andrew Craig a writer just travelled to Stockholm to receives a Literature's Nobel Prize, however he sneers the prize, just was there to receive 50.000 dollars only, always flattering girls, he has a special assistance the beauty native Inger Lisa Anderson (Elke Sommer) also he meets Dr. Max Stratman (Robinson) a famous Physic from iron curtain who works in USA, later he was kidnapped by reds and put his twin brother in your place, Andrew suspicious that something is wrong after meets Stratman one more time, he doesn't seen the same person, henceforth Andrew starts investigate on one's own this intriguing case, many weird situation comes across, amusing scenes, others contrived, has many sub plots with others winners, delightful dramatic comedy blended with other genres, a true Hitchcockian thriller, worth to see!!
Resume:
First watch: 2019 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.75
Resume:
First watch: 2019 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.75
- elo-equipamentos
- Dec 22, 2019
- Permalink