Brett is known to be giving away British industrial secrets. When Drake confronts him, he discovers things are a lot more complicated and that Brett's not the only person being investigated.Brett is known to be giving away British industrial secrets. When Drake confronts him, he discovers things are a lot more complicated and that Brett's not the only person being investigated.Brett is known to be giving away British industrial secrets. When Drake confronts him, he discovers things are a lot more complicated and that Brett's not the only person being investigated.
Photos
- Archer
- (as Howard Marion Crawford)
- Kemal
- (as Raul Alkazzi)
- Airport Ground Crew
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThe first episode of DANGER MAN in which the main character, John Drake has been retconned: he no longer works for NATO (instead, he works for British M9), He is no longer American. There are additional changes, amongst those are the episode length is expanded to 1 hour, and, a new theme (High Wire, by Edwin Astley), as well as a new American theme, Secret Agent Man, by Johnny Rivers, which would be inserted after each episode's prologue.
- Quotes
Mrs. Curtis: [Drake's in Archer's house -'his plan of getting Archer on British soil, falling apart. Archer's turned the table in Drake; 2 Arab men - 'journalists', as he tells his wife - have begin to torture Drake, just as Mrs Archer, along with Miss Curtis, and Harris, of her theatre group, have entree into a very awkward situation. She pecks Edmund on his cheek, and sees Drake, and rushes across the room to greet him, as well] Oh, Mr Drake. Well, how are you, Mr Drake?
John Drake: [Drake smiles, and *whispers* loudly, for anyone to hear, in an effort to make light of a very serious, and deadly situation] Delighted to see you.
Mrs. Curtis: You almost make Mer believe you
McGoohan had been offered the lead role in "Dr. No"; of course, he turned it down, and it went to Sean Connery, who at the time lacked McGoohan's star power. (Coincidentally, both actors appeared in the gritty 1957 British crime drama "Hell Drivers.") The story goes that McGoohan, married and a devout Catholic, refused to kiss another woman on-screen, so of course there goes half the rationale for the Bond franchise that made Connery a legend.
Perhaps, though, McGoohan saw through Bond creator Ian Fleming's patronizing, bum-patting sexism--Fleming's most memorable female character name remains the notorious "Pussy Galore" in "Goldfinger"--and wanted to pursue the realistic depictions of "tradecraft" in the world of espionage and covert operations, the proxy field of battle during the Cold War, that distinguish "Danger Man," both in its original incarnation and its 1964 rebirth in a one-hour format (retitled "Secret Agent" for the US market), with each far more John le Carré than Ian Fleming--and so much the better for it.
"Yesterday's Enemies," the premiere of the one-hour series incarnation, sees McGoohan's intelligence operative John Drake now British and working for "M9," loosely based on MI6, Britain's actual foreign intelligence service, instead of for NATO, while the expanded running time enabled the series' writers to develop the intricacies, particularly among the various characters, that could only be suggested or summarized in the half-hour version. Drake himself still retained his cool intelligence, steel nerves, easy charm, and unassuming toughness, although there were hints of tension and dissention, particularly with his superiors including the Admiral (Peter Madden) who sends Drake to Beirut on his inaugural mission in "Yesterday's Enemies."
In Beirut, expatriate British oil executive Brett (Peter Copley) has been funneling sensitive information to "the other side," but as Drake tries to investigate he clashes with harried, understaffed station chief Jo Dutton (Maureen Connell), who steers him toward local police chief Attala (Anton Rodgers), who lends surreptitious support. Surveillance on Brett reveals that he is actually working for Archer (Howard Marion Crawford), an alcoholic journalist drummed out of M9 during World War Two who has established his own rogue spy network partly as a bargaining chip to return to M9. However, machinations unknown to Drake undermine his attempts to bring Archer in from the cold.
One reviewer has deemed the script "pretty routine," but strip away the flash and glitter depicted in the James Bond movies, or the intricate, clever contrivances in the American television spy drama "Mission: Impossible," and you're left with the reality of espionage: as with police work, routine is the norm, far more unglamorous legwork and endless paperwork than deadly shootouts and high-speed car chases.
The trick is to make that reality believable, and Donald Jonson's sturdy script highlights the dynamics of covert operations being executed in plain diplomatic sight--Dutton especially must manage two tracks in an intimate expatriate community--while Charles Crichton's direction doesn't let the pacing flag. Strong performances, including by Patricia Driscoll as Archer's wife Catherine, enhance the credible, intriguing depiction of spycraft not with James Bond-like derring-do but with resolute determination punctuated by moments of legitimate danger as McGoohan portrays a realistic, three-dimensional spy with quiet conviction.
That makes "Danger Man" in its one-hour configuration the premier 1960s spy series without question. Am I overlooking "The Prisoner," Patrick McGoohan's subsequent project? Not at all. But although spy-versus-spy intrigue underpins "The Prisoner," that revolutionary, almost revelatory miniseries transcends genre pigeonholing to become sui generis. It is unique. Apropos of that, I reject the facile assertion that Number Six is simply the continuation of John Drake. Be seeing you.
REVIEWER'S NOTE: What makes a review "helpful"? Every reader of course decides that for themselves. For me, a review is helpful if it explains why the reviewer liked or disliked the work or why they thought it was good or not good. Whether I agree with the reviewer's conclusion is irrelevant. "Helpful" reviews tell me how and why the reviewer came to their conclusion, not what that conclusion may be. Differences of opinion are inevitable. I don't need "confirmation bias" for my own conclusions. Do you?
- darryl-tahirali
- Jun 14, 2023
Details
- Runtime1 hour
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.33 : 1