The last time I saw this was in high school on the last day of term when you were allowed to watch a movie in class. We were looking forward to watching something like the Karate Kid when one of our classmates, Murphy, excitedly whipped out this tape THAT HE HAD BROUGHT IN SPECIALLY - this film, Caravan to Tedium. To our utter dismay our Geography teacher put it on and the class spent a double period thoroughly disenjoying themselves watching this Alastair Maclean snoozefest - all except Murphy that is, who was lapping it up big time. When our class wasn't collectively daydreaming about shoving Murphy's face into a vat of pig excrement we endured PG rated thrills and Wednesday afternoon level excitement as Charlotte Rampling and David 'personality' Birney run around dodging bullets while attempting to achieve something tiresome. I watched it again today, so the question is, was it better 34 years later? No, not really. Murphy if you're out there, this unfortunate event may have happened in 1986 but you're still a bell end for instigating it.
14 Reviews
Pretty, unexcitable stuff
Popey-65 July 2002
It's a shame that such a lame plot should be hung on such picturesque locations, with some documentary style reportage shoved in for extra length. A shorter film may have held the tension a little more, and a more charismatic lead may not have mangled his lines so much. The female lead also, was not allowed to do enough resulting in a pretty but boring affair. It builds towards the end but the lead actor's own redemption is too little too late and should have been revealed earlier in the film. Not awful, just a pity. Unexciting but nice enough to grace TV schedules of the early hours.
LANGUID, UNDERWHELMING CURIOSITY
paulackerley6 October 2019
The existing reviews for this are useful and I'd agree with pretty much everything that people are saying. As someone who finds Alistair MacLean books and films a guilty pleasure, the decision to film on location and work in a little-documented actual festival gives the film a certain atmospheric appeal. However the subsequent commitment to using this footage appeared to hamper the creative team's ability to tell a coherent story. The frequent use of cutaways and montage such as the bullfight with the killing of De Croyter's daughter, suggests that the availability of the documentary footage drove the film's structure and so effectively killed opportunities to create suspense with more carefully constructed shots. Perhaps more unfortunate is that the Director constructing the shots was the hapless Geoffrey Reeve who managed to increasingly mess up three MacLeans. In addition to Vaccares, he directed the flawed, though undoubtedly watchable, 'Puppet On A Chain', noting however that the memorable boat chase was shot by Don Sharp. Then after 'Vaccares' he helmed the appalling 'The Way to Dusty Death' which confirmed that he was totally out of his depth as a Director in the industry. Writer, Paul Wheeler should also carry some responsibility for the eventual cinematic carnage. Maybe Reeve's TV work was better but he and the writer really didn't haven't a clue how to build suspense and handle this sort of material and as a result, a decade of exciting Alistair MacLean branded entertainments started to lose credibility with audiences. Starting here.
Caravan to Nowhere.
doire29 April 2002
Of all the adaptations of books by Alistair MacLean, I feel that this qualifies as the worst, but don´t blame MacLean!. It would appear that all that this film shares with the novel is the same title. We have no suspense, no sense of foreboding of mystery, no chance to really empathize with the main characters. We spend the entire duration (or at least I did) waiting for Charlotte Rampling to shed her clothing (for Charlotte, this appears to take a remarkably long time!). Still, a glimpse of Charlotte Rampling´s tits really can´t save this disastrous film. MacLean has once again been kicked into the gutter to endure the sniping of those bitter hacks and nit-pickers who would appear to blame him for all the ills that befall attempted filming of his books. Poor old Alistair must have crawled into a corner and whimpered when this one came out. At least "Bear Island" - which also uses the Maclean name but apparently none of his novel - was a LITTLE exciting. The excitement here is in waiting for the final credits.
A few recommendable moments but overall, pass the Nyquil
Guy Grand13 February 2002
Charlotte Rampling must have been so bored with her character in this production that she went full tilt the next year after this picture was released into one of cinema's most confusing epics, 1975's "Zardoz," just for the challenge. Well, at least she got a good tan on location in this movie, and photographs here better than in any other film she has starred in. Alas, poor Charlotte appears to be so much smarter than the material she is given in this hamhanded cat-and-mouse yarn, shot entirely in the quaint environs of Provence, France. She smiles alot, and behind that grin she seems to be saying "Please call it a wrap so I can drive over to Marseilles for a wild night on the town."
Dullness doesn't translate to ineptitude however. The production values for this co-British/French effort are as high as those found on the other Alistair MacLean knock-offs of the '70s, like "Puppet on a Chain," "When Eight Bells Toll," and "Fear Is The Key." Like Barry Newman in "Fear Is The Key," actor David Birney gets to show his limited emotional range as the stalwart MacLean hero thrown into the middle of a deadly game of international policies and kidnapping. As a wandering American playboy, disenchanted with the Vietnam War and America, he stumbles into the schemes of the Duc, played with continental charm by the wonderfully droll Michael Lonsdale. Birney is coerced into protecting a Hungarian scientist who holds the secret formula to converting solar energy into economical power in his head. Shadowy hitmen, presumably hired by someone who wants that formula, follow their every move. Birney is occasionally forced to wipe his lackluster smirk from his face and perform some chop-socky moves on the villains.
Unlike the wartime MacLean novels like "Ice Station Zebra," "The Guns of Navarone," and "Where Eagles Dare," "Caravan To Vaccares" falls into the same trap as the majority of Alastair's later books displayed, that of simple chases, one curveball "twist," and a strong-chin, 2-dimensional hero always able to easily thwart the antagonists. The interesting tidbits to this picture come with the villains. Uncharacteristically (at least these days), this film's villains speak French, and yet their dialogue is not subtitled into English. Of course, you have no idea what they're saying if you don't parlez-vous, but in an interesting directorial choice, that's okay. Their actions and intensity translate their motives, and it's that decision to allow their every words to go unsubtitled that I applaud this element of the production. The producers knew their audience was intelligent enough to figure out what would be occurring on screen without spooning out translated dialogue. Thank you!
As for the principals, well, as mentioned, David Birney isn't the most convincing of badasses around. He exuded more testosterone when he got into a tiff with Meredith Baxter on "Bridget Loves Bernie." Charlotte Rampling is given very little to do but play the sexy, compliant companion who lets Birney make all the decisions. Her looks, however, betray this simplitude. She has the presence to suggest she could easily outmaneuver Birney on a speed-chess match. Which leaves us with Michael Lonsdale. Here, he exudes more confidence than his put-upon inspector in "The Day of the Jackal." He has a comfortable, wise delivery, a sly way of sizing up his minions and adversaries, that is a pleasure to watch. It is a shame Bond producers did not use him to the fullest extent when they cast him as super villain Hugo Drax in "Moonraker."
The plot neatly ties up most of its loose ends by the last reel, and you're rendered the satisfaction that David Birney didn't go on to reprise his role in any sequels. However, any movie that climaxes with him being attacked by rodeo clowns isn't all that bad. My rating: ** out of ****.
Dullness doesn't translate to ineptitude however. The production values for this co-British/French effort are as high as those found on the other Alistair MacLean knock-offs of the '70s, like "Puppet on a Chain," "When Eight Bells Toll," and "Fear Is The Key." Like Barry Newman in "Fear Is The Key," actor David Birney gets to show his limited emotional range as the stalwart MacLean hero thrown into the middle of a deadly game of international policies and kidnapping. As a wandering American playboy, disenchanted with the Vietnam War and America, he stumbles into the schemes of the Duc, played with continental charm by the wonderfully droll Michael Lonsdale. Birney is coerced into protecting a Hungarian scientist who holds the secret formula to converting solar energy into economical power in his head. Shadowy hitmen, presumably hired by someone who wants that formula, follow their every move. Birney is occasionally forced to wipe his lackluster smirk from his face and perform some chop-socky moves on the villains.
Unlike the wartime MacLean novels like "Ice Station Zebra," "The Guns of Navarone," and "Where Eagles Dare," "Caravan To Vaccares" falls into the same trap as the majority of Alastair's later books displayed, that of simple chases, one curveball "twist," and a strong-chin, 2-dimensional hero always able to easily thwart the antagonists. The interesting tidbits to this picture come with the villains. Uncharacteristically (at least these days), this film's villains speak French, and yet their dialogue is not subtitled into English. Of course, you have no idea what they're saying if you don't parlez-vous, but in an interesting directorial choice, that's okay. Their actions and intensity translate their motives, and it's that decision to allow their every words to go unsubtitled that I applaud this element of the production. The producers knew their audience was intelligent enough to figure out what would be occurring on screen without spooning out translated dialogue. Thank you!
As for the principals, well, as mentioned, David Birney isn't the most convincing of badasses around. He exuded more testosterone when he got into a tiff with Meredith Baxter on "Bridget Loves Bernie." Charlotte Rampling is given very little to do but play the sexy, compliant companion who lets Birney make all the decisions. Her looks, however, betray this simplitude. She has the presence to suggest she could easily outmaneuver Birney on a speed-chess match. Which leaves us with Michael Lonsdale. Here, he exudes more confidence than his put-upon inspector in "The Day of the Jackal." He has a comfortable, wise delivery, a sly way of sizing up his minions and adversaries, that is a pleasure to watch. It is a shame Bond producers did not use him to the fullest extent when they cast him as super villain Hugo Drax in "Moonraker."
The plot neatly ties up most of its loose ends by the last reel, and you're rendered the satisfaction that David Birney didn't go on to reprise his role in any sequels. However, any movie that climaxes with him being attacked by rodeo clowns isn't all that bad. My rating: ** out of ****.
Woeful from beginning to, well, halfway through...
the_oracle_of_oz19 June 2020
An atrocious waste of time.
The story plods along so slowly, I expected the clothing trends to change as the movie went on.
Woodenly acted, poorly directed, even Charlotte Rampling with her limited but "70s-pretty-faced" range can't help that, especially after the only interesting thing about her character gets sidelined thirty minutes in.
An absolute disgrace to the novel, the south of France, the Romani, and movie-making generally.
I gleaned all that from the first 54 minutes. I couldn't bear another.
I only gave it three stars because of the countryside, the Fiat X-19, and the absolutely abhorrent continuity in the first ten minutes re the gun used. Three stars for putting a silencer on a revolver, it turning into an automatic later in the scene (with a non-suppressed report when fired), then back to a revolver the scene following. That was the entertainment.
Seriously, you're better off watching a 1970's Film Studies end-of-year project.
I gleaned all that from the first 54 minutes. I couldn't bear another.
I only gave it three stars because of the countryside, the Fiat X-19, and the absolutely abhorrent continuity in the first ten minutes re the gun used. Three stars for putting a silencer on a revolver, it turning into an automatic later in the scene (with a non-suppressed report when fired), then back to a revolver the scene following. That was the entertainment.
Seriously, you're better off watching a 1970's Film Studies end-of-year project.
This was truly a dreadful movie
ceandre28 August 2005
This must rank as one of Cinema's greatest debacles. I was wandering Europe at the time and had the misfortune to stumble upon the crew making this movie in what was, even then, one of the world's idyllic, unspoiled settings. I was enlisted as an extra, and what followed was an exhibition of modern day debauchery. Forget all the accusations you've ever heard of Peter Mayall's intrusions on this rare piece of French life- Geoff Reeve and his cohorts embarked on a level of revelry at the restaurant at Les Beaux that left the Maitre'd slack-jawed in disbelief. They were, quite simply, awful, uncultured and undeserving of French hospitality.
"Action-adventure thrillers" don't get much more uninteresting than this
I_Ailurophile17 July 2023
It's not exactly encouraging at the outset; plot development, dialogue, and scene writing alike all feel very thin, and one simply has to accept it at face value or immediately give up outright. David Birney spends a lot of scenes looking like a deer in the headlights, and some supporting cast members similarly don't come off well; in fairness, there are no few times when I can only question Geoffrey Reeve's choices as director. I recognize plenty of swell ideas in every regard, which I assume follow from Alistair MacLean's novel, but even the adapted screenplay has issues with narrative flow, nevermind particular instances of editing or sequencing. There is a complete, cohesive story being told, but the simple fact of the matter is that with the way 'Caravan to Vaccarès' is made, sometimes it really doesn't feel like it.
It all looks good, at least. There are many stunts and effects throughout, and they come off well; the filming locations and production design are excellent. The costume design, hair, and makeup are easy on the eyes; Stanley Myers' score isn't anything special, but it's enjoyable, and lends flavor. The narrative is actually fairly compelling, despite its weak cinematic treatment and the extraordinary leaps of faith it often requires as a viewer. Then again, even the heartiest suspension of disbelief can't withstand some of the storytelling decisions made here, and the Just So sensibilities that characterized the writing from the start collide with distinct dubious moments to place significant, low upper limits on one's engagement and entertainment. It would have taken astonishingly little to realize this as a satirical Euro-spy comedy, but no, it's an earnest action-adventure thriller. This poses a problem.
I don't think 'Caravan to Vaccarès' is altogether bad. It is, however, sadly middling, and even its best ideas just don't amount to much of anything. Insofar as it's enjoyable, it's a title one is able to enjoy very passively, without actively watching. There are worse ways to spend one's time, sure, but even if you're a major fan of someone involved, nor is there any specific reason to watch; Charlotte Rampling and Michel Lonsdale are rather wasted. Oh well. Check it out if you want, I won't stop you. Just don't get your hopes up.
It all looks good, at least. There are many stunts and effects throughout, and they come off well; the filming locations and production design are excellent. The costume design, hair, and makeup are easy on the eyes; Stanley Myers' score isn't anything special, but it's enjoyable, and lends flavor. The narrative is actually fairly compelling, despite its weak cinematic treatment and the extraordinary leaps of faith it often requires as a viewer. Then again, even the heartiest suspension of disbelief can't withstand some of the storytelling decisions made here, and the Just So sensibilities that characterized the writing from the start collide with distinct dubious moments to place significant, low upper limits on one's engagement and entertainment. It would have taken astonishingly little to realize this as a satirical Euro-spy comedy, but no, it's an earnest action-adventure thriller. This poses a problem.
I don't think 'Caravan to Vaccarès' is altogether bad. It is, however, sadly middling, and even its best ideas just don't amount to much of anything. Insofar as it's enjoyable, it's a title one is able to enjoy very passively, without actively watching. There are worse ways to spend one's time, sure, but even if you're a major fan of someone involved, nor is there any specific reason to watch; Charlotte Rampling and Michel Lonsdale are rather wasted. Oh well. Check it out if you want, I won't stop you. Just don't get your hopes up.
Like A Bunch of Film-Makers Went on Holiday to France and Made a Movie in their Spare Time.
MetalMiike13 July 2007
It's weird, this film; you get the impression that the makers of this snooze-fest spent more time in the local bars than on set. In fact, it's a surprise not to see Harry Alan Towers' name on the credits; it certainly has the flavour of one of his tax-shelter productions but here the motivation behind the project seems to be for all involved to enjoy a prolonged stay in Provence. Despite the fact that the film is supposed to take place all over the region, Les Baux and the area around it stands in for almost everything.
David Birney makes for a spectacularly colourless hero - as Michael Lonsdale says at one point "you're a walking cliché". What Lonsdale is doing in this is anyone's guess. For some reason, the most interesting character, played by Rampling, is sidelined, whereas, regardless of the book, she should have been the central figure because she clearly has the skill to carry the movie (which would have been dull anyway, but at least we'd have got more of something pretty to look at).
All in all a pointless affair that is only worth watching to see how action-less an action movie can be.
David Birney makes for a spectacularly colourless hero - as Michael Lonsdale says at one point "you're a walking cliché". What Lonsdale is doing in this is anyone's guess. For some reason, the most interesting character, played by Rampling, is sidelined, whereas, regardless of the book, she should have been the central figure because she clearly has the skill to carry the movie (which would have been dull anyway, but at least we'd have got more of something pretty to look at).
All in all a pointless affair that is only worth watching to see how action-less an action movie can be.
Slightly biased review....
andrew-york8015 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
So I was 8 or 9 years old when this was released and even younger when I spent three weeks on-set with my parents and siblings. On-set because my dad was a film lighting technician working as part of the production team. I'm now 52, and watching it again brings back some vivid memories of those days, for example my brother and I taking turns steering an 8-tonne generator lorry around the marshes (sitting on the drivers knee in my case), or staying up late in our rented villa near Saintes-Maries-de-la-Mer listening to the tales and jokes of the film crew and sitting on benches enjoying the food provided by the mobile catering (not to mention the end of production feast - where I even tasted and liked frogs legs).
Several of the scenes in the film I remember vividly, for example the VW beetle driving through the burning cabin, waiting in a building outside the bull-ring in Arles (it was a real bull-fight, so rightly I wasn't allowed in) and especially the circus bull-ring at the end where I was sat with my brother and sister on the fence watching as they were filming.
To the film itself, I'd agree it's not the best Alistair Maclean film, the action stilted, the dialog disjointed and the story has gaps (no worse than a tacky Roger Moore Bond film). But, for when it was made, the camerawork is simply excellent and the acting was by and large ok for a 70's film (I have seen much worse). I also like the fact that it's unashamedly bilingual with both French and English dialogue.
So all in all, I think this is an underrated film for the reasons I mention and for me personally, is forever part of my life. Unfortunately this site doesn't allow you to post photos or else I'd post some production photos as my dad took his camera on many of his jobs.
Several of the scenes in the film I remember vividly, for example the VW beetle driving through the burning cabin, waiting in a building outside the bull-ring in Arles (it was a real bull-fight, so rightly I wasn't allowed in) and especially the circus bull-ring at the end where I was sat with my brother and sister on the fence watching as they were filming.
To the film itself, I'd agree it's not the best Alistair Maclean film, the action stilted, the dialog disjointed and the story has gaps (no worse than a tacky Roger Moore Bond film). But, for when it was made, the camerawork is simply excellent and the acting was by and large ok for a 70's film (I have seen much worse). I also like the fact that it's unashamedly bilingual with both French and English dialogue.
So all in all, I think this is an underrated film for the reasons I mention and for me personally, is forever part of my life. Unfortunately this site doesn't allow you to post photos or else I'd post some production photos as my dad took his camera on many of his jobs.
This is a review of the British version
JohnHowardReid13 November 2016
Warning: Spoilers
PLEASE NOTE: This is a review of the British version, which runs no less than 98 minutes. Understandably, the movie was cut to 84 minutes in the U.S.A., but this version seems to have disappeared.
SYNOPSIS: An attempt to smuggle an East European scientist into the U.S.A., is hampered by international gangsters.
COMMENT: The popular thriller writer, Alistair MacLean, tackles the Camargue in this one. As might be expected, the action scenes are genuinely exciting. The photography and music score are also most effective, but the film is unfortunately saddled with an unimpressive cast (aside from the lovely Miss Rampling), directed in a monotonous TV style of close-up, after close-up, after close-up. This remarkably dull and ham-fisted approach not only emphasizes the tedious, hokey dialogue, but it also points up and draws audience attention to all the the seams and red herrings in the plot. True, actual locations help to restore a bit of interest, but not enough to capture an audience's constant attention.
SYNOPSIS: An attempt to smuggle an East European scientist into the U.S.A., is hampered by international gangsters.
COMMENT: The popular thriller writer, Alistair MacLean, tackles the Camargue in this one. As might be expected, the action scenes are genuinely exciting. The photography and music score are also most effective, but the film is unfortunately saddled with an unimpressive cast (aside from the lovely Miss Rampling), directed in a monotonous TV style of close-up, after close-up, after close-up. This remarkably dull and ham-fisted approach not only emphasizes the tedious, hokey dialogue, but it also points up and draws audience attention to all the the seams and red herrings in the plot. True, actual locations help to restore a bit of interest, but not enough to capture an audience's constant attention.
Dull Maclean adaptation
coltras3515 August 2022
American Neil Bowman is traveling through France when he meets British photographer Lila. They are hired by French land owner Duc de Croyter to escort a Hungarian scientist to New York. But they soon realize that the job is not a cushy number, and have to deal with a gang of kidnappers who will stop at nothing to get their hands on the scientist.
One of my favourite Alistair Maclean novels is turned into a flat and dull cinematic affair, lacking the excitement, the suspense and thrills that Maclean is renowned for, however there are some bright spots such as the scenery of Provence, the culture, the aerial shots, and some exciting action scenes especially the bullfighting scene at the end. It's just a shame the film overall lacks that spark, not very engaging, and dull. I normally like David Birney and he looks the part but his character isn't too likeable and he smirks most of the time. It's a shame that this doesn't match up with the exciting book. The problem is that the filmmakers deviated significantly from the book, which had a great plot and was tailor made for the big screen, and settled for what now is on film. A big faux pas on their part.
One of my favourite Alistair Maclean novels is turned into a flat and dull cinematic affair, lacking the excitement, the suspense and thrills that Maclean is renowned for, however there are some bright spots such as the scenery of Provence, the culture, the aerial shots, and some exciting action scenes especially the bullfighting scene at the end. It's just a shame the film overall lacks that spark, not very engaging, and dull. I normally like David Birney and he looks the part but his character isn't too likeable and he smirks most of the time. It's a shame that this doesn't match up with the exciting book. The problem is that the filmmakers deviated significantly from the book, which had a great plot and was tailor made for the big screen, and settled for what now is on film. A big faux pas on their part.
Boring and predictable!
RodrigAndrisan18 July 2022
Despite the fact that it has enough action. But the whole action is around the character "who has to get
to the USA" (Zuger) and is repetitive from beginning to end. Something totally crazy, we will never know why
Ferenc The Killer (Serge Marquand) had to shoot that man in the car in the first two minutes of the film. Charlotte Rampling is young and beautiful but her
role is as if she is not even in the film. 3 very good actors, Françoise Brion, Marcel Bozzuffi and Michel Lonsdale, are wasted in a banal story with many flaws. Watch for Graham Hill, the great racing pilot, as the helicopter pilot at the end!
The most boring film ever made?
buckaroobanzai5029 January 2003
Sometimes I wonder what possessed a studio or a director to make a certain film. And this is a prime example. I won't bother to try and explain the plot, because while watching it, I forgot what it was. Not even the luscious Charlotte Rampant Rampling can save this movie. And David Birney, a low grade ham if ever there was one, seems to be going through the motions while on the way to his bank.
Avoid at all costs!!!!!
Avoid at all costs!!!!!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
