Thriller Watch: Arabesque (1966)

Watched:  05/02/2026

Format:  TCM

Viewing:  First

Director:  Stanley Donen 

As a fan of artist Robert McGinnis, I had seen the poster art for Arabesque (1966) for years, but it's also a movie nobody ever really mentions, which I found odd given the star power, director Stanley Donen and a score by Henry Mancini.  

But I did record the film off TCM and so gave it a whirl.  

It becomes immediately clear that in the wake of Charade, Donen and Universal wanted to try to do that again.  But on the second attempt, it just doesn't quite work the same way.  

You can't blame the leads - Gregory Peck is Gregory Peck, and Sophia Loren is Sophia Loren (and maybe even more so.  Good golly.).  Peck is trying on being Cary Grant and for reasons, Loren is playing an Arabian woman.  I mean, it's an entire movie full of Arab characters played by non-Arabs, which isn't entirely a shock when you consider this is five years after West Side Story having some interesting ideas about who Puerto Ricans are.

The plot would maybe make Dan Brown a bit cross as this is about a specialist in ancient languages and scripts (Peck) who is recruited by the Prime Minister of Nameless Arabian Country (in secret) to be  a double agent and work for a shady fellow to translate some hieroglyphs.  

Sophia Loren is an unknown quantity, first seen in cahoots the baddie, and then aligning herself with Peck - and then it's unclear what her game is.

Her job, though, is to be Sophia Loren looking, let's be honest, amazing.  She's dressing in the best clothes and has just astounding hair and make-up, and she's witty and sexy and fun.  And that is literally what the movie feels like what it's selling as a movie star in a way that movies haven't done in decades, for good or ill.

But the movie wants to be *fun* so badly, and wants to fit into the burgeoning cultural swing into hep cats and cool kittens - I mean, check out that poster - that it sometimes barely feels like anything is at stake.  And maybe that's the point?  But it's easy to get lost in the "who is she working for and why?" sub-plot and kind of forget to care about the main plot, which is mostly chasing around a piece of paper.

I didn't dislike the movie.  It's fine.  If someone was picking between this and Charade and I'd direct them to Charade.  Sometimes movies from this period and in this rough genre have surprised me, like The Silencers.  But this one just felt like it cruised along without much behind it, with confusing stakes, and what was someone a bit too old for the mod, Swinging London scene of 1966.  And then layering on so many concerns about Arabians not really participating in that scene that it's all a little baffling. 

It *does* have some interesting photography courtesy Christopher Challis, and it really helps translate what I think Donen wanted to do - occasionally tilting into psychedelic imagery and surrealism, or using the frame to show the vibe in creative ways.  

But, also, I don't think Peck lifts a gun in the whole movie, let alone the canon in his hand in the poster.  But it sure sells *a* movie if not this one.  But you sure know where Steranko was getting some of his ideas when you ponder the thrillers of the mod era.