Steve McQueen gives one of the best portrayals of a psychopath ever, whether he intended to or not. Whether it's his game playing with the authorities... his pulling off the crime to see if he can (there is no true profit motive here... he has more money than he knows what to do with), all are classic behaviours. But the TRUE telling is in the scene where... after tormenting the cops... Crown tries to laugh. It's as though he knows he's supposed to be maniacally happy, but doesn't know how to achieve it. And everything he goes through as far as the 'love affair' goes... and sets her up to leave her and escape... pure non-conscious behaviour. The movie may SEEM dated with time... but the portrayal is as accurate as any you will ever find.

Horrible song (Windmills) Horrible rendition of the above-mentioned horrible song, usually injected into inopportune moments or when the action grinds to one of its periodic halts. Dated 60's editing techniques, especially the split screen, clutter up the flow of the film. Windup-doll Faye Dunaway wore some of the ugliest hairdos I've ever seen. Steve McQueen mumbles and bumbles his way through the film with an aura of boneheaded machismo. I was around when this film was initially released and nobody thought McQueen was cool then. The passing years have not been kind to this film, making it appear creakier and older and even less 'hip'. Grade: F+ (Good for a few unintentional laughs)

This movie clomps through some dated sixties tropes: that women need to use their sex appeal as much as their intelligence; that seducing a man is merely a technique; and that, in the end, women are slaves to their feminine feelings. Both actors are miscast--McQueen because he's anything but suave and debonair (there's only one Cary Grant), because he's unattractive in closeup, showing tobacco-engraved wrinkles and sun damage (there's only one Cary Grant!), and because he plays only one character, that of the smirking bad boy. You don't rise in the Boston Brahmin banking echelon and maintain that persona. His performance started skidding with his faked hysterical laughter and never regained traction. Faye Dunaway delivers her lines with the skill and conviction of a Jackie Gleason chorus girl, swings her miniskirted hips and fondles herself with sixties-era "*" fingernail polish, but she's out of her depth. Her hairdos recall Princess Leia's cinnamon buns in surreal bulk. It's worth remembering that, like Cybill Shepherd, she was a fashion model to start with, and can't stop composing her flawless features into camera-ready freezes. The plot is sketchy, the motivation unclear, the supporting characters, particularly the heist men, left unexplored with the exception of Jack Weston's sweaty Erwin. Even Crown's motivation is barely hinted at. You don't care that Vicki loses her man in the end, and I actually wished for Crown to get his comeuppance--then, at least, McQueen's bad-boy insouciance would have something to work itself on. Gimmicks like split-screen, slow dissolves, and the psychedelic colors (the costuming is particularly hideous, putting Dunaway in stale-coffee shades of beige and black, and minor characters in the ugliest of lime, orange, and pink) don't annoy as much when viewed as artifacts of a particularly dismal time in fashion and film--they arouse a more indulgent compassion, like what we experience looking at old high-school pictures of heaped-high hairdos, narrow short trouser legs, and garish makeup.

Bored decadent rich man plays games with ordinary peoples lives for no other reason than he can. A not very likable premise for a movie but it is very popular. Used as an epitome of coolness - with laddish aspirations of greatness gleamed from it for a couple of generations of bored not-so-bright 'Man-children'. I know that many males identify with Steve McQueen maybe because he is your average joe in looks ( verging on ugly ) and his diminutive size ( 5'9 ) is very appealing and non-threatening. His characters drive fast and don't give a damn about anybody - anti-hero pinup boy - an adolescents wet dream. Beneath his supposedly cool laconic exterior, this actor seems to hide a blank interior rather like the character he plays in this film. He is the ultimate lad. Listen to him chortle to himself on his prowess when he returns to his mansion after the heist- some of the saddest acting I have seen in awhile. In fact right up there with his performance in the chess scene - which is laughably bad - but then maybe thats the point ? From the frame within a frame nonsense to that farcical theme tune, it's lame entertainment. The female protagonist/foil is either a sexual object to be won or a non-ethical money scheming femme fatale who is bright but obviously confused by his big kid magnetism. The film ups and turns with a very predictable and ludicrous plot, the film makers made every character one dimensional and dislikable, again maybe on purpose - something for the Lads, budding crooks and capitalists to 'empathise with' ( or is that an oxymoron ? ) In the end the Bored decadent rich man leaves to sunnier climes with all the cash - ( He is bored with everything, cares for nothing and nobody cares for him. ) As the girl cries, caught between an ethical dilemma, her lust and the reward she's lost - he smirks in his getaway plane.

The entire method of robbery in this film is lifted intact from the 1952 film "Kansas City Confidential"...? Two completely different films in every other respect, the robbery is exactly the same. I like "The Thomas Crown Affair" very much, Faye Dunaway is particular stunning in this highly entertaining film. As much as I have heard it talked about, I've never heard anyone mention the "borrowed" subplot of the robbery. I suppose this is not unusual to film. The entire second half of "Border Town" (1935) is used again in "They Drive By Night" (1942), and yet each film credits different writers.

The Thomas Crown affair begs the question. What do the rich think of when they are bored? Norman Jewison decided to answer that question with a subtle, but over the top version of cops and robbers. Thomas Crown (suprisingly, but adroitly played by Steve McQueen) is a bored, millionaire who asks, "Who do I want to be tomorrow?" To that end, he decides on 'kicks.' In what seems like an absentminded challenge to himself, Crown designs and implements a down to the minute bank robbery. The plan is fantastic. He selects and hires five total strangers at random, instructs them on their part of the Bank robbery, then sets them in motion. What follows is perhaps the finest cat and mouse crime game between two intelligent and sophisticated players. Faye Dunaway plays Vicki Anderson, a top notch insurance investigator who for ten percent of recovered loot promises the capture of her agile quarry. Standing by to arrest the elusive Crown is Paul Burke, who plays Lt. Edward 'Eddy' Malone. Jack Weston portrays Erwin Weaver the get-a-way driver who could jeopardize Crowns Perfect crime. With the famous, "Windmills of your Mind" theme song, the viewer is hauntingly allowed into the mind of a sympathetic man and one cannot help but root for the thief. This film was McQueen's favorite. *****

It is significant that the least cool film by Steve McQueen, King of Cool, is the one in which he strives hardest to be cool. Of course, effort is the antithesis of cool. I had expected to enjoy this film as a frothy 60s pop-artefact in the ARABESQUE vein, but it is tedious and gauchely unchic. Director Jewison has subsequently proven himself to be bereft of interest in his later career, but he confuses ripping off adventurous film-makers with being adventurous himself. The film is NOT stylish, which is its claim to fame - its devices are irritating, its form is not aligned to an artistic point of view, the colour is ugly, the unravelling of plot is insultingly implausible, its use of stars is hopeless. Faye Dunaway, bristling with sexuality in BONNIE AND CLYDE, is an unloveable mannequin in this film, with an appalling taste in clothes. Steve McQueen, one of the great actors, is completely wrong for this film, lacking the necessary dark suavity of a Cary Grant. These characters are ciphers, without history, motivation or even charm: Thomas Crown plans a heist for kicks - at one point he hilariously suggests that he is fighting the 'system' - a $4 million capitalist dealing in property and currency! The film tries amid the inept gloss to make some 'serious' points - capitalism is linked to crime and death; Crown, successful businessman, has a dark, split personality (lots of mirror/frame shots, hysterical laughing, split-screens). The use of this latter device is annoying and uninventive - unlike the complexity of Greenaway's THE PILLOW BOOK, in which multiple images disorient the viewer with unexpected juxtapositions and disruptions of time and space, the images here are all narratively coherent and hence redundant. The flashy direction is so satisfied with itself that it bungles the tension and excitement in not one, but TWO heist sequences, surely an expected skill in the 60s. Compare this film to the amazing CHARADE, a genuinely stylish 60s film, which, while tongue-in-cheek, played its thrills straight; incorporated its stylistic and fashionable elements to visualise a growing desire between its two stars (Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant were invented for this kind of film), who provide a genuine, touching, playful attraction, which evokes enormous audience goodwill, without resorting to gimmicks like the chess sequence, which is possibly meant to be funny, because it's certainly not erotic. Although Jewison probably wanted to replicate the freshness and romance of an early Nouvelle Vague film, he has only succeeded in emulating that egotistical fraud Claud Lelouch. Like that purveyor of insipid, 'significant', romances, the only saving grace is the beautifully schmaltzy score, this one by Michel Legrand (although for real Legrand beauty, check out LES PARAPLUIES DE CHERBOURG).

The original "Thomas Crown Affair" directed by Norman Jewison is one of the coolest movies ever made and great fun for all of its 100 minutes - a clever bank-heist caper combined with the sensual romance where both participants (the brilliant bank robber and his match, the sultry and shrewd insurance investigator) are sophisticated, quick-witted and oh so cool. The split-screen technique really works well in this movie and I should mention the song "The Windmills of Your Mind" by Michel Legrand that very deservingly received an Oscar - and it does not happen often in the best song categories. The chess game between "King Of Cool" Steve McQueen and 27 year old Faye Dunaway in the most provocative dress possible is one of the sexiest and most exiting without actual sex involved (my favorite kind of scenes - let my imagination work, let everything happen in my mind) scenes ever filmed. IMO, the 60s was one of the best dressed decades ever with the first wave of mini (and I mean it) skirts and elegant suits and dresses. From Faye Dunaway's interview to "USA Today" about working with McQueen, "We had the most magical spark. Our hearts and souls combined. There was no romance off screen but on screen it was like a smack."

I cannot think of anything that I did not like about the TCA. I read some of the other reviews, and I can understand why they might come to their conclusions to the contrary. First, McQueen does look a little out of character being a financier, but as in most of his other roles, he is in control of the situation. He plays the loner outside of the situation and/or system. Even the women that came into his arms are issued temporary visa only as shown by Faye Dunaway left holding the bag at the end of the movie. He played her like a violin. Someone mentioned that they hated the multiple shots used in several scenes, and that it was overused and probably pointless. I completely disagree. I think that it adds dimension and excitement when it used. During the robbery, the viewer can witness several aspects of the caper as it unfolds. The polo shots were fantastic and exciting. To me McQueen was a bit of a mystery. What did he really want? "Kicks" as suggested by Paul Burke the police investigator? He told Faye Dunaway that it was he against the system, which leaves me a little less than satisfied. He certainly seemed to be bored. Everything came to him too easily. Faye Dunaway started out great with the pitbull attitude toward reclaiming the money for the insurance reward. I liked the repartee at the initial meeting with McQueen at the art auction. I felt she showed weakness at their first dinner meeting when McQueen accused her of having a "funny, dirty little mind". The surveillance, "replacing the carpet" in his mansion and IRS audits forever were good blows she landed. McQueen always seemed to be one step ahead. Even before the last robbery when he said he had to know where she stood, I think he already was on the plane to Europe without her. For Faye, it was a lose-lose situation. Whether she ever was really in love with him or not, she got far to close to draw the line. The chess scene in McQueen's den was probably the sexiest scene I have ever witnessed. Everything occurred in the viewer's mind -- no nudity or anything more than kiss on screen. This movie was wonderful, a very good look at a refreshing look at the 60s with wealth and power. Even cigarette smoking had not become a pariah. PS: I saw the Pierce Brosnan version of TCA, and it was zero in my estimation, and that was with the nudity. Don't waste your time on it.

A bank executive Thomas Crown (Steve McQueen) pulls off a multi-million dollar heist and craftily shifts his ill-gotten gains to a safe-haven in Geneva. However, insurance investigator Vicki Anderson (Faye Dunaway)and her partner Eddy Malone (Paul Burke) are hot on his heels and are determined to capture Crown, but complications ensue when the criminal and investigator seemingly fall for one another. I can imagine back in the late 60's that a film like The Thomas Crown Affair would sell itself; Steve McQueen (the epitome of cool) and a plot involving a heist job (essentially an Oceans 11 or Italian Job type film). Whilst it may have won audiences over back in the day, viewing it from a modern perspective the whole thing looks incredibly dated and badly put together... OK I'm prepared to accept that the first 10-15 minutes of this film are good and lay out the foundations for a fairly promising heist film, but pretty much as quickly as it starts this film stops dead and slowly ambles towards dullsville. So OK the heist happens and then what?? Nothing, expect scene after scene of dull chatter and next to no plot development. Faye Dunaway and Paul Burke arrive as private investigators and despite an early lively and spirited performance from Dunaway the film never really lifts off the ground. There is just no excitement, intensity or fun in this film - anyone expecting an Italian Job or Oceans 11 type film is going to be mightily disappointed. The film is also filled with lots of elongated and pointless sequences; Dunaway and McQueen spending 10 minutes cruising round the beach in a beach-buggy and them both having a game of chess which seemed to span for about 5 minutes or so. You may think I'm being cynical, but to me that is 15 minutes of screen time that I felt could have been better utilised on character or plot development. Having witnessed such mind-numbing boredom and being in the face of such dull characters I did hope that there may be light at the end of the tunnel, but no the film offers no real surprises and happily coasts its way towards Dullsville. Be warned folks, just because a film stars Steve McQueen and is a heist film it doesn't automatically make it a good film. This is crap and I think that the only reason that it has a reasonable rating is because it is a Steve McQueen film. Yes he is the King Of Cool and yes he is quite a good screen presence which may have gone along way back in the late 60's, but let's not pretend that this rubbish is any good simply because Steve McQueen stars in it. The truth is that it is dull and rather forgettable.