redwards-81247 Very good story line and this says something about human nature. The bottom line is do not lie and your conscious can stay healthy or clean. The romance between the three threw me off a little as the female mossad agent was portrayed as loose ie sleeps around which is not what these types of individuals usually do ie their mental makeup is stronger. Yes people fall in love, but typically not under these circumstances. The end was a little hurried and confusing as the doctor was found but more by chance than any under cover work.

boaz-11 People have different tastes; some go on the emotional side, and some on the rational side. I guess I'm in the latter, but this movie was made for the former crowd. The actors playing the roles of Mossad agents spend most of the time expressing their emotions "Hollywood style", instead of acting as cool headed trained agents. The actual details of the plot are often not very convincing. Like: Why is such an important operation is handled by only three agents? And when they catch the Nazi guy, they tie him with some piece of rope on the floor, and make sure they shave him every day? And why only one agent is watching him -- what do the other two do meanwhile? And why does a gynecologist need to poke a woman three times in her private part? And if he lived in a suburb of (West) Berlin (in 1964, which was surrounded by East German territory), why do they need a party at the Israeli embassy (which was in Bonn then)? And why do secret agents get such a public welcome reception upon their return?

runamokprods The basis for the 2010 Hollywood remake, this is an intelligent and clever spy thriller, with interesting moral overtones. However, as rarely happens I personally slightly preferred the re- make. I don't know if it was the acting, the writing or the directorial style, but for whatever reason I found myself both more moved and more chilled by the re-make. To be fair, that could be because I saw the re-make first, so knew the story, but this isn't really based on shocking twists, so I think the newer film simply worked better for me. In particular I found Helen Mirren more affecting than her Israeli counterpart, Gila Almagor. That said, this is still a strong film, and there are a couple of very powerful scenes between the agents and their Nazi prey that beat out their counterparts in the re-make.. Worth seeing if you're into films enough that seeing two different versions of a good story is fun, not a chore.

Nozz Any faithful Israeli moviegoer could have recommended better films for Hollywood to remake. This one was not particularly successful in its home country, but evidently Hollywood likes the idea of Israeli secret agents who are conflicted and vulnerable. Various details here are quite unbelievable: an Israeli secret agent who travels on an assassination mission with an Israeli passport, another who when attacked can think of no better countermove than jumping onto her opponent piggyback, and a straight razor casually in use for everyday shaving in 1964. The movie gets off to a bumpy start with some overly quick and contrived exposition, but it hits its pace when Gila Almagor, one of Israel's most respected veteran actresses, starts doing her stuff. She is joined by equally strong male veterans in small roles, but in the flashbacks to their younger selves the film doesn't hold attention as well, particularly since the two young male actors are not easy to tell apart and maybe because the youngsters need to act in other than their native language. The story is not true, but it recalls a bungled operation in 1973, known as the Lillehammer affair, which we like to think of as an anomaly. In THE DEBT, there is no indication that these half-hearted blunderers aren't your typical Israeli agents.