slightlymad22 Continuing my plan to watch every Sean Connery movie in order, I come to Ransom (1974)Plot In A Paragraph: A gang of hijackers led by Ray Petrie (Ian McShane) seize a British plane as it is landing in Scandinavia. police chief Colonel Tahlvik (Connery) is assigned to rescue the plane and its passengers. But he must also deal with the problem of the British Ambassador, whose residence has been seized by a second group of terrorists.It has took me 4 attempts to get through this movie, as on of my three attempts last night, I fell asleep each time. On paper it sounds promising, but oh dear.After two great performances in The Anderson Tapes and The Offence, It was two steps forward and then two steps back following them with Zardoz and Ransom. Zardoz required nothing of Connery except that he looked good in a loon cloth and in Ransom he just looks bored and uninterested. A classic case of an actor phoning it in, which is a shame as you could see what a great actor Connery was despite the poor box office results. Ransom was the second Connery movie in a row to tank at the box office. Not even recouping back its $1.5 million budget.

bkoganbing In the generally peaceful country of Norway some terrorists have grabbed the British ambassador and are holding him for Ransom. What they want is some of their compatriots released from British prisons. When that doesn't happen, an airliner is hijacked and landed at Oslo airport and the Norwegians have two hostage dramas going simultaneously.Sean Connery plays the Norwegian head of what would be the equivalent of their Delta Force team. Dealing with one situation is bad enough, but dealing with two at the same time can strain anyone's nerves. Connery as always is the good tough action hero. His opposite number is Ian McShane who heads the team of hijackers on the plane. They're evenly matched, but it seems like McShane is almost too good at what he does. Connery continually remarks about the professionalism shown. Of course there's a reason for that, but I can't give that away lest you want to see Ransom.The surprise ending in Ransom doesn't make up for a very sloppy script. We never do find out exactly who these terrorists are and what they're beef with the establishment is. Ransom is like a made for TV film that someone decided on the strength of Sean Connery's name would do well on the big screen instead. It barely made a ripple when released, but by that time Sean Connery was a big enough star so that a mediocre film didn't really hamper his career.

hondo8 I thought the story flowed nicely and as I watched it I had the feeling it may be one of those good sleepers I had missed in the past. Really most of the actors were weak...but Connery and especially McShane were good. I have to say the ending made no sense at all...and when that happens you wonder why you watched the movie. Did I miss something or were both Connery and McShane(Deadwood) after the same guy. If so why did they fight in the plane....I may have missed something but weren't they basically on the same side? Were the hijackers on the plane all working for the Britsh? Just an absolutely bad ending to a movie that actually had some potential.

Mikew3001 "Ransom" is a Swedish 1974 action thriller about a bunch of terrorist taking the British ambassador in Sweden and an airplane full of passengers on an airport as hostages for blackmailing the government to free some radical political prisoners - a typical plot of seventies' politics and thriller books and movies. It's Sean Connery's turn now, playing the Swedish secret service boss Tahlvik, to free the hostages, and he finds out a shocking political conspiracy between the governments and the terrorists...Well, only Sean Connery is worth being watched in this movie, playing a moustache-wearing agent in his European post-007 years with the well-known James Bond touch, but with a sharper and more tragical edge. The other actors are rather mean (watch out for Germany's legendary "Kommissar Keller" Erik Ode in a cameo), but Finnish director Caspar Wrede and his production team didn't do a really good job!Although the story is good, Wrede didn't know how to produce action, thrills, subplots and interesting characters. Except for some explosions in the beginning of the films and a short showdown at the end, the pacing is boring, the characters are dull and the editing seems like from a first-step student short cut. With an experienced director, photographer and editor, this movie could have been a lost little treasure maybe. So you can only wonder why Connery and Jerry Goldsmith, who provided a rather weaker score here, got involved with this picture. "Ransom" is far away from the great new wave of Swedish action, thriller and political crime books and films of the last 15 years - and it can't compete at all with Joseph Sargeant's brilliant subway hijacking drama "The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3" which was released a short time before.