Was Cross (Burt Lancaster) really guilty of treason or not?
I tuned in for the last twenty-five minutes or so, having seen most of the film before, but having always missed the end. Are we meant to be deliberately left wondering at the end if Cross was a traitor, or did I miss out on something?
I think he was wrestling with the idea, but not completely convinced to turn. Remember he was part of the group of soldiers who freed the people in Germany's concentration camp -the conversation with his cello playing friend made that clear. Also his drunken argument about communism with his Russian friend. All this and more leads me to believe he had not turned.
shareThen what was his business with the Czech (how do we spell that anyways??) girl at the end of the movie? "Evidence hard to get". It was obviously given to her by her late wife, but for what purpose exactly?
shareHe was technically guilty of treason, but he hadn't sold out to the Russians; rather, he was in business for himself, stockpiling money so that he and his wife could run away and retire together.
The Czech courier was helping him pass info. Perhaps at the end she was giving him the "insurance" that Laurier had given her -- I'm not 100% sure.
I just watched this film and I agree with u, he was working for himself. Remember, he wanted to get out of the spying business, not change sides. The move was good, I think.
shareIt looks like he was playing both sides to make a little nest egg for himself.
It's that man again!!