I saw it, liked it. I don't recall much other than the ending.

Some of the most implausible sh!t I've ever seen in a movie.

I thought it was a great adaptation of decent book, that somehow captured both the pseudo-realism and overblown bombast of Frederick Forsyth's novels without that being a jarring contradiction. I have to agree with the OP about Zimmerman, although it is only this and AMFATS of his that I have seen and really rated. His ability to capture a time and a place is extremely impressive. The location shots were all great here and felt very French, despite there not being a French accent to be found.

The ability to condense huge sections of a book into under 2hrs 25mins is very impressive. There is no fat on this film but, other than the final 2mins, it never feels rushed. You could easily make a 6 or 8 part series out of the book.

Very memorable scenes such as:

• the staged horse accident (how the hell did they coordinate 2 animals and a human stunt to such perfection?)

• the minimalist violence and gore in one, blink-and-you'll-miss-it murder

• the dreaded inevitability of another death (out of sight of the camera, with only the tell tale plop of a falling lobster to convey the horror)

• "they won't find a soldier who would raise a gun to me"

You are never going to get a completely coherent and believable tale from an author with the limitations of Frederick Forsyth, but as a film focussed on hitmen / undercover / terrorists I enjoyed this far more than any Bond film or movie on notorious crooks like Carlos the Jackal. Probably the first Bourne film is the only one that comes close for me.

Just watched it for the first time tonight and it has aged very well. A more considered final 2mins would have made this an all time classic, but as it is I go for 8/10.