Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Konterr Brilliant and touching

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

JohnHowardReid NOTES: Number three of the four "Matt Helm" films: The others: The Silencers, Murderers Row (both 1966), The Wrecking Crew (1969).Despite almost unanimously bad reviews, the movie turned in a tidy domestic rentals gross of $4.7 million, but overseas returns were somewhat disappointing. COMMENT: The third and least entertaining of the Matt Helm adventures, this one has an even sillier script than Murderer's Row. Dean Martin gives an extremely lack-luster performance, delivering even his few witty lines in a bored, listless fashion. Levin's direction is tired too, and the action scenes lack punch. There is a comic execution scene that is not even a fraction as funny as that performed by Raymond Griffith way back in 1926 in "Hands Up". Albert Salmi over-acts, but Kurt Kasznar turns in a delightfully amusing portrayal, and Senta Berger is eye-catchingly decorative. For the first time (and in response no doubt to numerous requests), the Slaygirls are given a few lines to speak. In future, I guarantee they will keep their mouths closed. And personally, I found their costumes on this occasion too grotesque.

aimless-46 "The Ambushers" (1967) is the third film in Dean Martin's four-film "Matt Helm" franchise. It is significantly weaker than the other three and the only one which does not feature a song by the Steubenville Thrush, I don't think that omission impacted the film's relative quality. Martin was not in Sinatra's class as a singer or an actor but he was effortlessly likable and had some comedic talent. "The Ambushers" gets two stars instead of one because Janice Rule gives a solid performance in the face of what must have been a professionally embarrassing production for her. She looks extremely uncomfortable when she is not looking bored - I imagine her mind alternated between these two states. I can't imagine that the typical Irwin Allen production design motivated any of the cast.That said the film works quite well as a window into the pre-Woodstock era cultural vacuum. It throws a bevy of pretty young starlets onto the screen, none having the slightest dimensionality or being involved in anything remotely erotic. Sizzle-wise it's all form over substance.Rule (whose character physically looks a lot like Mrs. Peel) does provide a bit of erotic voltage in much the same classy detached way Diana Rigg did in a standard episode of "The Avengers". Working against all the females in the cast are some of the worst costume choices you can imagine. Apparently for a few days in 1967 dull finish boots that look to be made from shag carpet were trendy, unfortunately those days appear to have been the days when the wardrobe choices were made.The film had a villainess or at least the Francesca Madeiros character was intended to serve such a purpose. Francesca is played by a foreign actress named Senta Berger. She has orange skin, no waist, and wears large Christmas tree ornaments for earrings. It is rumored that Francesca's look served as the inspiration for the Oompa, Loompa characters in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". The film features a flying saucer and I wonder if the original script called for Francesca to be from Venus, perhaps they forgot to communicate the changes to the wardrobe people. That might explain the incredible leaps of logic and obvious gaps in the development of her character. Berger's character is so garishly moronic that it elevates Rule's character or at least helps you appreciate the degree to which Rule was able to transcend this hopeless mess.Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

Simon Foster I'd like to know more about the people writing negative reviews of a movie like this: how old are they? were they even alive during the 60s? This movie is a product of a different age. It was a simpler time. You could get away with making movies that had this kind of production values, script and, yes - allusions to rape in an action-comedy notwithstanding - moral values (I'm not saying they're high, they're just an indicator of the time).Do you watch Charlie Chaplin or Laurel & Hardy and complain about the cinematography? You're watching a movie from the 60s guys - it's a time capsule. It can teach you about what life was like then, because at the time the Matt Helm movies were all completely acceptable and even successful.I dread to think how you lot would handle a 'Carry On' film - yet they were some of the most successful movies ever made in England. You'd probably brand them sexist, vulgar, childish and uninventive though...duh!

bob the moo During a test run, an experimental American flying disk is captured by an unknown force. It's pilot, an ICE agent is also captured and only found months later wandering in the jungle frightened and disorientated. She is teamed with the only agent who can make her normal – Matt Helm. The two go to the area she was found to investigate the whereabouts of the lost saucer.I think I have seen all the Matt Helm films (which I hope will serve as my punishment rather than Hell!) and I don't know why I keep going back. I have seen them out of order and this is one of the last I saw (despite being the second or third of the series). Safe to say, any merit that the first film had is gone even by this early stage. The `plot' is silly and ignored for the most part – instead we just have as many beautiful girls for Helm to kiss and goons for him to fight as possible. I know it is a spoof but it isn't funny and is woeful rather than mocking.The girls are all beautiful and if you're just looking for playful titillation then this may suffice. They all wear low cut tops and short skirts, showing bellies etc when possible – and if there is any opportunity for a costume to get ripped then it gets ripped! However it does begin to tire a little when Martin turns up. He is lazy in the lead – just content to touch the girls as much as he can. He does do a few good jokes (like having a few Sinatra records around the place) but really this is one big ego trip for him. The villains are unmemorable and without teeth and the only members of the cast you're left remembering is Janice Rule (the original Ja Rule!) and the really sexy Senta Berger– both of whom are sadly only used for their looks.Overall the girls are the only reason to watch this – and even that is not really worth putting yourself through this for. The comedy is dire, the plot weak and Dean Martin hardly even tries to do a good job. Another weak entry in a very weak series.