Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Tyreece Hulme One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Eric Stevenson I was looking up this movie and noticed that it has yet to be released on a single format on video. I was always wondering how people managed to see such a rare film. Then again, how did the cast of "Mystery Science Theater 3000" stumble upon this? Was the film just preserved somewhere? I don't think this was an awful film. I actually enjoyed the fighting at the end. Of course, it's still a bad movie. It's mostly because it's just plain boring. It wasn't until near the end that I understood why a lot of people considered this a James Bond wannabe.The main character actually did get a few amusing lines in. It's just nothing too memorable. The atmosphere isn't good, but not the worst. There's some pretty gaudy details here that don't help. It didn't really have anything that stupid about it. I guess it wasn't a good movie to look at for the most part. There aren't any actors or actresses that I recognize. At least we got to see a few explosions in this. Of course, that's just near the end and it isn't worth the whole movie. I thought there was a little effort put into it. **

IndustriousAngel The IMDb-rating (3.0 at the time I write this review) is plain ridiculous, that's why I give this movie a write-up. Of course, it's cheesy and silly but no different from other spy comedies from the 60s, say the Matt Helm flicks. And the production values are much higher; there's good location shooting and beautiful sets, plus good camera work (I watched the wide-screen version). Capable acting there is little, but the pretty female cast makes a bit up for that. The music is nothing special and the movie definitely has some lengths despite the snappy running-time.SPOILERS: The main problem is probably that the "hero" never gets much to do (James Bond would have freed himself in the final act - well, I guess our hero waiting passively for his rescue is part of the spoof but it was a lousy decision, tension-wise). Secondly, the villain organisation, basically a small army of nubile young women aimed at creating a men-free reign, is doomed to fail from the start (in fact, one wonders how it ever got that big) because none of the pretty members, from leader to lowest rung, is able to keep her wits about her when left alone with a healthy male. That's a nice running gag at first but gets simply ridden to death. So overall, it's just a minor B-movie despite the high production values.But if you like other 60s spy comedies (say, Liquidator or the Matt Helm outings), you'll like this one well enough. It's even a valid spoof of early James Bond in many scenes.

shepardjessica This flick was always on a "double-bill" because nobody in it (including one of the leads, Frankie Avalon - who starred in Beach Movies before this) was REALLY A-list quality talent, except for the beautiful Ms. Shirley Eaton (Painted-gold girl in GOLDFINGER). The plot is wack-city on a bad dexedrine trip with ancient greed or something. The sacriligious testament to Z-movie cultures exemplifies NOTHING! This flick isn't even EVIL or robotic, it's just a zenith of confusion ("plot"-wise), let alone there's some beautiful babes spouting Amazon-like platitudes about illusions of purity.Needless to say, this sounds like a turkey (and technically it is), but it's an exploitation film without any known characteristic (sex, violence, bikers, horror..etc.) and manages to make you believe that these characters are actually believing what they're saying. George Nader was never great shakes as an actor, but had a lengthy career without having "known" talent or good hair. Shirley Eaton, one of the brightest, most beautiful and enchanting Brits of the 50's and 60's never gets to show something. But you have to check this one out. I give it a high (7) for this kind of thing rating, ..only because everyone involved SEEMS convinced it's a REAL PLOT! Anyway, give it a shot (if you can find it). Quite enjoyable in a sleepy, demented way.

quamp A Frankie Avalon movie without him singing in it? Apparently so. Then again, I'm not too sure that would have saved this film. Basically Frankie plays a James Bond goodie-two-shoes type that goes on an adventure against an evil woman named Sumuru that wants to take over the world so women can rule men. To this end, she and her army of women have become lovers, wives and mistresses to some of the most powerful men on earth. However, there's one lone hold out. To get near him, Sumuru's people frame Avalon for a murder and then tell him he's got to play ball or die. Avalon goes to the guy as a diplomat he was supposed to meet. After one of Sumuru's women kills the twin brother of this diplomat, Avalon and his pal try to defeat Sumuru. She has a device that can turn flesh into stone. It's about as exciting as watching paint dry. So are the rest of the gadgets, and the plot for that matter. Avoid if possible.