ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Ariella Broughton It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

mmunier I see 6 reviews here, let's not forget we're now in 2018! I can't imagine too many of younger generations bothering about such a film. But I am from that generation and in the 60's was a young man. It was just my lunch "course" served on a small TV screen with low sound quality. it was an ordinary day but as soon as the film started I found the story interesting and intriguing...Then the lady turned up and we had to believe things would change in this devilish remote desert station. Until then and we the arrival of a new worker there were five men all having very different characters, so living in close quarters you would expect some friction. Beside Peter Van...I did not know any of the other actors but I felt they all did a reasonable job. Yes a little over dramatic but we have to keep in mind the period. It pleasantly filled the duration of the feature.

JasparLamarCrabb A virtually forgotten potboiler directed by Seth Holt. A disparate group of men working an oil refinery in the Sahara get company in the form of foxy car crash victim Carroll Baker. Sexual tension ensues as Baker leads on at least two of the men, including group leader Peter van Eyck, who's desperate to get out of his miserable existence. Adding to the mix is Baker's possessive husband (Biff McGuire), who, though bedridden, refuses to let Baker go. Extremely well acted but perhaps a bit too melodramatic to really be taken seriously, there is nonetheless plenty to recommend...Baker is in peak form and Van Eyck is great. Ian Bannen steals the show as a crass bully and Denholm Elliott is his uptight foil. There's a great music score by Ron Grainer. The script was worked on by Bryan Forbes.

pjc7992 As you look at the evolution of film through the 50's and 60's, one trend readily observed is that of increasing use of sex and nudity - as earlier boundaries began to expand. This film, coming in 1965, appears on the cusp of a change from more veiled hints of sex to more explicit scenes as the 60's closed and we moved into the 70's and beyond.A few themes run through this film, one being that of the overbearing boss many of us have been saddled with in our careers - one who knows that the men have signed on for an extended stay under his "command" and plays his hand to the hilt. A boss who has little or no regard for his men and motivates through intimidation.Clearly, the director reaches out to the farthest boundaries of the times (and mores) to inject the sexual tension of Ms. Baker arriving on the scene. She is beautiful and sexual and is never out of control of the situation. There is nothing explicit here (but oh so close); nevertheless, the suggestive nature of visits from members of the crew works just as well. In the end, she stands up to the crew commander in a way none of the men (save one) ever had.I think the film is a well-acted little gem.

Kirasjeri Sexual and other tensions at a Sahara pumping station heat up when a female is added to the mix. A turgid little B&W potboiler of no meaning notable only as it ran as the 'B' feature in theaters in 1963 for the wonderful "Topkapi".