Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Junior Bronson This is a serviceable western comedy film. It's the third movie in the Helm series of movies and I remember watching them as a child. I loved the first one but the next two had a pretty big drop off in quality, especially this movie, which is not just third chronologically but third in quality.Dean Martin is funny like always but the movie just seems cheaper. The love interest is very good but the story is by the numbers and just more of the same. Particularly cheap looking are shots with a green screen effect (back in those days they actually just screened a film behind them) which looks just tacky and awful.The gadgets aren't as fun either, it's like they ran out of the good ideas in the first two films. Still it's fun with some great gags and we didn't get bored watching it so I give it a 6. Probably a tad generous.

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.

Uriah43 In this film the United States is working on an experimental spaceship that resembles a flying saucer. To pilot it they have enlisted the aid of an I.C.E. agent by the name of "Sheila Sommers" (Janice Rule). Upon takeoff everything is fine until it is commandeered by remote control across the border into Mexico. A week or so later Sheila is found wandering out of the jungle with no memory of what has happened to her other than her complete fear of men. It is at this point that Matt Helm (Dean Martin) is tasked with locating the flying saucer. So with Sheila under the illusion that Matt is her husband, they go to Acapulco to investigate. Anyway, like almost all Matt Helm films this one has plenty of action and scantily clad women to keep most men's interest for a good portion of the time. However, the movie seemed to drift from one scenario to another a bit too quickly, the dialogue was somewhat flat and everything seemed to lack cohesion. But both Dean Martin and Janice Rule performed in an adequate manner and while it could have possibly been written better I will go out on a limb and give it average rating.

MartinHafer A bizarre looking Mexican dude (Albert Salmi in very, very strange garb) steals a flying saucer built by the good guys. So, it's up to Matt Helm and a crazy lady who thinks she is Matt's wife to go to the rescue. However, the film does have a happy ending. The lady actually realizes that the perv she thinks she's married to isn't her husband! Oh, and they stop Salmi and save the day.Okay, I'll admit before I go any further that I don't particularly like the Matt Helm films. Part of this is because Dean Martin appears to be sleeping through the pictures. I have heard of giving an "effortless performance", but here Dean-O doesn't seem to try to break a sweat or attempt anything other than a walk-through sort of performance. Part of it is the cheapness of the film itself, such as the scene where he slides on a rail, the obvious dummy falling off the roof or the poor use of stunt doubles or the obvious wires suspending the woman near the end of the movie--they're so obviously bad yet no one seemed to care. Part of it is that the films are one sexual double-entendre after another--the sort that put 12 year-olds into hysterics but non-brain injured adults usually can't stand. And, part of it is the utter smarminess and crappiness of the films. They just didn't try very hard or have decent production values in this film.Amazingly, however, this film comes off almost as an Austin Powers film--and it's obvious that they inspired this later series. The problem, though, is that while the Powers films were sleazy, they also were funny in an undemanding and crude way. The Helm films are just sleazy and crude--and the single joke that is the film wears thin very fast. And, believe it or not, the Helm films had many, many, many more crude lines and sexual references--coming so rapidly and poorly that you cringe at the terrible writing. Because of this, Austin comes off as a joke while Helm comes off as a boorish pig...an old, alcoholic and boorish pig.It's pretty obvious that I didn't like the movie very much. So the question is, is the film bad enough to have been included in the book "The Fifty Worst Films" by Harry Medved? Harry obviously thought so, though I am inclined to say no...just because there are more than 50 worse films out there--probably several hundred, actually. However, I could see why it was included. For spy films, it might just be the worst from series films--though individual spy films such as THE NASTY RABBIT and LAST OF THE SECRET AGENTS? make THE AMBUSHERS seem like Shakespeare!! Oh...the music was pretty good. There, I COULD say something positive about this film after all!!