The Worst Film Ever

An Exercise In Nonsense

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

An American agent, Bob Fleming (Richard Harrison), is sent to Europe to track down the whereabouts of two Russian scientists. They may have secrets important to the West. However, before he can find either, both are assassinated. Operating under the assumption that they had transferred their secrets to microfilm, he's asked to find it before the Russians do. As you'd rightly suspect, his path is blocked by a plethora of baddies, guns, explosions, women, and car chases. It's all a lot of fun.Secret Agent Fireball is a nice Eurospy effort from director Luciano Martino. Martino keeps the film lively and never lets it overstay its welcome in one place for too long. Richard Harrison plays a good lead. He's got a natural appeal and knows how to use it. Dominique Boschero and Wandisa Guida make for perfect spy movie females. Either would have been at home in a Bond movie. And the whole bunch of Russian dudes, especially Luciano Pigozzi, are quite good. The plot is easy to follow, but has a couple of twists. I especially liked the twist right at the end. The only thing missing from Secret Agent Fireball that would have made it even better is a big action set-piece. I suppose that's where you can see the movie's budget limitations popping up. The film does play a lot like a 60s European travelogue. The locations shots are all nicely done. I'm always impressed in a movie like this when I see what 60s-era Beirut looked like. Very interesting. Overall, I'll be generous and rate it a 7/10.

Even if I didn't like ' 60s (and some later) spy movies, I would still hate that "Bond rip-off" label that they almost all get (at least, the "escapist" ones). Even fans of them always seem to be saying that. Sure, they owe a lot to the Bond movies, but they aren't copies. Having said that, this one maybe owes more than most, but in a good way. Of course, Richard Harrison always seemed to fit very well into these Italian adventure films of all kinds. And Dominique Boschero was very good as the "damsel in distress". And especially, Wandisa Guida was very good as the "villainess", as was the actor (I can never think of his name) who played her partner - though when they're together, I can't help thinking of a serious version of Boris and Natasha (he even has the same coat and hat!). But this had one down side. That actress and character seemed just right as an all-out "villainess", the kind who actually seduces the hero, like "Fiona" in Thunderball (a movie that this one seems to be inspired by more than a little). There was even a scene that seemed to set up that idea, but it didn't go anywhere else with it (as opposed to the big showdown between him and her & her partners). I have a real prejudice for adventure stories with "femme fatale" characters, but even considering that, this one seemed to really miss an opportunity when it came to that one thing. This brings up a question that someone might be able to help me with (though it's kind of a general one). Since European films are supposed to have been very free with bedroom scenes and things like that, earlier than American ones (though I'm sure that's a generalization), and since these movies are SUPPOSEDLY Bond rip-offs, I've always wondered why most of them are only SLIGHTLY titillating in that way, or not at all. In other words (rip-off or not), why aren't they full of "Bond girls" in the thorough-going sense?