Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

This was one of the most memorable films of my childhood, and I hadn't seen it since it came out in the cinema in England when I was seven years old, until I was given a DVD of it again today, thirty-one years later. Although today it didn't have me rolling in the aisles or have me doing Peter Ustinov impressions for hours afterward like it did back then, it still was a charmer, and it was simply just fun to watch. It deliberately encapsulates a bit of the paradoxically innocent yet bigoted flavor of England back in those times, and there are many little delicate touches for those with an appreciation for the idiosyncrasies of the English. Peter Ustinov is perfectly cast to be given license to run amok with his non-politically-correct character, considering he was one of the most well-read, culturally-sensitive intellectuals of his generation. (Check out HIS Bio!) It's certainly all about him. Overacting? I'd say "playing it broad" instead, and yet with real skill. Ustinov was a master raconteur on many subjects: political, cultural, and musical, and his comedic timing was also very acute. I think it shows. Is this film racist? Well, it certainly couldn't have been produced by Walt Disney in today's social climate, but I'd say rather that it is really a grand romp in satire, made at a time when we could more easily laugh at ourselves and each other, and forgive a little easier too. Sure it's completely "wrong" that the Chinese guys are actually played by Europeans in make-up. But the very joke lies in just how much a parody this "Chinese" make-up actually is, and how no-one is remotely intended to be fooled. Paraphrasing lines of Ustinov's (Chinese) character explains this perfectly: "How can you tell Europeans apart? They all look the same...those eyes." The film left me with the wistful feeling and hope that here was the England and these were the kinds of adventures that we had when we were children. (How dearly I would still love to run around with a squad of Great British Nannies or Chinese Agents looking for a microfilm on the Diplodocus in the Natural History Museum.) It's a wonderful time to look back to, even if it probably only ever existed in imagination. Sadly, the once-free-to-wander-in- during-our-summer-holidays Natural History Museum now charges a hefty admission fee. And that's a fact.

Clearly any film nearly 30 years old is going to have flaws by today's standards and I know many people knock this film because of the now very politically incorrect portrayals of the Chinese.However (and I am part Chinese myself) I regard the performances as pure pantomime or affectionate parody and not offensive. Besides - the bumbling British upper classes hardly fare any better.I watched this on DVD last night and I still find it funny. Nostalgia of course plays a big part - I was 8 when it came out, still into palaeontology and visiting the Natural History Museum regularly. But it still has some cracking dialogue, great slapstick and visual humour and of course the incomparable Helen Hayes and Peter Ustinov.So if you want a chuckle and to escape back to a gentler (albeit fictitious) time - you could do a lot worse than spend 90 minutes watching this.

English slapstick comedy spy caper definitely a must for fans of that genre. Director Robert Stevenson (Mary Poppins, The Love Bug) dresses up the scenery with nice old British cars, trucks and storefronts (watch for one called THE RELUCTANT DRAGON a tip of the hat to an old Disney animated classic) and his usual trademark special effects which includes a neat little stunt where a group of men stand on each other's shoulders to see above a fog filled street. Fans of Agatha Christie movies will note Peter Ustinov (who played Hercule Poirot) and Helen Hayes and Joan Hickson (who both played Miss Marple). A final note regarding some ill-placed, ill-thought out comments about Peter Ustinov's performance that was meant to be broad comedy. Ustinov (an Englishman) also portrayed a Belgium (Hercule Poirot), a Russian, and a Frenchman in other films without any comments about their appropriateness. From Peter Sellers who played a wickedly unflattering portrayal of a Frenchman in the Pink Panther series to Ben Kingsley's stately performance as Ghandai to Jews playing Christians (sometimes unflattering) what the heck...it's called acting. If you don't like the performance that's one thing, but to call it racist then all these performances should be called racist and ALL performances that require an actor to play someone not himself would be on some level bigoted. Don't you think? To those who would call Ustinov's performance racist you are wrong and you should sue your parents and teachers for raising an idiot. By the way. I am Chinese. If I do a good Texan accent no one would think me a racist. If I do a bad Texan accent all it means is that I do a bad Texan accent. Yee Haw!

I'm not sure why this movie receives as bad reviews as it does. Admittedly, Ustinov's performance is the worst I've seen from him, and nowdays the portrayal of Orientals comes across as out and out racist. But, if you forgive the movie these problems (this was 1976 when sensibilities were different) it's not that bad. Not wonderful, but with a few laughs. And I had little trouble following the plot.