Did you people see the same film I saw?

Boring

Absolutely the worst movie.

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.

Sequel to the reasonable "Deadliest of the species", featuring the return of Richard Johnson as Hugh "Bulldog" Drummond. The sequel fails to come up to even the varying standards of the original, and feels long and laborious. More stunts, more girls and an even more exotic location fail to boost this flagging film, which begins to feel very tired rather too early on, and its' plot less run-around nature soon becomes tedious. Cashing in on the success of Bondmania, this film failed to even show any understanding of what it was trying to copy in a film which features Robert Morley as a camp cookery teacher, called "Miss Mary", Johnson giving love-making lessons to a female robot, an embarrassing Bond-wannabe, played by Ronnie Stevens, a carbon-copy villain with a Napoleon complex, and a lot of embarrassing stuff you just wish would end mercifully soon. The weapon of the day is an ultra-sonic device, which shatters glass and eardrums, and provides the film's climax with a lot of bang, but only after enduring a lot of pseudo-science on the subject. Notable for featuring an early appearance by Joanna Lumley in the pre/during credits sequence.PROS; -A few airborne stunts look nice, and are mildly suspenseful.-Some nice scenery; the villains' base is particularly aesthetically pleasing -Ronnie Stevens is endearing in a terrible part -Daliah Lavi is a strong presence, as the film's central villainess CONS; -Richard Johnson looks tired, and can't act his way out of a bad part in a derivative film-The theme song is among the worst ever-penned, and is written buy should-have-known-better John Barry collaborator Don Black-No pace, no atmosphere, drive, plot or excitement really in any scene– the film is virtually dead, and merely exists to show women in bikinis and a lot of embarrassing gags -Drummond is not a real character, merely a Bond-clone, with no personality or interesting characteristics-A weak, overlong boat race/chase sequence -Robert Morley in a hugely embarrassing role for a good, if somewhat limited actor -Many of the main women in this film look very similar, and its' hard to tell some of them apart-Actually, virtually everything; it's not a good film

This is the twenty-fourth Bulldog Drummond film, and the last purporting to be even remotely serious, as the final Drummond film, 'Bullshot', was to be a complete spoof. But of course this one is not serious. It is cornier than an ethanol refinery, and raises inanity to the height of the ionosphere (like the SST-1 in the film perhaps), or should I say I-wanna- sphere, as in 'I wanna be sick'. Everyone's tongue is so far into his or her cheek in this film that they all have holes in their faces. Betty Box, this time without her brother Syndey Box with whom she co-produced the predecessor to this bit of fluff, 'Deadlier than the Male' (slightly less fluffy, but equally inane), here returns with her final offering of a pseudo-James Bond film using the name, and no more, of Hugh Drummond, and the name, and no more, of Drummond's villain nemesis Carl Peterson. Peterson is played here by James Villiers, trying as hard as he can to be deeply villainous but unable to convince. For those of us who knew James, who was so witty and fun-loving, the idea of his being a villain was ludicrous. Wrong choice! Daliah Lavi is the lead villainess. She was in so many films in the sixties, and had been in the Bond film 'Casino Royale', but I never understood her appeal. She must have put a spell of producers or directors somehow, but she never managed to be truly sexy, despite all the absurd hype about her and her feline movements as 'one desired'. The fact that she couldn't act is irrelevant, as she was not required to. Joanna Lumley got her first film part in this picture, but was uncredited. She has made up for that later! This film has an absurd plot, which goes so far beyond pastiche that - well, I did say how high the inanity went, didn't I? James has got all these girls in short skirts who are robots, you see, 'under my complete control' as he boasts, who kill on command, and when they are not needed, he or Daliah Lavi presses a button in the neck of the girl and she goes to sleep. They also have libidinous capacities, so we are led to believe. How Betty Box, a woman, could produce a film pandering in such extreme measure to the most ridiculous male fantasies of the pliant woman (one you can turn on or off, every hectored man's dream??) is beyond my comprehension. As for Ralph Thomas, the director, there are no words. Once again, as in the earlier film two years before, we have babes in bikinis toting machine guns, killing people while saying 'poor little man' and smirking and simpering and wiggling their busts. The sixties eye makeup, the bouffant hairdos, the wigs, the eyelashes, my God. I'm a Bulldog Drummond viewer, get me out of here!

It took an idea that's pretty popular in these kinds of stories (female armies, female robots), and made it pretty entertaining. It was also clever that it had the traditional version of a "femme fatale", and also a sort of "dumb blonde" version of one, both working for the villain. If I've understood the movie, the two main "villainesses" weren't robots themselves, which makes the last scene just a little surprising. In the last scene, Drummond sabotages the "destructor", which then sabotages their whole headquarters, then escapes, after more or less making sure that they DON'T escape. This is a little surprising for the hero of a light, "escapist" kind of adventure film. Or maybe it's LESS surprising for the same reason, I'm not sure. Anyway, it's one more ' 60s spy movie that I think ISN'T a "Bond rip-off" (it's an unpopular opinion, but I think that MOST of them aren't). Of course it is a Bond "send-up" in some ways, but that's a whole other thing. And in one area (in a "friendly" way), it tries to out-Bond Bond - it has Drummond bedding the Helga character, then escaping her "black widow" attempt to kill him, not once but twice! (Pretty bold, in other words.) Seeing her in this and a few other adventure films, it's a little hard to believe that Daliah Lavi never ended up in an ACTUAL Bond movie (apart from Casino Royale, which both is and isn't one).

This movie should not be mistaken as a budget imitation of a James Bond film, as it possesses it's own distinctive characteristics. Yet, for it's time (1969) it is just as adventurous and entertaining with Richard Johnson performing the role of (Bulldog) Hugh Drummond, similar to your James Bond Secret agent, but with a touch of humour and to some extent, a bit of sarcasm. Like Bond, Drummond is well skilled, serious and intelligent and is out to investigate what is behind a series of murders disguised as accidents, that are carried out by what appears to be beautiful young women (hence it's title Some Girls Do). Robert Morley performs the part of Miss Mary and is later found dead after having given classes to potential chef students in perfecting the art of cracking eggs open into a bowl. Drummond is also targeted when flying a glider and is meant to crash down when his parachute has been tampered with by the beautiful robotic women who watch from below, but manages to skillfully and successfully release open the parachute, landing down safely as if nothing had happened.. A fine performance by Sydney Rome as the typical James Bond type girl, but Drummond is not at all fooled by her pampering and charming behaviour, as he is very intelligent in sensing her motives.. She does play the bimbo but is very cunning, as most Bond style girls are.In a nutshell I did enjoy this movie and am not surprised that any criticisms are really more to do with it's comparisons to modern released movies. However, I am very surprised that the character of Bulldog Drummond was not pursued in later years like with remakes of `A Thomas Crown Affair', `The Avengers', `The Saint' etc. I believe that the character of `Bulldog' Drummond could have been further modernized and made into a big hit in the late 1970's upto the 1990's with newer adventures, as it had all the charm and character of serving action/adventure style movies, but on a larger scale. I would have kept one foot in the 1960's and another one in the 1990's keeping that style in an evergreen sense.