Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

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

JohnHowardReid It's very difficult to make a movie that is both amusing and exciting, let alone one that spoofs its own pedigree. But thanks to Roy Baker's excellent direction and the efforts of a stellar cast, this effort succeeds admirably on all counts. True, it does take at least ten minutes to warm up, but we need that time to get used to Margaret Lockwood's new, shorter hair style. I actually prefer women with long hair. Short hair seems so boyish to me, but it is certainly appropriate in this instance. Anyway, Margaret Lockwood and Dane Clark easily walk away with the acting honors, if only for the fact that all the other roles are either small or very small. Marius Goring is obviously operating at a slow speed in order to stretch out his screen time – a ploy which is not successful because it helps us to lose interest in the character. He's there, mooning about and looking ominous, but so tongue-tied, he doesn't really seem to pose a threat to our heroine at all. True, he may be cunning, but on the other hand, he may be just a slow-witted dope. As I say, no threat to our heroine at all! Margaret is also supported by a whole mob of really vigorous farceurs (no doubts about them, they're obviously all on our side) led by Naunton Wayne and Marius Goring (of all people). It's also good to record that the music score is particularly adept. And last but not least, I'd agree with other reviewers that director Roy Ward Baker manages to give this comedy/thriller a bit of style – which must have been hard to do, given the way the script jumps around from comic capers to suspenseful episodes, especially those involving Margaret and Marius! I tend to feel that other reviewers missed the point or got lost, Admittedly, I watched the itv DVD twice!

Alex da Silva Frances (Margaret Lockwood) volunteers to go into an Eastern un-named country (with a peculiar un-named language that the actors have had to learn) as a spy to smuggle back insects that are being used in the development of germ warfare. When her contact Alf (Eugene Deckers) is murdered, she continues her mission with reporter Bill (Dane Clark). However, the Chief of Police, Razinski (Marius Goring) seems to pop up at every stage of her mission......The problem with this film is that there is no real tension or feeling of danger. The lives of Frances and Bill are in danger and yet there is no suspense. They should have been more scared. Dane Clark is like-able but what have they done to Lockwood? She looks like Angela Rippon (English newsreader from the 1970's with terrible, frumpy hair). Lockwood's look is NOT good. Turning to the rest of the cast, they are all fine.The plot is extremely daft with the inclusion of some nonsense about how Frances incorporates a radio show to determine her actions in order to get the job done. There are also numerous unreal situations, eg, the escape to the woods by Frances and Bill with a whole army unit combing the grounds for them. Basically, these two clowns would have been caught and shot. For the sake of the film, we have a different outcome. Overall, it's lightweight fluff but I'm not sure this was the intention.

blacknorth Highly Dangerous is a rare original screenplay by novelist Eric Ambler. It draws heavily on elements of his early pre-1939 thrillers, but reposts them behind the Iron Curtain. This film leans particularly on Ambler's first novel The Dark Frontier, most notably with the super-agent coda, which is very fashionable today.Ambler's problem with Highly Dangerous is that most of the plot devices he invented single-handedly in the 30's were used to the point of saturation by film-makers during the 40's. By the time he got around to an original screenplay it all seems very unoriginal. For that reason I like to think of this film as British cinema's homage to all Ambler's great work in the 30's. An adaptation of one of Ambler's post war novels, say, Judgement On Deltchev, would have been much more satisfactory at this point in his career - as it was, he had to wait ten years until Topkapi before the cinema recognised his post-war novels.Margaret Lockwood makes for a very beautiful and personable innocent, drawn into a cold-war plot about a form of biological warfare, not entirely a new thing, but a change from the nuclear threats of the time. Lockwood's career was on the decline, and this film can't have offered her very much compensation. Additionally, she is badly served by her make-up artist, her hair being mocked up to middle-age very badly.Don't treat this film as a serious attempt to translate Ambler's art to the screen - you can find that in just about any war-time thriller - from Journey Into Fear to The Mask of Dimitrios. Highly Dangerous is minor Ambler, and an opportunity for a fading Lockwood to make one more impression, and what an impression - innocent, scientist and secret agent.

richard-meredith27 Margaret Lockwood is in it- "Hoorah!" And it's about a biological scientist who is sent behind the Iron Curtain as a spy, and she gets captured and, under hypnotism fulfilled her mission. "So Rex Harrison is in it, and the basic plot should be be as logical and driving the action along as (for example)'Night Train to Munich'?" Er... no on both counts. "Why?" Well, Rex wasn't in it. American B-movie actor Dane Clark plays Margaret's buddy. He is a very boring Journalist. And the plot is confused and rambles. And the plot is disjointed and includes a bizarre truth drug/BBC radio serial sub-sub plot. So subplot, I had no idea what was the point of it. "Ah! Anything else?" Yes, who is the child Margaret talks to at the start of the film? Is she married,if so, why does she kiss Dane at the film end? To be blunt, the film should have been re-scripted and re-written and it would have been as good as any film from that period. Better casting and a positive decision by the director and producer whether they were creating a serious spy movie or Light Thriller would have tightened the action,dialogue and direction. I like B&W British Film, but this is one I have seen and will not revisit.