Wordiezett So much average

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

jacobs-greenwood Directed by Eric Till, with a story & screenplay written directly for the screen that earned Ira Wallach and lead actor Peter Ustinov their only Writing Academy Award nominations, this dated comedy has an ironic conclusion. Fans of Ustinov's characterizations, complete with fumbling mannerisms intended to make one wonder if he (e.g. his character) is bumbling idiot or a genius pretending to be one, will certainly enjoy it while others may find that they wear thin to the point of being tiresome, especially during this film's slow moving plot. Plus, Bob Newhart's comedic capabilities are wasted in his role.Ustinov plays Marcus Pendleton who, upon his release from jail (presumably for a "white collar" crime) where he did the warden's taxes, steals the identity of (wannabe moth explorer &) computer expert Caesar Smith (Robert Morley) to get a job in the I/T (information technology) department at Ta Can Co, a concrete & cement corporation. He's hired by Tacanco's executive vice president Carlton Klemper (Karl Malden); Newhart plays VP Willard Gnatpole. Maggie Smith plays Patty Terwilliger who, with seemingly no skills, can't keep a job until she's hired as a Tacanco secretary that's assigned to work for Smith. She knows him as Pendleton, because he lives in the same apartment building, but is otherwise clueless that her boss is about to embark on an elaborate embezzlement scheme. Cesar Romero appears late in the story as a customs inspector (in two scenes which seem unnecessary).It's the 1960's, so the executives we see in the London offices of this American conglomerate are on the make (e.g. out for sex) AND are apparently able to kick up their feet & look out their office windows in lieu of doing any real work. By throwing around a few acronyms here & there and hiring an outside consultant to write some management recommendations for him, Ustinov as Smith has Klemper completely fooled as to his competency whereas Gnatpole is suspicious. Both, however, are impressed by what they think is their new hire's sexual prowess. Since he keeps unqualified secretary Patty employed, they assume she's meeting his "other" needs. Gnatpole's attraction to Patty keeps him off balance and his suspicions somewhat at bay. Meanwhile, accountant trained but computer novice Pendleton/Smith reads a few technical manuals and, after learning an important trick from a housekeeper, is able to figure out how to defeat the corporation's computer security in order to drain one million pounds from the company's 290 million dollars in assets over the course of his year's employment. He does this by establishing dummy companies around the European continent; when the computer prints its checks, one goes to each of them.The plot bogs down, necessarily as it turns out, when Patty is fired by personnel for being late. She and her former boss & neighbor Pendleton then discover that they're both lonely, and begin a relationship that leads to marriage and even her pregnancy. Eventually, of course, the crime is uncovered and Patty learns the truth about her husband and their sudden need to flee the country for Rio de Janeiro, but this comedy's payoff is when the truth about Patty is discovered.

gatsby601 I was excited to discover this late sixties comedy staring some of my favorite people - Maggie Smith, a very young Bob Newhart and, of course, Peter Ustinov. My disappointment was thus compounded to discover the film doesn't work as either a comedy or a perfect heist film. Ustinov plays a small time crook just out of prison who sets his sites on a large American corporation based in London. Bluffing his way past dimwitted CEO Karl Malden and tech geek Newhart, Ustinov passes himself off as a computer expert and immediately plans the 'perfect heist' part of the film. To do this he needs to get passed a tamper proof security system that guards the corporation mainframe. And here is problem one. His perfect plan only works because everyone else in the film is remarkably trusting and stupid. His lame excuses are taken at face value and this must be the only computer center anywhere not to bother with video cameras. The second problem is the heist (fraud really) happens within the first 30 minutes of the film robbing the rest of the picture of much in way of dramatic tension. Maggie Smith is sadly miscast as Ustinov's ditsy next door neighbor/secretary who just can't keep a job. I love Maggie Smith but she just seems too together here, too composed, the part called for more of a wacky, physical comedian. Furthermore, Ustinov and Smith have no chemistry together, maybe it's the age difference, but the later romantic relationship, as devoid of actual romance as it is, still comes off a little creepy. Ustinov co-wrote the script, and it was thought well of at the time, but I found it unfunny, meandering and a sad waste of a great cast.

sol- Peter Ustinov received an Academy Award nomination for the script that he co-wrote for this film, and it was a nomination well deserved because if not particularly witty or laugh-out-loud funny, the film still has a number of amusing moments and it is a delight to watch. Ustinov is perfect as a charismatic conman, and Maggie Smith is excellent as a ditsy bimbo in a role very atypical for her repertoire. There are also some interestingly edited sequences and great music too. The scams that Ustinov devises are a bit overly complicated, as is the science behind is the hacking that he carries out, but a full understanding of everything that is going on is not required to enjoy the film. It is interesting to watch and often amusing.

robin-221 Those who only remember the late Sir Peter Ustinov as Hercule Poirot or a professional raconteur would do well to seek out this charming piece of late '60s satire. Ustinov stars as a convicted embezzler (we first see him during his last day in gaol where he is preparing the prison governor's tax return) who, sensing that the future is in computers, poses (by means of a deft piece of identity theft) as a computer expert and sets out to infiltrate an American multinational.Ustinov (who co-wrote the script) is on top form, as is the delightful Maggie Smith, here unusually cast as an accident-prone cockney-sparrow dolly bird. Bob Newhart also puts in an amusing performance as a suspicious executive who has designs on Maggie Smith. In addition, Karl Malden is satisfyingly sleazy as Ustinov and Newhart's womanising boss.What do I particularly like about this film? Not only is it a well-thought-out 'caper movie' but it's also a touching little love story; Ustinov and Smith are very convincing as the two misfits stumbling into love (the whole scene involving the deck of cards is particularly effective.)So, what is there not to like? Well, the script is no more computer-literate than most films (that is, hardly at all) even though it captures the feel of late '60s 'big iron' business computing quite well. Also there are a couple of small plot glitches that you're not likely to notice until the second or third viewing, but I consider these to be minor niggles.As I said, this is a film which is well worth seeking out, and after you've seen it once you'll want to see it again at regular intervals.