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

Powerful

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

I have just watched this film, 46 years after its release. The film was shown on Classic Silver Screen, and unfortunately the print was of poor quality. I can imagine that Freddie Youngs photography would be stunning in a good quality print! Overall I would rate the film as average fare. Was this film or the original book based on factual events? I hate to be a "nit-picker", but at the beginning we see a helicopter with loudspeaker telling the rebels that the war with the Japanese is over. Now, I know early helicopters were used by the Allies in small numbers late in World War Two. But in a remote area such as Malaya? Anacronistic I would think! Also the aircraft was a Bristol Sycamore, not designed until the 50s!! This helicopter thing also happens in "Where Eagles Dare". Don't film researchers do there homework? Or do they include such "gaffs" just to p**s off "nit-pickers" like me!!

I agree with most posts. I think this was an underrated film, surprisingly hard to find. It was quite critical of the British elements of counter terrorism. It seemed a little simplistic, but it told a story not usually found in most movies. I think that it was a good, balanced viewpoint of colonialism, terrorism as well as romance. This would be an intriguing remake, if today's times were a little different. Today's culture is far into the anti-terrorist mode to understand the psychology of insurgency. Vietnam was much more complex, with the S.Vietnamese bureaucracy betraying themselves and China masterminding the NVA for its own purposes. William Holden played the naive, if somewhat self-important voice of reason. He played the angle from his side, and was critical of the British viewpoint. The "loyalty" aspect was quite intriguing and prevalent throughout most of the film, and he distinguished that element again in the Wild Bunch. This was a pretty good movie.

Odd, that I don't recall the word 'communist' being uttered throughout this picture. Anyone notice if it was? It was pretty clear from the references and the red stars the Ng and his guerrillas were communists. This is an entertaining film from a jungle war that has been largely forgotten in the shadow of Vietnam. The British spent 12 years eradicating the elements they called "communist terrorists" before Malaysia became independent. Most of their enemies weren't convenientlyuniformed like Ng's forces, but were more like the grenade-tossing chauffeur. The SAS played a key role in suppressing the communists, and the British pretty much wrote the book on how to deal with these sort of insurgencies, lessons theAmericans too often seem to forget (though they slowly seem to be figuring it out in Iraq and Afghanistan). Saw this movie years ago and liked it, liked it more in a recent viewing, in spite of its flaws. Always liked Holden, have a real soft spot for Susannah York - and Capucine was splendid. Some great cars in this movie, too (and a Gloster Meteor, too, I think). And yes, superbly photographed.

This movie deserves a better rating,that's for sure.Capucine's character is arguably the stand-out as she portrays an uncompromising proud pure heroin,à la Joan of Arc,with dignity and grandeur.Her last scene particularly impresses as the cinematography does.Lewis Gilbert is not a seventh art genius but he avoids pathos and melodrama by using ellipsis :Holden and York are still in the jungle,desperately trying to arrive before it's too late and abruptly,the story takes us forward,several days after they returned.That said,York's character in not really credible,and Tamba's part is too cardboard when it demanded an ambiguous, in depth psychology.But interest is sustained till the end and I think the movie should be restored to favor.