Chamas da Paixão

One of the Worst Movie Ever

The unique point that worth in this movie is the astonishing beauty of Ursula Andress. She plays Alex, a dumb blonde in Manila, 1941, shortly after the Japanese attack to Pearl Harbor. Her character is so shallow and stupid that impress, the same way the countless closes of her gorgeous face. But this movie is so cheesy, with such an awful director, horrible story and screenplay, ridiculous dialogs and ham actors, which even Ursula Andress performance and beauty is unable to save. A film to be forgotten, and I am going to get rid of it from my collection. My vote is two.

Title (Brazil): `Chamas da Paixão' (`Flames of Passion')

It almost defies belief that a movie can be as bad as this one, without it being fun to watch, like any number of Ed Wood films.

Put this DVD on if you have unwanted guests, and watch them exit your house, rushing to depart to save whatever sanity they have left.

A rotten, lousy waste of time.

This film, in spite of a few capable performers, like Ron Ely and Richard Jaeckel, for example, deserved to be left in the jungles of the Philippines from whence it came. Ursula Andress (once dubbed by the press as "Ursula Undress") is nice to look at, but in this film she hasn't much to do except show off her well-nourished superstructure through anachronistic wet clothing - The screenplay certainly doesn't show off her acting ability. John Derek treats her contributions to this picture like one of those front-page, soft-focus pictorials in "Playboy" that Andress (and, subsequent subject Linda Evans) did so often throughout the 1960s and 70s. For better material featuring Ursula Andress, see "Dr. No" (1962) and "Casino Royale" (1967). What a waste of time for anyone looking for serious drama about the post-Pearl Harbor Philippine invasion of 1941-42.

What a waste of time confusing. pointless and annoying. The action scenes in this were stupid beyond belief. Why would you drive around in circles in a truck whilst trying to shoot a passing aircraft with a machine gun you're not aiming? Sticking red circles on a Sherman tank does not make it Japanese! I know they weren't really central to the plot - if you can call it that but still what a crock o crap. So many scenes were unexplained, why would senior officers be sitting in a strip club with enlisted men and then brawling? Why didn't they believe Custer about the rear guard action? Why is Custer allowed to cut the sleeves off his shirt and wear it like that? How does Ursula keep her outfit clean and pressed after jumping in every river she sees? Oh and another thing - why, after the battle, does Custer hand Alex his .45? She's never touched a gun before and never shown any interest! Disjointed and without flow, I really regretted watching this one through to the end. it's dire!

J

John Derek has never made a good movie in his life. He's been IN some good ones, but he's never MADE a good one, and there's no better example of his almost complete lack of talent as a filmmaker than this. He takes a potentially interesting story--the guerrilla war waged against the Japanese after their takeover of the Philippines in World War II--and for some reason turns it into a game of who's going to nail Ursula Andress before the Japanese kill everybody. Derek apparently thought that the sight of Andress, his wife (or girlfriend, or whatever she was) at that time, in various stages of undress was enough to draw people into the theaters (it wasn't). Because of that, he obviously paid no attention whatsoever to minor things like having a coherent script, directing the other actors, maintaining a semblance of continuity--trivial matters like that. The only saving grace (professionally, that is) is Richard Jaeckel's performance as a soldier eventually driven insane by the fighting. Jaeckel was always one of the most watchable actors around; he had that cockiness and explosive quality that Cagney had, and no matter how lousy the movie was (like this one), he always pulled it up a couple of notches. Unfortunately, he wouldn't have been able to pull this thing up with a crane. Its infuriating pretentiousness is its main undoing. The dialogue is so Ed Woods-ian in its rambling, nonsensical "what-the-HELL-are-they-talking-about?" absurdity that you finally find yourself wishing that the Japanese would come in, whack everybody and put the cast--and the audience--out of their misery. An absolutely painful experience that makes you wonder, "How in God's name did he get anyone to put up the money to make this thing?" Skip it.