L'homme le plus dangereux du monde

I am interested in Hollywood movies about China all the time. 55 Days in Beijing, Seven Years in Tibet, Red Corner... I happened to see the Chairman and bought it without any hesitation. But, it turned out to be a complete disappointment not because performance and scenery but true China. In fact, I hate Mao's dictatorship in Red China, however, apparently, American people didn't and could't know much about Red China in 1969. In this movie, the starting music made me believe it was about Japan, what's worse, the Japanese-style-music was all through the movie. And, in 1969, Americans could not find anyone who can speak Mandarine well. What they could find was some Hong Kong-accent guys whose Mandarine made me confused and giggle. When I saw the Chairman, I realized the worst part began. Mao Zedong became much shorter and less-arrogant. He spoke English! Others Mandarine. From the very beginning, I could not find any clues about China Mainland. Everything was falsed too bad. I wondered if you shot the movie without getting a Chinese as a history adviser.

An earlier review dismisses the "Cold War paranoia " reflected in this 1969 film. How ignorant. The Cold War was a product of the unremitting hostility of Soviet Russia and China against the U.S. Historical fact and anyone who thinks otherwise, like this commenter, merely reflects the moral equivalence and political correctness of our time, which doesn't believe in good and evil. Ironically it is these people who have the distorted view, not the earlier generation they patronize. Evidently this commenter never heard of the Korean War, in which we fought North Korea's and China's invasion of South Korea from 1950-53. Nor does he appear to have heard of the Quemoy- Martsu crises of the fifties, when the communists were threatening the nationalist regime on Taiwan, our ally. Nor the torrent of hostile propaganda against us. Again, look in the mirror before patronizing an earlier period of history.

Gregory Peck is a Nobel Prize-winning American scientist who has been recruited by the US government to go into China to steal the secret for a new enzyme that would do much to feed the starving of the world. And, oddly, the extremely closed Chinese let him in and wine and dine him. He even gets a nice cozy little audience with the ever-adorable Mao (just because he was responsible for more deaths than Hitler doesn't mean he's not a swell guy in this film). Little does Peck know, however, that the evil US government implanted an explosive device into his skull along with a transmitter (which he does know about). Will they detonate him to kill the Chairman or is there mission the one they stated at the beginning of the film?

Considering that the film is about an American espionage agent in Communist China circa 1969, you'd sure think it would be an exciting film. Add to that the talent of Gregory Peck and it seems like a guaranteed winner. Instead, the film just limps along to a less than thrilling and ridiculous conclusion.

One of the major problem is that Peck plays a scientist who hates working for US intelligence but has done so in the past. Yet oddly, despite his strong bias against the spy game, he agrees to risk his life by going into China--and you keep wondering why. His motivations seem mixed at best and this is perhaps the worst part of the film. Additionally, as the film progresses, you see that the film makers employ moral relativism--showing the US and China are basically the same. In this film, the US would love to starve the world in order to maintain its power. But comparing Mao's regime (best estimates 25-100 million killed during his rule--I guess you gotta break a few eggs to make this omelet) to the US seemed a bit...well....insane. Throw into the mix that the US and USSR are now good buddies in the film and you are left wondering who, if anyone, to root for in the movie. This really is THE main problem with the film.

Another problem, though not as severe, is the relative ease with which Peck enters China and eventually leaves China. You didn't just do this in the 1960s--heck, you don't just do this today! His ease in escaping seemed rather dumb and you know that in reality the Chinese during this time were pretty ruthless and far from dumb. Purges and counter-revolution fever were rampant--as was xenophobia (which, fortunately, has changed a lot over the years). In such a crazed environment, a 6' 3" American would probably be spotted and captured very, very quickly!

Overall, this is one of Peck's misfires. The film never seems credible though it is an interesting time-passer provided you don't think through the details too much.

This movie is a relic of its day, reflecting the cold war paranoia that was already rather quaint by 1969. This sort of undercuts the film as anything to be taken seriously, but fortunately it's reasonably well-acted and directed so it still holds up as mildly entertaining -- if there's nothing better on TV to watch. Of historic note is that this film was produced by the same guys who made the much more memorable "Planet of the Apes" a year earlier (both films were scored by the great Jerry Goldsmith), and one of the sets is left over from "Fantastic Voyage."

I confess to not having seen this in 30 years,but politics and aging aside,I still remember it as a film that took on a different/ not usual subject(Red China) and had Gregory Peck giving an all out performance as a "layman" spy . It had a somewhat novel gadget factor with the monitoring listening device and the introduction of Mao's country as another "Player" in the big game of world control.The chase for the border was tense and very memorable (the U.S. actually working with the Soviets...who woulda thunk it?)It also boast top-notch production qualities(Score, direction and a fine supporting cast.)There's a funny part that I still remember ... Military guy Arthur Hill is taking the trigger-detonator of Peck's "brain-bomb" from a safe and noticing there's a "skull and crossbones" on it. Hill-"Whose the joker who did this?".........