Gambit (1966)

Best movie ever!

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Good acting. Good story. Good villain. Well developed, there's an interesting first part (the plan as envisioned by Caine's character), middle part (the development) and very interesting ending. This is the sort of film you'd expect the ending to go a certain just about predictable way, and it absolutely doesn't at all, like, there are no clues of where the film is really taking the audience. And there's a good moral right at the death too (which is really where the whole movie is driving).Dialog is very good too, with some good wit and that avoid the tacky lines this sort of film will often throw at the viewer. Caine is good as always, Lom as the villain does his job just right, and Maclaine manages her role very well, and looks absolutely gorgeous here.There's just enough originality and volume to this film to break the usual monotonous storytelling its genre will often supply, and it's well balanced that it starts as intriguingly as it ends.Good stuff ! 8/10.

Like the other notable twist laden Michael Caine movie Sleuth I can't say much about Gambit without spoiling it. During the first 25 minutes I was doubting if I was even going to enjoy the film. The characters appeared to be forgettable and two dimensional. Michael Caine outwits everyone but in an uninteresting manner while Shirley MacLaine never speaks nor shows any emotion or vulnerability with Herbert Lom plays an unimaginative caricature of a reclusive, eccentric millionaire. Like Sleuth on first viewing I thought that film was making a mistake during a certain section; with Gambit I felt the same way about the first section of the movie. However when it is revealed these first 25 minutes are just the idealised scenario for a heist played out in Michael Caine's head I had the biggest smile on my face and the reaction of "You clever bastards!". All of a sudden this seemingly boring film became fascinating with the scenario I had just seen played out now occurring again with a welcome sense of realism and with interesting, flawed characters, with much of the humour stemming from the differences between fact and fiction. It reminded of that popular internet meme 'expectation/reality' and came off to me like a satire of sorts on unimaginative writing and characters. Watching the film a second time I can now spot the moment of foreshadowing such as Michael Caine saying to his accomplice "Now pay close attention". Of course it wouldn't be a heist movie without suspense and does the third act deliver, full of nail biting moments and clever solutions.Released in 1966 just prior to the rise of the New Hollywood movement, Gambit sees the final days of that distinctive old Hollywood glamour. Gambit is a very exotic movie at that with Shirley MacLaine being presented in the image of a goddess throughout and even her more common looking attire during the heist at the end is exceedingly stylish. Plus who can look more dapper as a cat burglar than Michael Caine? The back and forth between Caine and MacLaine is pure heaven. There are few other actresses with as playful an on screen persona as Shirley MacLaine while Caine gets annoyed by her giddy, child like attitude. I don't care how many films I see which contain the "the hate each other but secretly love each other" dynamic, as long as it's between a screen pairing with superb chemistry then I'll never tire of seeing it.

Fans of caper films and stylish heist yarns should be pleased with this well-appointed entry. Caine plays a shifty Englishman who recruits a jaded Eurasian dance-hall girl (MacLaine) to aid him in his latest plot. Due to her resemblance to the dead wife of the richest man in the world (Lom), he plans to use her to gain entry to the man's heavily guarded suite where he can map out a way to pilfer a priceless piece of sculpture. He intends to gussy MacLaine up in the appropriate hairstyle, clothing and manner of the dead woman, knowing that Lom will be fascinated enough by her to let his guard down. To reveal more would rob first-time viewers of some of the twistier elements of the script. A significant twist occurs about a quarter of the way in and it isn't the last one. The story begins one way and then takes off on a different tangent, giving the audience a chance to amply discover that the best laid plans don't always turn out they way they're intended to! Caine was just emerging as a major name in the cinema and gives a low-key, but assured performance here. His stern, understated persona is a terrific counterpoint to the more animated MacLaine (she hand-picked him for this role.) MacLaine is given a considerable showcase which allows her to display her range. She plays both a demure, silent, deliberately mechanical type and a chatty, animated, opinionated person. She also gets to show off her incredibly limber physique in one climactic scene. Lom is excellent, conveying a sure authority and a suave, aristocratic presence. Though the film is chiefly a three character showcase, all the other roles are portrayed by talented character actors. One small role is played by Tayback, who would later make a splash as the loud-mouthed short-order cook on TV's "Alice". The film is visually arresting, thanks to excellent set design, art direction and some eye-catching Jean Louis costumes. It's glossy, tasteful, old-fashioned entertainment featuring two charismatic stars. Caine and MacLaine would pair up again the next year in "Woman Times Seven" and be reunited almost 40 years later in "Bewitched".

I just watched this again, after a period of many years; I think that I must have seen it in its original release, and it would have seemed wildly glamorous and exotic at the time. Its always been a favorite of mine; I love it when MacLaine finally opens her mouth and starts talking, and the entire story tilts and veers off in an amusingly different direction.So very many things could have gone wrong with this production, and MacLaine could have completely overwhelmed it. Miraculously, everything stays in harness and no scenery gets chewed (as opposed to, say, "Topkapi", which although fun goes completely over the top, and where Mercouri lustily devours everything in sight). Caine and MacLaine were both in their early 30's at the time, and MacLaine gets away with photographing much younger. Its one of the earliest of her films where she got top billing; she had been making a series of Hollywood big-budget bombs, and I suspect that this somewhat modest entry kind of redeemed her. Its great straight entertainment.