Recensioni degli utenti

As almost everybody has already noted, "Circus of Fear" is not a horror movie, despite the title, the advertising and the presence of Christopher Lee (in a secondary role). It's a cross between a crime caper and a whodunit. And as soon as you get over your initial reservations, it turns out to be an engrossing film that keeps you guessing all the way to the end. The story is full of strange, shady, secretive and suspicious characters, but the revelation of the killer's identity still comes as a shock (to me at least - it blew my theory away!). Apart from the sometimes overemphatic music score, this 40-year-old movie still holds up today. And who wants to miss any opportunity of seeing Klaus Kinski playing....Klaus Kinski? This guy only needed a cigar, a few close-ups and two or three lines of dialogue to look creepy! (**1/2)

This film is living proof of the wonders a stunning-looking print on DVD can do to a film: when I first saw it (in a dubbed version on late-night Italian TV), I had felt it was nothing more than average and dismissed it somewhat. Truth be told, a few weeks prior to this I had watched the other Christopher Lee/John Moxey film - THE CITY OF THE DEAD (1960) - by way of VCI's exemplary DVD edition, and perhaps I compared it unfavorably to this minor horror classic.

I had long known Blue Underground were preparing a SE and I was not sure it was worthwhile for me to invest in it, but now I'm certainly glad I did because I enjoyed the film immensely (even though I had my heart in my throat all the time, expecting the picture to freeze and break up any minute - which, thankfully, did not occur!). It's still nothing great, I guess (Lee certainly made many better films where his talents were more immediately in evidence; the hood and the fairly ridiculous accent hamper his performance here somewhat) but it's easily the best film from BU's "The Christopher Lee Collection" Set - and in fact it and the restored edition of THE BLOODY JUDGE (1970), not forgetting the plentiful and wonderful supplements, save this relatively expensive purchase from being a wasted opportunity (considering the low profile of all four titles in the Lee canon)!

The plot is pretty convoluted (I can certainly believe Jess Franco here when he said that Harry Alan Towers is a very good writer, not evidenced by the two Fu Manchu films): while the identity of the killer could have easily been established if one had thought about it for a while (considering it follows the Agatha Christie maxim that the least suspicious-looking character is indeed the guilty party) but, frankly, the film provides red herrings and new twists at every turn that when the final revelation is made, it still comes as fairly surprising (it's perhaps harder to swallow that the buffoonish if clearly ambitious Eddie could be the delicious Margaret Lee's secret lover!). The film also features an arresting opening robbery sequence and is beautifully shot for such a low-budget film. The music score is very atmospheric and the circus scenes consist mainly of stock footage but the lion-taming and knife-throwing acts inject a measure of excitement at appropriate moments.

Casting is certainly above-average for this type of film; there are some pretty good performances here: Leo Genn's above all as the amiable yet dogged Police Inspector; Margaret Lee is more than a radiant beauty - despite her sluttish character, she was fairly sympathetic (especially after having been threatened by a lion) and I think that the film loses something with her sudden, tragic exit; I liked Skip Martin a lot, amusingly named "Mr. Big" - he is a pretty interesting character to begin with (sort of a cynical Chorus to the proceedings), and even more so for being involved in some shady business on the side, for which he gets his just desserts in the end!; Klaus Kinski is eminently watchable despite his limited role (at least he does manage an effective death scene); Cecil Parker added some nice but not overstated British humor; Heinz Drache made for a pretty engaging hero; Suzy Kendall, on the other hand, was more decorative than anything else - though, in all fairness, she could only do so much with her thinly-written role. As I've already mentioned, it's disappointing that Christopher Lee was not involved at all with this release; an interview would have been nice.

The gloved killer of this film brings up comparisons with the giallos being made contemporaneously in Italy, though it's nowhere near as violent (in fact, this one is pretty tame in the scares/gore department). I did notice some flaws in the story: Christopher Lee taking off his hood when his mortal enemy (Drache) is beside him is a miscalculation, in my opinion; ditto, we never learn how Drache finds Lee and Kendall's hiding-place in the cave so easily when we had just been told the Police had scoured the area thoroughly, bearing no results! Also, Lee's death comes as a surprise: he is not the villain and if it was done because it was deemed 'obligatory', it was certainly a silly move!

I only saw the film for the first time a couple of years back but, for the life of me, I have no idea what constitutes the 'new' 8-minute sequence which was supposedly unearthed for this release? Can anyone shed some light on the matter? The Audio Commentary is somewhat dry, though Moxey's enthusiasm for his films (if not his memory of them) is constantly felt throughout the discussion; again, disappointingly, the cuts this film was subjected to are hardly mentioned and certainly not listed in any way - though, in all fairness, Moxey probably wouldn't have watched any of the export versions (not recently anyway)!

This is likable but perhaps in the end a little too keen to confuse. With more sex and violence this would have been a giallo and we would have worried less about one after the other being made to appear the guilty one. Great start with robbery against the backdrop of Tower Bridge and we proceed with a fantastic little river trip amidst the docks that were. Hard now to recall just how dismal, dirty and downright depressing some of these bits of London were in the early sixties. Great to see now though and contrast with today.

The story slows as we go to the circus but there are plenty of period vehicles and fairly interesting turns to watch. Klaus Kinski, and Suzy Kendall have far too little to do and whilst not wishing to spoil anything, what a strange part for Christopher Lee!

I'm stunned by the low average (5.4) given to Circus of Fear by IMDb voters. I've just watched the 91-minute colour version put out on DVD by Blue Underground, and found it absorbing throughout.

My guess is that many of the reviewers have seen only the truncated 1965 American version (65 minutes); naturally, missing 26 minutes of a 91- minute film, one will see only a very imperfect version of what the filmmakers intended. To get a true sense of the film one has to have the uncut version.

Despite the advertisements of the time, which played up the film as a horror movie (cashing in on the fact that horror icon Christopher Lee was the star of the film), this is not a horror film. There are some frightening moments, but this is essentially a whodunit, and a fairly good one. The slight "horror" tinge to the film (with its hooded lion- tamer, murders by skillfully thrown knives, screaming circus starlets, vicious circus lions, etc.) add atmosphere, but the story remains a whodunit.

It's also a caper film, insofar as it opens with a well-filmed money truck heist in broad daylight on the Tower Bridge in London. (It was filmed on location for that part.) But there ends up being some kind of sinister and unclear connection between the heist and goings-on at a circus, and it takes the whole film to make clear exactly what the connection is.

Leo Genn is brilliant as the Scotland Yard detective. He has a smooth, beautiful, calm acting manner reminiscent of Herbert Marshall's, and is a joy to watch. The excellent dialogue he is given doesn't hurt. The movie also has good performances by a number of very good British and German actors of the 1960s (it was a German-English co-production).

Christopher Lee is good in the part of the hooded lion-tamer with an ambiguous past. He shows his ability to act in non-horror parts here.

The opening and closing theme music is good, with a 1960s British flavor, but the film itself has only incidental music, with many parts of the story unaccompanied. This works well for this type of film.

The colour photography is beautiful.

This movie is definitely worth more than a 7 out of 10. Maybe it's not quite worth an 8, but to compensate for the ridiculous 5.4 average, I give it an 8 anyway. That's less misleading than a 5.4. A 5.4 says, "Don't waste your time watching this movie", but this movie is very much worth watching, for Genn's performance alone, not to mention its other merits.

Christopher Lee in "Circus Of Fear". It's got to be a horror movie, right ? Well, no. "Circus Of Fear" is a pretty classic-style whodunnit full of red herrings and characters with skeletons in their cupboards.

It starts with a very dramatic and almost silent armoured car heist which goes terribly wrong when a security guard is shot and killed. The gang escape and divide up the loot, saving one share for their boss who only communicates with them via the phone and who none of them have ever seen. The action soon moves to the winter quarters of Barberini's circus - which appears to be somewhere in Berkshire! There is a quite surreal shot of a line of elephants and camels moving down a suburban street. The rest of the film takes place here, its anglo-German cast perfectly capturing the international flavour of the circus. And it is here that the murder mystery element of the film really takes off. Leo Genn is 'Gentleman Jim' Elliott, the police inspector investigating the heist. Though it seems most of the circus folk are keeping an eye on each other. Christopher Lee makes a startling appearance as Gregor, the lion tamer, who wears a black hood at all times to hide the horrible scars he received when he was attacked by a lion. The film was written and produced by Harry Alan Towers, for whom Lee made the series of Fu Manchu pictures, and directed by John Moxey, for whom he had made the 1959 occult chiller "City Of The Dead". There are pleasures to be had from cameo appearances by the likes of Cecil Parker as Elliott's superior and Klaus Kinski who gets to lurk menacingly as a member of the gang. It's not long before more bodies start piling up. But who is the killer ? Is it Barberini, the circus owner with financial troubles ? Mario, the jealous knife-thrower ? Maybe it's Mr. Big, the blackmailer ? Or Karl, the ringmaster with an unhealthy interest in Gina, Mario's girlfriend ? Or maybe it's Gregor, whose brother is in jail for murder ? I've seen the film. I know the truth. The killer is..Aaaarghh!

This movie would lead you to believe that Christopher Lee is the main star, but he is not in it all that much. He is in this one more than he was in "Scream and Scream Again", but for most of his scenes he is wearing a hood. This movie was sort of good, sort of bad. The opening of the movie was messed up on the copy I got as scenes skipped here and there and the sound was messed up too, but as the movie went along it got better. This movie first shows a complicated armored truck robbery in to much detail. It then shifted to the circus where the police tracked some of the money. In the circus we meet all sorts of strange characters; any number of them could be responsible for the robbery and a murder that took place on circus grounds. Of course, the movie leads you to believe this or that person committed the crime and each time they usually clear the person of the crime. Could have been better, but it could have been worse it was somewhat interesting. Has to be one of the only movies ever to end with a little person being fired.

this movie proved to be a surprisingly effective spin on the then popular german genre of the "krimi": a series of films, often from edgar wallace source novels, which tend to defy the generic conventions of crime dramas by moving into horror, espionage, even sci-fi at times.

beginning with an energetically directed heist sequence, the film soon shifts gear and location, focussing on the machinations of circus folk, in particular the various affairs and double-dealings of a handful of seemingly innocent and not so innocent clowns, midgets, knife-throwers and lion tamers. the two stories are linked, but only about as much as the two stories in "psycho" are linked: one is there to purely to feed the other.

there are twists and turns galore in this film; perhaps a few too many to be entirely plausible. some of the dialogue scenes are a little stilted, too. however, john moxey's direction tends to keep things going quite well, with some surprisingly sophisticated and kinetic direction. (note, for example, the way the loop of gregor's whip hovers around mr big's head to symbolise his attempts to psychologically ensnare his blackmailer.)

performances are generally quite solid, including from the imported german cast (there presumably to keep west german krimi fans happy), and there are definitely a couple of standouts. klaus kinski is unintelligible a usual, especially as he's forever got a cigarette in his mouth, but his presence lifts the film quite a bit. christopher lee is the only crashing disappointment, as he doesn't appear until act two, he's in a mask for most of the film, and his russian accent wavers a little. he really has no definitive presence here, and it's not particularly his story. i'd also have recast a lot of the police officers for a modern audience, as although they're quite old-fashioned (think dixon of dock green or pc 49), their dialogue would suit the stars of "the sweeney" with little adjustment. but then, in a microcosm of the characteristically unusual, perhaps a little grounding in sanity isn't so bad!

overall, this was a surprisingly effective film. i've only seen the restored 91-minute version that's available on dvd, so perhaps a slightly shorter version with some of the duller dialogue scenes cut down would hold the attention a bit better. (can't be as bad as the p;d 65-minute version, though, even if the film does hold up okay in b&w.) but this is definitely a film worth seeing, especially if you want a decent introduction to the world of the krimi. just don't see it if you want a big christopher lee vehicle -- he had more presence in "dracula", and he was only in six minutes of that!

The film opens with a heist at London's Tower Bridge in which a gang steal a quarter of a million pounds from a security van. The loot is then hidden somewhere in the winter quarters of a traveling circus and this leads to a series of brutal killings. Each of the victims is found stabbed with a circus throwing knife. Inspector Elliot (LEO GENN) suspects that one of the circus performers is the killer and the mastermind behind the raid. He has a number of suspects to choose from including the hooded lion tamer Gregor (CHRISTOPHER LEE) who for some mysterious reason is determined to conceal his face. Then there's Mr Big (SKIP MARTIN), a dwarf assistant on the big top who is systematically blackmailing Gregor for substantial sums of money. As the death toll rises, the pressure is on from Sir John (CECIL PARKER), Elliot's superior, to bring the culprit to justice.

CIRCUS OF FEAR (not to be confused with the Anton Diffring shocker CIRCUS OF HORRORS) isn't the horror film which it's nudging title promises. It's a disappointingly static murder mystery thriller with mild horrific overtones that wouldn't even scare your five-year-old son! It is based on an Edgar Wallace novel called AND THE THREE JUST MEN (first published in 1928), but the director who made a fine impression with his debut feature (the pseudo-American shocker CITY OF THE DEAD) is clearly uninterested in his material here. Hardly surprising since it's a very shaky plot and he seems happy to just keep the cameras immobile and leave it to the impressive cast to keep the movie afloat. Despite Lee's top billing, he gets very little to do and he wears a balaclava for most of the film. All in all, this one is for uncritical audiences only.

Enjoyed this film which starts off with a very neat robbery on the London Bridge, in England and then the picture takes you to a Circus Community that has lots of wild animals and very creepy people. Christopher Lee appears in the film but very briefly, their are plenty of lions, tigers, elephants and plenty of people with hidden paths and deep dark secrets. There is a constant battle between a guy and his attractive gal who teases him with a lot of flirting with other men. This film will completely keep you guessing just how the film will end because of the many twists and turns it takes you on. This film would really be a good Halloween film even though it does not have any horror, just suspense. Enjoy.

For a horror-thriller, there aren't many thrills or much horror to be had. Too much of the plot progresses with a breezy nonchalance, not least in those scenes centering the stuffy inspector or his colleagues. Almost two-thirds of the runtime have elapsed and I'm still waiting for something meaningfully grabbing to manifest, but it's clear it's just not going to happen. The plot from the opening scene mostly seems to vanish; dialogue is as bland in its delivery as in its writing; characters are written with glimmers of personality, history, and background, threads of plot, that seem to go nowhere; scene writing generally hovers somewhere between the mystifying ease of the plot development and the flavorless tenor of the dialogue. Moments of violence and heightened emotions vary wildly in their storytelling judiciousness and overall value; some are baseline interesting, some are just annoying. Most noteworthy of all about 'Circus of fear' may be poor treatment by other characters of women, and the horribly antiquated practice of using live animals in such performances in the first place.

There IS a story here, but it's assembled piecemeal, loosely, and deeply unconvincingly. Not only is the narrative advancement casual and indifferent, it's also unfocused and scattered. Under these circumstances, how can I care about the cast, or their performances? How can I care about the filming locations, production design, or art direction? The best value and most excitement that the movie can claim at any point is wrapped up in such blithe, insouciant, and fuzzy storytelling that it struggles to ever achieve the desired effect. The result, at length, is dull, bland, and never usefully engaging; the climax and reveal of the killer feels like a total non sequitur in light of how ruefully the tale was approached at any given time. When all is said and done it's hard to care about this in any way. I guess you could do worse than 'Circus of fear,' and I hope other folks get more out of it than I did, but I found it to be all but completely boring.

This viewer recently became aware of a genre of film known as "Krimi". Just as Italy has the "Giallo", Germany has the "Krimi", which is essentially crime and mystery fiction, based on works by the likes of Edgar Wallace. "Circus of Fear" itself is based on a Wallace novel, and scripted by producer Harry Alan Towers (using his pseudonym of Peter Welbeck). Originally, "Circus of Fear" was trimmed by almost half a hour upon its release in North America, and shown in black & white. This certainly must have made the plot confusing to audiences of the time.

In its full 91 minute incarnation, it tells the story of a daring daytime robbery of millions of bank notes, and how the money eventually makes its way to a circus run by Barberini (Anthony Newlands). While a dedicated police inspector named Elliott (the great Leo Genn) works the case, performers in this particular big top begin to be knocked off. There is no shortage of suspects. Could the perpetrator be hooded lion tamer Gregor (Sir Christopher Lee)? Knife thrower Mario (Maurice Kaufmann)? Or the diminutive, ironically named Mr. Big (ever delightful Skip Martin)?

Viewers will have fun following the twisty plot. As directed by John Llewellyn Moxey ("The City of the Dead", 'The Night Stalker'), this is appropriately colorful entertainment that takes full advantage of the circus setting. It's a well told tale that receives strong performances by much of the cast, although it's somewhat disappointing that co-star Klaus Kinski doesn't get more to do. Genn is wonderful as the detective, always amused by the foul temper of his superior Sir John (Cecil Parker), while Lee is typically commanding, no matter if his face is covered up or not. Heinz Drache as ringmaster Carl, Eddi Arent as comedy relief character Eddie, lovely ladies Margaret Lee & Suzy Kendall, and Victor Maddern as robbery participant Mason round out a sterling group of actors.

A good, solid film overall that I would easily recommend to others.

Eight out of 10.

Circus of Fear is based on a novel by Edgar Wallace; the same writer who spawned the German "Krimi" style of film-making. This film is a British take on the Krimi style and comes out something like a Hammer Horror mystery, though the film is not without its problems. That's possibly why this film is not easy to come by; as despite the fact that it stars Christopher Lee in an interesting role as a circus lion tamer, Circus of Fear, at times, isn't all that easy to get along with as the plot is really quite messy and the horror that goes along with the central mystery often gets in the way. The plot begins with a botched heist that ends with one of the criminals shooting a police officer. The shooter is given the chance to go and give the boss his share before being allowed to flee the country; but unfortunately, he is murdered upon his arrival at the meeting place. The action then switches to the local circus where is believed that the identity of the murderer will be revealed. There we are introduced to a whole host of shady and mysterious characters...

The film is directed by John Llewellyn Moxey, who previously directed Christopher Lee in the excellent, fog-soaked, City of the Dead. Said previous film is a better one as the plot worked better; but while Circus of Fear doesn't always work well, the things that do work are very good and the film never gets boring. The cast is headed by Christopher Lee who is grim and imposing in his role as a horribly scarred and masked lion tamer. The film also features a small role for the great Klaus Kinski, as well as sound performances from British performers Anthony Newlands, Leo Genn and Margeret Lee. The film presents a lot of suspects and it soon becomes easier to just watch it rather than try and guess who the killer is. However, the two twists in the tale can be guessed (the first one is very obvious) without putting too much strain on the viewer, which is a shame. City of the Dead was all about atmosphere and this film is fairly atmospheric too, though not nearly to the same extent as the earlier film, which is another shame. Overall, Circus of Fear is not a great film; but it's entertaining enough and I can recommend it.

You may wonder how and why one would want to hide such a great actor as Christopher Lee. His role almost could have been played by an entire different actor (did not look into it, if that was the case). Whatever the reason, I think this would have fared better if we'd seen more of Lee, but that is just me and how I feel I guess.

Having said that, the terror and the suspense is there for 60s horror movie fans and those who've watched it back in the day may feel some nostalgia factor within ... it's not bad, but it's not really good either

This movie has more title changes than evilskip's shorts. Psycho Circus, Circus Of Fear etc.It isn't a horror movie but it is a crime movie and I might add it is a crime what has been done to this movie.It may or not be based somewhat loosely on an Edgar Wallace thriller.

A robbery goes awry leading to murder,double crossings, mistaken identities, blackmail and revenge.You've got a great cast, an involving plot and...video distributors that butchered the film.There is at least one reel missing from this print that has some important exposition.Not to mention 15 minutes as well.This print only runs 74 minutes.

I would love to see the complete film.In the meantime this one will have to do.

1st watched 6/23/2002 - 4 out of 10(Dir-John Moxey): Overly-emphasized as being a horror movie, but instead is a murder mystery with a horror film star getting top billing(Christopher Lee). There seemed to be an emphasis as well on using the music to make us think this film is scary(loud blaring music at certain points) but I'm sorry it's not a horror film. What it is, is a very boring, and drawn-out murder mystery where we don't really care who did it in the end. Sure it has your typical twists and turns in the plot but it's pretty obvious that the man in the mask(Christopher Lee) will be revealed and be a part of what's going on and that the midget is involved somehow and the unlikely killer is just that(made out to be unlikely, but having a good motive). There is a reference made to Sherlock Holmes counterpart, Dr. Watson made in the movie but I think even Sherlock wouldn't have been happy with this slow-moving tale.

This is a pretty good little film, though it is a lot like two films in one. The first portion is a heist film. However, after the money is hidden among the props at a circus, the film abruptly becomes a 'psycho at the circus' film. This was a very odd way of constructing the film--not bad, mind you, just very different.

Once in the circus portion of the film, one by one people are killed or nearly killed and the film becomes like a mystery. Who is the person behind all this? Who will they kill next? I would say that the true perpetrator was a pretty good choice, as it took me by surprise--making the film a better than average film.

By the way, although the film gives top billing to Christopher Lee, you barely see him in the film. Much of the time he's wearing a hood and I even wondered if it was always him under this disguise or if they just had an extra (a very TALL extra) filling in for some scenes. Who knows? However, even it was always him, it's more Leo Genn's film. Regardless, it's worth a look.

While I'm heartened that Christopher Lee is currently enjoying something of a career renaissance (thanks to his imposing presence in the "Lord of the Rings" and "Star Wars" films), the truth is this talented performer has lent himself to an astounding number of unworthy projects over the course of his fifty-eight years on screen. How does one explain participating in wretched films like "The Devil's Agent", "Curse of the Crimson Alter" and "Safari 3000"? Is it all about the money? Perhaps, but not in the way you might think; I tend to believe Mr. Lee has lost too many bets to too many bad filmmakers.

"Circus of Fear" is typical of the projects Lee involved himself in during the early to mid '60's when not working on English horror films; drearily shot on bad film stock, sloppily dubbed (even when performed in English!), poorly financed and apparently edited with a chainsaw. The opening heist scene has potential but is so poorly photographed it's hard to tell at first if the film is in color or black and white. The film plods along choppily until we are introduced to the circus folk, including Lee, and the proceedings grow increasingly murky and complicated as their backstories develop. As Lee has often done, he has accepted a role that is more an extended cameo than a lead part; he plays a disfigured lion tamer who hides his face beneath a heavy black hood (which clashes with the beige tweed jacket he wears throughout the film). Lee's lion-taming scene is embarrassing; shots of the actor wielding a whip interspersed with even grainier shots of anemic looking lions lifted from another film. To make matters worse, the fact that Lee performs from behind the aforementioned hood draws attention to his rich, sonorous baritone. This would be okay if he didn't affect an unconvincing German accent; he also tends to bellow his lines, as if he were addressing someone an acre away.

Despite this seeming diatribe, I respect Mr. Lee and I'm glad he survives as the last of horror film's Old Guard. I grew up enjoying the fine work he did at Hammer and Amicus studios. I marvel at his personal and professional longevity, and wish for him more of the same. And I sincerely hope that in his sunset years he is fortunate enough to associate himself with distinguished productions worthy of his considerable talent.

I tried to find favour in movies but this one tempted my commitment to do so!

The investigation of the crack-force police was pathetic! Imagine a girl seeking to speak with a detective, who'd first presented himself to this circus as an uninvited 'journalist'. He's actually a policeman deciding to go in undercover in search of missing treasure! Then he announces himself without the slightest opposition to the circus boss! But the one who'd approached him minutes earlier, was then abandoned with his assurance of protection & at a whim of spontaneous urgency from one of his officers, he headed elsewhere without hesitation! For her to be left to die, within minutes, without protection!

That's just ONE of the examples of plot that makes this into an amateurish excuse that most any fictional character, as if Sherlock Holmes or "007", would have countlessly torn to pieces with ease! Even countless mere mortals would see through its traps of irrelevance & pathetic acting & plot!

I thought the best parts of the movie were the opening & the occasional music score that wafted in & out of the lack of genuine intensity of plot or passion in this doubtful production! But I am mindful of other comments that 15 minutes of its length was wiped out of one version & that alternate titles were adding to the confusion!

It's not good beyond the first few minutes, the music & incidental activity that is dramatic & appropriate when occasionally used, mostly early!

Starts off beautifully clipped and raw, on Location in 1965 London, with lovely historical shots and a storyline mimicking the Great Train Robbery of 1963. It's taut and as authentic as a Michael Caine movie of that era.

And then.....

...a seemingly endless 'can we speak in private' moments, ghastly red-herrings at the circus and absolutely ZERO sympathy for any of the characters, good or bad. The last hour is dreadfully boring and the denouement unfulfilling.

This is a perfect "B" movie. It starts off as a well-planned bank vehicle heist at the draw bridge of London Towers. The crime follows perfect timing among the thieves until a snag happens. Once the heist is completed the haunting theme starts and the movie begins. We follow astutely honorable Leo Genn, as Elliot the Scotland Yard investigator, to Barberini's Circus settling in its winter quarters. Somehow the money trail ends there. Who, what, where and when is a windy road with great characterizations and scenes. Christopher Lee is the hooded Gregor, masked in mystery also kept by his lovely niece Natasha (Suzy Kendall) who fancies Heinz Drache; the attractive circus ringmaster with a secret edge to him. Barberini, deftly played by Anthony Newlands, has all the bigness of a circus owner; making policy and calling the shots; a powerful personality in his Russian hat and odd accent. Maurice Kaufmann is Mario, the controlling jealous boyfriend of the beautiful playgirl Gina, played by a beguiling Margaret Lee. Add to the mix Klaus Kinski, the oddly affected criminal trying to tie up ends; Mason, the imperfect money deliverer; hard boiled crime leader Jackson; Manley, the sweet local police lieutenant; Cecil Parker as the incredulous eye-popping Sir John; Skip Martin as the conniving midget Mr. Big; and the idiotically sweet Eddie (Eddi Arentt), the circus owner's right hand man and clown wanna-be. It is an interesting story; a good mystery, with a fabulous theme weaving interesting characters with mysterious agendas, starkly filmed, with a surprise ending well worth the wait. It is on my A list. Enjoy.

Proving once again that talent need not stand in the way of making a bad movie, Christopher Lee strikes again. Not content with being part of a mind-numbingly bad performance in "The Castle of Fu Manchu" -- just ask Tom Servo & Crow T. Robot -- Lee once again sends the mind reeling in a performance that could be a substitute for LSD.

While the occindental Lee's performance of Fu Manchu is offensive in terms of sensibilities, his appearance as a hooded man on the run amongst a circus merely offends the viewers expectations. He spends his time apparently thinking he's doing a Dracula movie. He does not seem to know that he's making a mystery/suspense movie, not a horror one.

It all begins well enough. A bank robbery happens before the opening credits roll. However, not long after, everyone is conveniently captured but one (and he is also conveniently killed). The rest of the movie centers on the cash, which the dead accomplice delivered to the mystery man who killed him, and how it makes its way to Lee, who plays a lion tamer (!).

The movie has a love triangle, odious comic relief, a midget with the name of Mr. Big, police detectives with bald heads, and lots, lots less. If the last line in your movie is "I don't need more evidence, Mr. Big. You're fired." you have a truly horrible movie. Watching this movie just may give you cancer. It should come in a red biohazard bag; it is that awful.

Sterno says remember to ask yourself, "What the heck was that?" if you are unfortunate enough to watch this one.