Low budget, ham-handed, and very briskly paced, these qualities also lend at times to an air of inauthenticity, a sense bolstered by reaction shots of circus crowds that bear the appearance of stock footage. Such matters are unfortunate, as is the recognition of how circus animals are treated in their training and routines. On the other hand, if imperfect, George Baxt's screenplay is filled with notes of brilliance - murder, conspiracy, unsanctioned experimentation, and controlling manipulation, all under the Big Tent. For all the gaucheness, there's some fine subtlety and nuance in the characters and scene writing that's welcome and gratifying, and for the most part this is echoed as well in the cast and their performances. I can't say that 'Circus of horrors' is flawless, but despite any shortcomings it's unexpectedly well made and solidly engaging all the while. This is pretty fun!
There are definitely moments dotted throughout the film that especially scream "ungenuine" or "over the top," such as the first death scene, or the last instance of Colette Wilde's acting. These are thankfully contrasted with characters of some complexity, and dialogue that in the very least serves the building of plot and characters if not also being enriching of its own accord. Suitably varied scene writing crafts some tension as it spins the narrative, fostering too an air of suspense as events escalate in the last third or so of the runtime. And while the plot may not be perfectly grabbing, I'm inclined to think that's just in part owed to watching an older film from the perspective of 60 years on - when you get right down to it, the villainy and violence remains rather horrid, if just not as visceral as modern viewers are accustomed to. This is indeed a horror flick, with quite the "trail of blood" behind it, only with the sensibilities thereof of the 60s.
The production design and art direction are swell, as is the costume design and hair and makeup work. The (human) stunts performed during scenes at the circus are, unsurprisingly, quite dazzling, and scenes at large are orchestrated with a deft hand. Some specific moments aside, the acting is generally very strong, with Anton Diffring, Jane Hylton, and Kenneth Griffith particularly standing out (though in fairness, they also have the most time on-screen in the first place). And in addition to Baxt's screenwriting, I think director Sidney Hayers does a fine job of overseeing the picture and bringing the vision to splendid, twisted life. All told this is well made as a whole; mostly I just wish a bit more care were taken to let scenes achieve their best potential. That might mean more earnestness and less kitsch, or a smidgen less freneticism so moments could be held for an instant longer for more impact. Still, even through the weakest points, by and large 'Circus of horrors' is an engaging, satisfying slice of genre cinema that continues to hold up fairly well several decades later. This isn't necessarily something to go out of your way to see, but if you have the chance to watch, this is worth ninety minutes of your time!
There are definitely moments dotted throughout the film that especially scream "ungenuine" or "over the top," such as the first death scene, or the last instance of Colette Wilde's acting. These are thankfully contrasted with characters of some complexity, and dialogue that in the very least serves the building of plot and characters if not also being enriching of its own accord. Suitably varied scene writing crafts some tension as it spins the narrative, fostering too an air of suspense as events escalate in the last third or so of the runtime. And while the plot may not be perfectly grabbing, I'm inclined to think that's just in part owed to watching an older film from the perspective of 60 years on - when you get right down to it, the villainy and violence remains rather horrid, if just not as visceral as modern viewers are accustomed to. This is indeed a horror flick, with quite the "trail of blood" behind it, only with the sensibilities thereof of the 60s.
The production design and art direction are swell, as is the costume design and hair and makeup work. The (human) stunts performed during scenes at the circus are, unsurprisingly, quite dazzling, and scenes at large are orchestrated with a deft hand. Some specific moments aside, the acting is generally very strong, with Anton Diffring, Jane Hylton, and Kenneth Griffith particularly standing out (though in fairness, they also have the most time on-screen in the first place). And in addition to Baxt's screenwriting, I think director Sidney Hayers does a fine job of overseeing the picture and bringing the vision to splendid, twisted life. All told this is well made as a whole; mostly I just wish a bit more care were taken to let scenes achieve their best potential. That might mean more earnestness and less kitsch, or a smidgen less freneticism so moments could be held for an instant longer for more impact. Still, even through the weakest points, by and large 'Circus of horrors' is an engaging, satisfying slice of genre cinema that continues to hold up fairly well several decades later. This isn't necessarily something to go out of your way to see, but if you have the chance to watch, this is worth ninety minutes of your time!