Martin Bradley In the early sixties Anglo-Amalgamated became the alternative to Hammer for cheap horror thrills but in a more contemporary setting and "Circus of Horrors" was one of their better enteries, (the use of a real-life circus, in this case Billy Smart's, certainly helped). Anton Diffring is the psychopathic surgeon who takes over a circus as a front for his activities but who still can't keep death from his door. There's a greater emphasis on sex than in the Hammer films and director Sidney Hayers serves up a bevvy of European beauties as actual and potential victims. Hardly ground-breaking but fun nevertheless.

Mr_Ectoplasma "Circus of Horrors" follows an ethically questionable plastic surgeon who manipulates his way into performing an operation on the scarred daughter of a circus owner, only to gerrymander his way into taking over the traveling big top. What follows is a decades-long practice of transforming disfigured and corrupted women whom are recruited into the circus— but if they decide to leave, they die. An effective riff on "Eyes Without a Face" as well as elements of "Freaks," "Circus of Horrors" is surprising in that it manages to walk a line between inhabiting the space of big top circus entertainment and the realm of true horror; that is to say that its cheery scenes of circus performance are shot with a colorful, family-friendly flair that is dazzling to behold, and yet there is a sinister and macabre subtext that underpins the entire film, leaving the picturesque, Technicolor-y (almost even Disneyesque) circus scenes feeling unsettling and even perverse.The film makes a point to toy with its audience's notions of aesthetics in this way, and in some sense acts as an almost exposé on the dark undercurrent of the big top (because, let's face it— there is something inherently weird about the circus). The power of the film hinges entirely on this interplay, and the dynamic is weird and unnerving enough to never really lose its steam. It's beautifully shot, and the performances are at times dated but overall still effective (we also get a younger Donald Pleasance as the circus's original owner). Anton Diffring has the appropriate look that screams "sadist" and "potentially psychotic," and he works this to the hilt. The conclusion to the film is shocking and fantastically presented.Overall, "Circus of Horrors" is an underrated offering from the crop of '60s British horror films. It is a visually dazzling film that is rich in visuals and colors, an element which is completely off-set by the twisted content and subtext of the plot. Sweet and sour, beautiful and ugly; all great things seem to be a bit of both, don't they? 8/10.

tedg Sometimes when watching these things you can see the napkin that started the whole thing, and the scribbling on it.Circus. Check. These are one of the most flexible and cinematic settings. We've seen many different things successfully done in circus movies. There's something about the abstraction of this type of performance in the performance of a film that works.Mad scientist. Check. Gotta have one. Somehow he causes the terror.Beautiful women. Check. All from roughly the same mold, literally. Then you can see the writer sort of disintegrating after that, because there is no obvious way to mix these three. The solution is a mess. What you have is a world famous plastic surgeon on the run for some reason, and he decides to take over a circus for cover. For cover? Then he finds beautiful, shapely young women with facial damage. He fixes their faces, and enlists them to perform in the circus. The horror? Well, if they want to leave, they suffer lethal "accidents."Yes, its that lame, including a guy in a cheap bear suit who finishes off the doctor.All through it, we yearn for that napkin.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

Elswet While the cinematography in this one is somewhat lacking, the story is genuinely atmospheric, although it felt more like an exploitation film than what it was. The development of the characters and their relation to the plot is what is so memorable about this one. Our star is to be hated, reviled, that much is clear from the onset, but once that has been set in our minds, this work really delivers, in a Sigourney Weaver kind of way. I can't really say more than that without giving away the plot and the ending, so I won't.If you're into retro-horror, this is a definite must see. It's not the best horror, but it is probably one of the best ever done by the British.It rates a 7.2/10 from...the Fiend :.