MARIO GAUCI I do not know what it was with Christopher Lee during the mid-1970s, but he seemed to accept pretty much every script that came his way in an attempt to obtain for himself some kind of Guinness World Record for movie roles played (which he probably holds anyway)!; with this in mind, a sizeable amount of titles from his extensive career remain obscure to this day and, having watched a few of them already in my ongoing tribute to him, I regret to say that this status is justified certainly for the majority emanating from this vintage (with only ALBINO {1976} emerging thus far as being undeservedly forgotten).This Canadian thriller (erroneously considered horror by some sources but, then, this would often prove the case with this particular genre icon) is a genuine dud, and one really has to strain to determine just what could have attracted the star to become involved!; it may have been the fact that he plays a cripple, but his condition is never explained and has no bearing whatsoever on the plot, or perhaps the notion that he can control minds by way of hypnosis – but the sessions conducted are downright laughable, with himself adopting a perfectly idiotic diabolical countenance throughout! Anyway, he plays the head of an insane asylum but insists on being referred to as "keeper": it transpires that his patients (one of whom turns out to be a "sympathetic" twin with another, shady character within the narrative) are all well-to-do and that their relatives – in line to inherit them – are being eliminated; since this would make Lee the eventual beneficiary of their fortune, a cop has been infiltrated into the establishment to investigate…but he too has been virtually reduced to a puppet in the master's hands! Incidentally, this is given a period setting – complete with trenchcoat-sporting detective hero (though far removed from the hard-boiled prototype) and a resourceful shoeshine boy – but, since there was no concerted attempt at sustaining mood, the option was no more than a randomly-deployed gimmick! However, perhaps the most head-scratching decision here was to make the inevitable Police Inspector – first clashing with, then abetting – the protagonist a highly-strung and accident-prone buffoon, obviously intended to supply comedy relief but only serving a litany of cringe-inducing antics one would think hard before including even in an outright slapstick comedy! I am afraid THE CRAPPER would have been an equally appropriate moniker

dmacewen-619-299258 Unlike some viewers, who have only "recently" become Christopher Lee fans, I've been a fan of Lee for 25 years. Now I don't have a gripe with Steven Kuroiwa's review of this film, since it isn't very good. I do, however, have a problem with upstarts passing themselves off as reliable critical sources, putting viewers off a remarkable film like Peter Sykes's To the Devil a Daughter, a film that falls just shy of his masterpiece Demons of the Mind (both films written, or co-written, by the great Christopher Wicking). So if you were unfortunate enough to read that review, put it out of your mind. And put To the Devil a Daughter at the top of your queue. I have spoken.

Tom Fowler `You are with The Keeper, and The Keeper will keep you alive!,' so says the evil Keeper in this 1975 Lionsgate offering, perhaps the rarest and hardest to find Christopher Lee film. This one is not even catalogued in Leonard Maltin's 2002 Movie and Video Guide. Lee is indeed the keeper at Underwood Asylum, where wealthy patients check in and soon after their relatives begin to die, leaving The Keeper (who apparently had no name) the sole heir of their well-being and bankbooks. Private investigators Dick Driver and Mae B. Jones are hired to get to the bottom of it and almost pay the ultimate cost in doing so. This is where the seriousness of this film ends and the silliness begins. The Keeper could not quite make it's mind up as to whether it is a serious horror film or comedic horror spoof. Some of Lee's scenes show him at a huge control panel torturing his hapless patients electronically and those are truly disturbing. Other scenes, particularly the ones involving exchanges between the police and private investigator Driver, are intended to be humorous but come off as embarrassingly amateurish. Lee, who appeared to phone his performance in, and Tell Schreiber as the male private eye Driver are the only two notable performers here, with the exception of Ian Tracey as the streetwise shoeshine boy. The Keeper suffers from subpar production values, as it appears grainy at times with poor dialogue, and the camera angles are poorly done. At times, one would think beginning film students made this film but then again even beginners could probably do as well or better. In the end, the police and private eyes get their man and they all leave Underwood asylum to apparently live happily ever after. The Keeper is notable only because of it's lack of availability and presence of Lee, whose body of work over the course of his lengthy career is extraordinary.

cfc_can The Keeper is a poor attempt at a psychological horror film in which Lee plays the head of an asylum that caters to rich families with unstable family members whom they want to keep out of public. What really sinks this film is the incredibly amateurish look. You'd swear that it was made by film making students. There are no scares and the plot has some really stupid holes and characters, especially a dopey policeman who gets hypnotized. Lee looks like he wishes he were elsewhere throughout the film. Can't say that I blame him!