Bruno, a sadistic criminal, wants clever con man Leo out of the way. Leo and his equally clever wife, Lily, are up to something. So too is Julius: he hires Leo to kill Gloria, Julius's wife. Leo does it, but then Julius shows up with the murder on tape, saying Gloria isn't his wife - it's blackmail. Leo's bookie, Troy, is also closing in, wanting to be paid. Bruno and Lily as well as Bruno and Julius have their own scams running, and Leo is their target. Maybe Leo can get Troy off his back, avoid Moose (Bruno's huge enforcer), send Gloria's corpse out of England, turn the tables on Bruno's murderous brother Caspar, and outfox Lily. Or is Lily his fox? It's a three-ring circus.
Similar titles
Reviews
A waste of 90 minutes of my life
A different way of telling a story
A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.
Blistering performances.
I had never heard of this film before today, but my father found it at goodwill for a dollar and bought it just to see if it was any good, and we just watched it a couple hours ago.All in all I will say I enjoyed this film, but only after I realized that the plot-line would be very difficult to follow and I would be best-off just sitting back and enjoying the character interactions. That being said, I think I actually followed the majority of it but just barely.The film was enjoyable because the characters are interesting and the acting is very good all-around. John Hannah put on a pretty good performance. Before tonight I had never seen him in anything other than The Mummy films, which I also quite enjoyed him in, and I must say I wish he was in more films. Very good character-acting from the other actors involved. I particularly enjoyed Eddie Izzard as the quirky yet tough bookie.However, the film suffered a great deal in the plot-line. The plot was clever, yes, but it was much too convoluted. A lot of things flew by really quickly and even for a person used to complex plot-lines it was hard to follow. Not only that, but it didn't seem like there was much of a distinct plot-line to begin with it. It seemed like things were just happening, and then they all kinda fell together in the end. On top of that there were far too many twist. I got the feeling that the filmmakers really wanted to throw in a twist every five minutes. This kept you guessing but it served to give the viewers really no grip on what was going on at all.The film would have done much better to lessen the amount of twists and turns, and establish a solid plot-line that the viewers could get a grip on, and let them think they actually know what's going on for a little while, and then start throwing in curve-balls. Of course, I am not the filmmaker, and who am I to tell them how to make their film? But that's just how I feel I would be better gripped by a film of this natur.All that being said, this film really was enjoyable due to the acting and characters despite being quite mediocre plot wise. 6/10
There's seldom a movie which requires to be seen twice only because you're not sure if you have understood everything the first time... well, now I have experienced that also. The reason to watch the film was duo Hannah / Stormare, and they surely did fine performances both! Some scenes were absolutely hilarious and as I had seen John Hannah as Rebus before this film, it was a great reminder that he also has immense gifts for comedy! And all those facades Peter Stormare had as Julius, they were a pleasure to see! Famke Janssen was a new face to see and one I gladly see in other productions also. What comes to cast, I have no bad words to say. But what comes to the director/producer... the story jumps to and fro between past and present and scenes get damn confusing... you didn't know what it was you were seeing... Anyway, 8/10, not bad, but those points were only saved by the excellent cast and the fact that I think the original manus might have been pretty good. It was just spoiled by someone who wanted to be "unpredictable and innovative". Besides, after seeing the movie twice I still have the feeling I've missed something...
Over the last few years the British film industry has made countless films like Circus , some brilliant some not so brilliant. Circus comes under the " Not so brilliant" catagory .The problem with this movie is that it tries to be far to clever for it's own good, which leaves the viewer bemused by the plot and in the end not caring what ,or if there is a final twist. The acting is good by most of the cast.John Hannah is convincing as a con man and Eddie Izzard is fantastic as the loan shark (why couldnt we se more of him?)but Brian Conley is not so convincing as the gangland boss. Every time he grimaces and tries to look nasty he looks like he is about to start laughing. Which is what you might do when you enter the circus for an hour and a half. 5 out of 10
This film was excellent. I parted with money that could have been put to much better use, and I'm very happy about it.The plot is excellent, the acting excellent, and Eddie Izzard is a god.Once again another fantastic British Film. 11 out of 10...