mark.waltz Remember those classic spoofs about movie making (usually the silent era) where a whole line of productions are being filmed right next to each other, only separated by a tent? You could have a melodrama of a young widow arguing over the rent with the mustache twirling landlord, a romantic scene of lovers interrupted by the husband, or a crazy cream pie fight? Then comes along the inevitable bar right where the director simply yells "action!" and it seems that a dance begins between the crazy action going on. Fists fly, bodies fly through doors, off balcony's, and bottles hit heads. Yet nobody seems hurt when the director yells "cut!"That's what happens here with this low budget pre-code drama starring Conrad Bagel as a high class traveling performer who hits the skids when Hus wife goes on the road, leaving their young son with him and is suddenly killed just after Nagel finds out that she's been unfaithful. Nagel hits the bottle, and in a truly amazing fight sequence, is getting drunk in a saloon where a fight just like I describe erupts. Nagel comes out only with a hangover, but his concerned old friend (Leila Hyams) goes off on him for neglecting his impressionable son.This is one of those B grade dramas from studios on lower Santa Monica Blvd. churned out dozens of titles like this, often not very good. That's not the case here as in spite of technical inferiority's got it right. It's all about Nagel's desperation to make good, and with the help of a good woman, he does just that. But will a romantic future between Nagel and Hyams be possible with the son against the relationship? Predictable? Yes. But boring? Hardly not. This keeps the viewer's interest without resorting to clichés, and if they are there, I was too taken by the film to notice. While there aren't a lot of circus sequences, the final involving a loose tiger and a fire is truly nail biting.

JohnHowardReid Eugene O'Neill rides again in this multi-plotted "Hell in a Circus" expansion of his one-act, 1913 stage play, Recklessness. If anything, there is now too much plot – noir in spades! – but you can't say that interest ever sags. If, like me, you don't give a hoot for the son who hates dad's new girlfriend plot, you can concentrate on dad's battle with the bottle or his struggle to hold on to his traveling, penny-ante stage show instead. The Alpha DVD is three minutes shorter than the original 76-minute release, because it has shortened or deleted a musical interlude with The Three Ambassadors. Conrad Nagel does his best to hold our interest, despite his poorly motivated role, and he does receive solid support from battling Stanley Fields, Claire Windsor as the cheat and Leila Hyams as the taken-for-granted Lou. The climax indicated by the changed title (the original release called The Constant Woman – a reference to the Hyams character – did zilch in the way of box office business) is pretty exciting, despite (or maybe because of) the obvious use of stock material. Ably directed by Victor Schertzinger (on loan from Paramount), the movie is now available on a pretty good Alpha DVD under the "Hell in a Circus" title.

MartinHafer Rarely have I seen a B-movie with so much plot. In fact, it has enough for two films or perhaps even an epic! It's a case of just too much and should have been trimmed, as a film completed in under 70 minutes with so much stuff happening is a bit confusing and ill-focused."The Constant Woman" (also known as "Hell in a Circus"--even though only the last five minutes or so takes place at a circus!) begins with a minor company of actors performing. As the leading lady is doing her act, you see her son in the wings--oh so proud of her. Moments later, he's having a fist-fight with another teen...but this isn't what the film is all about however. Then, the lady announces to her husband and son after the show that she's accepting the lead in another show--in New York. After leaving them, the two decide to follow a few days later to surprise her. When they arrive at her hotel, the father finds out two nasty things: she was burned up in an accidental fire with her lover AND the boy is not really his son!!! Wow. But, this still isn't the main plot of the film.For a while, the father spends all his time getting drunk and his life is a mess. So, it's up to a lady who cares about him and a friend named (I kid you not) 'Beef' to bring the gang to the speakeasy to get him--and a huge fight occurs with the owners of a speakeasy. But, this really isn't what the film is about however.Next, you see the father being sobered up by his lady friend. And, soon they've both gotten a great job paying wonderful money doing a radio show and all appears to be happy. And, at that moment, the dopey dad realizes how wonderful the lady is an asks her to marry him. But, this isn't quite the main story idea either.The teen learns about this upcoming marriage and he freaks out--running off to live with Beef at the circus. However, his dad and possible new mom are beside themselves looking for this runaway little punk and on a hunch, they rush to the circus. There, the place has just caught fire--wild animals are running amok and are about to eat the boy who is pinned under some stuff....in a burning tent!!! But who should come and save him?! Yep--new mom. Now the boy awakens in the hospital realizing what a jerk-face he's been and announces that the marriage is a swell idea and they all live happily ever again. So, now that I think about it, what is the actual purpose or plot of this thing?! The bottom line is that the writer threw in everything but the kitchen sink. As a result, the film came off as cheesy and contrived. To recap--a mother abandons her family only to become a crispy critter with her lover, the husband finds out about it AND that his son isn't really his, becomes an alcoholic, is being held prisoner in a speak-easy, is rescued by 'Beef', is sobered up, gets a good job, negotiates a great contract for lots 'o money, realizes he's in love, asks the girl to marry him, son returns from boarding school and freaks out when told this, runs off and joins the circus that now happens to catch fire AND the lions and tigers escape AND new mom-to-be rescues the kid and the kid now realizes she's a swell dame.....Good Lord, there is a LOT in this film!!! In addition, the acting, at times, is a bit suspect and the film is a silly and inconsequential little B-movie and nothing more.

marcslope In a trim and workmanlike 70 minutes, we get barnstorming theatricals, an unfaithful wife, a bastard child, a hotel fire, a circus fire, a speakeasy brawl, and crackling pre-Code dialogue, including this reminiscence from an ex-roustabout: "Why, when I was with the circus, if you had only one black eye they thought you was a pansy!" Victor Schertzinger achieves some resourceful directorial tricks, not always placing the camera where you expect and injecting some expressionistic touches. The cast is game, with Claire Windsor a particular delight as the rotten, selfish wife who gets bumped off in the second reel.It's a Poverty Row epic -- from Tiffany Studios, to be precise -- but it has what they used to call moxie. And the quick pace and unflinching Depression milieu recall Warners-First National at its best.