IMDb RATING
2.9/10
2.4K
YOUR RATING
Fu Manchu seizes a Turkish castle for its stockpile of opium, as he needs the drug as part of his plot to freeze the Earth's oceans.Fu Manchu seizes a Turkish castle for its stockpile of opium, as he needs the drug as part of his plot to freeze the Earth's oceans.Fu Manchu seizes a Turkish castle for its stockpile of opium, as he needs the drug as part of his plot to freeze the Earth's oceans.
Howard Marion-Crawford
- Dr. Petrie
- (as Howard Marion Crawford)
Günther Stoll
- Dr. Curt Kessler
- (as Gunther Stoll)
José Manuel Martín
- Omar Pasha
- (as Jose Manuel Martin)
Werner Abrolat
- Melnik
- (as Werner Aprelat)
Stanley Baker
- Running Man
- (archive footage)
Dirk Bogarde
- Running Man
- (archive footage)
Mike Brendel
- Omar Pasha's Gunman
- (uncredited)
David de Keyser
- Omar Pasha and others
- (voice)
- (uncredited)
Jesús Franco
- Inspector Hamid
- (uncredited)
Herbert Fux
- Governer
- (uncredited)
Osvaldo Genazzani
- Sir Robert
- (uncredited)
Burt Kwouk
- Feng
- (archive footage)
- (uncredited)
Pere Portabella
- Dying Turkish Soldier
- (uncredited)
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaAll of the footage at the beginning featuring a large ocean liner striking an iceberg and sinking is stock footage from the British Titanic movie A Night to Remember (1958).
- GoofsThe first scenes where Fu-Manchu is directing the sinking of the liner were the final scenes of a previous Fu-Manchu movie: The brides of Fu Manchu, where he shots his lieutenant who was trying to stop Fu Manchu surpass the maximum of the machine.
- Quotes
Fu Manchu: The entrance to eternity. Beyond that door there is a tunnel which leads directly to the sea. Cisterns of water are poised above it. The touch of a lever will release hundreds of thousands of gallons of water into that tunnel, and combined with professor Heracles' crystals this can transform the entire sea into one gigantic block of ice.
- Crazy creditsMaria Perschy's character is called Dr. Ingrid Koch but on the credits her character's name is given as Marie.
- Alternate versionsAs usual in 'Jesus Franco' movies, the credits of the film contain different (and often incongruous with each other) info in every country's version. While the English version lists Peter Welbeck (nom-de-plum for Harry Alan Towers) as the author of the screenplay, the Spanish version (with a credits sequence that replaces the exterior shots of the castle from the original with a cheesy drawing of a red dragon) lists Manfred Barthel as the author of the story and screenplay, and Jaime Jesús Balcázar as the author of the dialogue. This version also credits some actors (such as Gustavo Re and Osvaldo Genazzani) and crew members not credited in the English version, and the cast order is different as well.
- ConnectionsEdited from Campbell's Kingdom (1957)
Featured review
It boggles the mind that anyone could possibly defend this movie as some sort of lost classic or claim that people only say it's bad because it was on "Mystery Science Theater". When *two* lengthy scenes in a movie consist largely of footage borrowed from better movies, and when both of those scenes could be removed without anyone noticing the break, you know that the director's aim was to exert himself as little as possible to get the required length of film in the can. Anyone here with a burning zeal to uphold the reputation of THE CASTLE OF FU MANCHU against its boorish detractors is almost certainly exerting more effort on the movie's behalf than Jess Franco ever did.
Nevertheless, the film is not among the all-time worst. Roger Ebert is correct when he says, "There's probably a level of competence beneath which bad directors cannot fall....they've got to come up with something that can at least be advertised as a motion picture, released and forgotten." It can be safely conjectured that this was just what Jess Franco wanted. The dialogue is passable, the acting (what little is needed) is serviceable, and occasionally the editing actually drums up something like tension.
So if no one aspect of THE CASTLE OF FU MANCHU is really *that* bad, why is watching the whole film such a chore? A bad movie can be difficult to watch, but an *aggressively* mediocre one can be worse. When Roger Corman cranked out his listless, paint-by-numbers adventures and fantasy movies, at least he had the excuses of working with zero budget, a cast of third-stringers, and shooting schedules permitting him maybe a week's use of a sound stage. I'm guessing that Franco's budget was scarcely greater, but he had a decent cast and enough freedom for location shooting in more than one country. Yet he produced a movie as uninspired and perfunctory as Corman did at his worst. What was Franco thinking?
The plot seems almost to go out of its way to abandon consistency. Fu Manchu kidnaps Prof. Heracles and then his doctor because he needs help to make the magic freezing crystals in quantity (crystals, by the way, which also perform the totally unrelated duty of a knockout gas), but then even though we see Heracles at the end refuse to help Fu Manchu, his refusal doesn't even slow Fu Manchu down, who initiates his freezing plan without apparent need for Heracles's assistance. We *had* seen Fu Manchu demanding a ransom earlier one (without bothering to name terms) but any idea of actually collecting on the ransom never comes up. Fortunately for the world Nayland-Smith shows up to foil his plot to freeze the ocean, although Franco can't be bothered to show us how he foils it. We see him beating up some flunkies and trying to contact London by radio, then suddenly there's a loud report and soon Fu Manchu is watching helplessly as everything blows up around him. I'm used to villain's fortresses improbably blowing up because the hero fires one well-placed shot or smashes one control panel, but THE CASTLE OF FU MANCHU gives us the only case of a villain's fortress exploding merely because the hero makes a long-distance phone call.
It's not as though Franco didn't have enough screen time to fill these plot holes. It's just that he decided to fill that time with lengthy establishing shots, walking, and creeping around dark corridors and tunnels. He also directs his actors to speak as slowly as possible and pause whenever possible. They have excuses, I suppose. Fu Manchu is "inscrutable", being an offensive Oriental stereotype, and Omar Pasha is probably stoned out of his mind on opium half the time. The police chief in Istanbul simply doesn't care and spends a good deal of his screen time sulking and telling people not to bother him. And why should he bother doing his job? He's played by Jess Franco, after all.
With so little actually happening in THE CASTLE OF FU MANCHU, we have to be content with watching the scenery. There are some beautiful background shots in the film, to be sure. Mostly, though, Franco traps us in Fu Manchu's lair. The quarter-hours slip by as the "action" takes us from one room or chamber to another and another, none of them very well lit, while Christopher Lee sits and looks smug, or stands up and looks smug, or even speaks while looking smug. Eventually a lot of people die and Fu Manchu disappears into the billowing fake smoke. Dry ice, Rosco fog, and blood, indeed.
Nevertheless, the film is not among the all-time worst. Roger Ebert is correct when he says, "There's probably a level of competence beneath which bad directors cannot fall....they've got to come up with something that can at least be advertised as a motion picture, released and forgotten." It can be safely conjectured that this was just what Jess Franco wanted. The dialogue is passable, the acting (what little is needed) is serviceable, and occasionally the editing actually drums up something like tension.
So if no one aspect of THE CASTLE OF FU MANCHU is really *that* bad, why is watching the whole film such a chore? A bad movie can be difficult to watch, but an *aggressively* mediocre one can be worse. When Roger Corman cranked out his listless, paint-by-numbers adventures and fantasy movies, at least he had the excuses of working with zero budget, a cast of third-stringers, and shooting schedules permitting him maybe a week's use of a sound stage. I'm guessing that Franco's budget was scarcely greater, but he had a decent cast and enough freedom for location shooting in more than one country. Yet he produced a movie as uninspired and perfunctory as Corman did at his worst. What was Franco thinking?
The plot seems almost to go out of its way to abandon consistency. Fu Manchu kidnaps Prof. Heracles and then his doctor because he needs help to make the magic freezing crystals in quantity (crystals, by the way, which also perform the totally unrelated duty of a knockout gas), but then even though we see Heracles at the end refuse to help Fu Manchu, his refusal doesn't even slow Fu Manchu down, who initiates his freezing plan without apparent need for Heracles's assistance. We *had* seen Fu Manchu demanding a ransom earlier one (without bothering to name terms) but any idea of actually collecting on the ransom never comes up. Fortunately for the world Nayland-Smith shows up to foil his plot to freeze the ocean, although Franco can't be bothered to show us how he foils it. We see him beating up some flunkies and trying to contact London by radio, then suddenly there's a loud report and soon Fu Manchu is watching helplessly as everything blows up around him. I'm used to villain's fortresses improbably blowing up because the hero fires one well-placed shot or smashes one control panel, but THE CASTLE OF FU MANCHU gives us the only case of a villain's fortress exploding merely because the hero makes a long-distance phone call.
It's not as though Franco didn't have enough screen time to fill these plot holes. It's just that he decided to fill that time with lengthy establishing shots, walking, and creeping around dark corridors and tunnels. He also directs his actors to speak as slowly as possible and pause whenever possible. They have excuses, I suppose. Fu Manchu is "inscrutable", being an offensive Oriental stereotype, and Omar Pasha is probably stoned out of his mind on opium half the time. The police chief in Istanbul simply doesn't care and spends a good deal of his screen time sulking and telling people not to bother him. And why should he bother doing his job? He's played by Jess Franco, after all.
With so little actually happening in THE CASTLE OF FU MANCHU, we have to be content with watching the scenery. There are some beautiful background shots in the film, to be sure. Mostly, though, Franco traps us in Fu Manchu's lair. The quarter-hours slip by as the "action" takes us from one room or chamber to another and another, none of them very well lit, while Christopher Lee sits and looks smug, or stands up and looks smug, or even speaks while looking smug. Eventually a lot of people die and Fu Manchu disappears into the billowing fake smoke. Dry ice, Rosco fog, and blood, indeed.
- monoceros4
- May 2, 2009
- Permalink
- How long is The Castle of Fu Manchu?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- Die Folterkammer des Dr. Fu Man Chu
- Filming locations
- Rumelihisari, Sariyer, Istanbul, Turkey(castle exteriors)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime1 hour 32 minutes
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.66 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was The Castle of Fu Manchu (1969) officially released in India in English?
Answer