Blackenstein

Nothing's sacred in the world of exploitation cinema, not even Mary Shelley's legendary novel or the classic Universal make-up effects on Boris Karloff. And thank the heavens for that, otherwise we never would have seen this wondrously demented Blaxploitation interpretation of Frankenstein. "Blackenstein" is a delightfully inept movie, some would even categorize it under so-bad-it's-great, and the script goes far beyond simply copying the original Shelley tale. There are even flashes of "The Island of Dr. Moreau" to be found here and there's another mini sub-plot about a rejuvenation serum. The actual Frankenstein plot is moderately altered as well, since the mad doctors (yes, two in this case, black & white brotherly messing with Mother Nature and God's creation together!) don't intend to re-insert life into dead body parts, but supply a wounded Vietnam veteran with new arms and legs. The procedure doesn't go as planned, due to the sabotaging of a jealous assistant, and a monstrous creation arises from the operating table. The genetically altered Brutha goes on a murder rampage but his endearing wife still doesn't give up on him. "Blackenstein" is original and funny because of its ineptness, but after a while it nearly becomes unendurable to sit through. The pace slows down fast and the story reverts to boredom, the dialogs are horrible, the make-up effects are miserable and the acting performances are lamentable. Especially Roosevelt Jackson, as Malcomb the assistant, is the hammiest performer I've seen in a long time. The DVD states that the operating sequences were shot with the same and carefully persevered scenery and sets of the original Frankenstein film. That's quite difficult to believe but, as said, everything's possible in the 70's exploitation industry. "Blackenstein" is definitely not a good film, but nevertheless recommended to people with a morbid & insatiable curiosity for weird film-making.

This kitschy blaxploitation film was originally intended as a serious movie, which (ultimately) earns it some points in the camp department. However, the movie's slow starting pacing pace, wooden acting, and (periodically) decent production value make for a largely uneventful ride. Using sets from the original 1931 "Frankenstein," as well as similar art direction, "Blackenstein" was a movie that tried hard to be legitimate, and the first half of the film rises above typical exploitation schlock. However, once the Blackenstein monster is created, the film begins to fall apart, and what follows is a terrible, "Blood Freak"-style horror movie, with laughably amateurish scene direction and gore effects. The result is a very uneven film, and a difficult one to recommend without reservations. The highlight is the awful acting, (particularly of Blackenstein himself), which makes for decent joke material, but I can't say we consistently laughed our way through this one. Fans of H.G. Lewis and Ray Dennis Steckler should be pleased, as the film has a somewhat similar feel, but most others can give it a pass. ---|--- Reviews by Flak Magnet

Eddie is a Vietnam veteran who loses his arms and legs when he steps on a land mine, but a brilliant surgeon is able to attach new limbs. Unfortunately an insanely jealous assistant (who has fallen in love with Eddie's fiancé) switches Eddie's DNA injections, transforming him into a gigantic killer.

The most interesting thing about this film is that Bud Costello is credited as the property master. Apparently at some point he came into possession of the original "Frankenstein" props. Who has them now is an even more interesting question...

Beyond that, it is just cheesy fun. This is not a great movie with great acting or plot. The scientist -- despite winning a Nobel prize -- says things that make no sense to people with a basic understanding of science...

Well the movie is silly now but you got to really understand that was 1973 and it was scary back then. even the original movies are not scary now . But they was back then. so come on now. if today they do a remake of blackenstien YES it would be scary now .THINK ABOUT IT.AND THE MOVIES THEY make now unless the music is really hard people are not that scared now. but on the real tip the movie was not all that bad for it,s time that it came out.the end of it was a bit silly. It did not have that hard core thunder to it . and really if it was a black movie why all the white women getting kill . you don,t see that many black women getting killed in the white movies . just asking OK don,t get it wrong . just something to think about.

BLACKENSTEIN is a terrible movie and its title wouldn't suggest otherwise. Like ABBY (sort of like a Black version of THE EXORCIST), BLACKENSTEIN has practically no budget whatsoever and the acting is just terrible. Believe it or not, the two Blacula movies aren't that bad--BLACKENSTEIN, however, is abysmally bad--so bad that bad movie fans might (but probably won't) love it. Others with taste, however, won't!

One of the first things you'll notice on the DVD is that the print is really, really bad--though it does get a bit better later. This is because there just isn't much money to be made from this film and adding closed captions or digitally restoring the picture just isn't going to happen! You also will probably notice how odd Los Angeles is in the film. Most nights, there seems to be thunder and lightning and often there is an eerie fog about as well (perhaps this is just smog). Regardless, it's pretty funky weather for sunny Southern California! As for the plot, it's really not like the traditional Frankenstein story. There is no mad scientist and no dead people are reanimated. Instead, a sane researcher and his assistant work to attach dead limbs to living people who lost theirs in accidents. However, instead of working in a hospital, they work in the doctor's home which is more like a castle (in Los Angeles, okay?). Heck, the place even has a dungeon and Frankenstein-like laboratory! The assistant is a young Black lady whose boyfriend lost his limbs in an explosion in Vietnam. While the transplant looks promising, no one realizes that the doctor's evil butler switches the genetic formulas and the poor Black man starts to mutate and become evil. He, of course, goes on some obligatory rampages and since this is a so-called "Blaxploitation" film, you see two ladies' breasts--though it really made no sense at all and was very, very contrived. It's amazing to see how this made no sense at all, but given that NONE of the film makes sense, it's understandable.

So what is to like about the film......well,....nothing really except for the small sequence involving the comedian. One of the jokes, though a bit crude, is funny and he was pretty cute. The acting is purely amateur, the script is amazingly static and dull (something you'd never expect in a horror film--even a bad one) and the sets are cheap and make no sense. It's really too dull for bad movie fans to enjoy and I found myself falling asleep from time to time--it was that unexciting. By contrast, even the very worst Hammer horror film was light years better.