Drácula contra Frankenstein

This would-be homage to the classic Universal cycle of horror films from the 1940s could have been interesting, but it's defeated by listless presentation (marked by Franco's trademark zoom-happy technique) and inadequate plotting (what there is is extremely lazy and contrived – such as Frankenstein's idiotic manifesto for world domination and his baffling about-face towards self-destruction at the end).

It was a good idea to present the latter (played by Dennis Price) as a deluded megalomaniac, but the dire physical condition of the actor makes this something of a lost cause. Howard Vernon's Dracula, then, is underused and saddled throughout with a silly fixed expression! Alberto Dalbes plays Dr. Seward – Vampire Hunter(!), Luis Barboo gives a hammy performance as Frankenstein's mute hunchback assistant, while Fernando Bilbao gets as little screen-time playing the Frankenstein Monster as his counterpart in the latterday Universal monster flicks themselves!!

With respect to the female members of the cast, at least, we get two lovely presences in Josiane Gibert (as a tawdry chanteuse turned into unwitting sacrifice in the re-animation of Dracula – the scene where the bat is bathed in blood is actually nice and grisly) and Britt Nichols (a vampire lady with her own agenda and whose coffin is stupidly never noticed by either Frankenstein or his assistant!). Also on hand are Anne Libert (who's killed off immediately), Genevieve Deloir (as Vernon's new bride) and Mary Francis (as a gypsy girl).

The film is capped by what is the most hilarious monster mash I've ever seen – with a werewolf who comes out of nowhere, only to get beaten to a pulp by the Frankenstein monster! Just as amusing, though, is the fact that Frankenstein (and his prisoner Dracula) use a hearse as their method of transportation! Incidentally, the way such great locations as Franco had at his disposal are squandered makes this that much more of a missed opportunity – not that the visuals are helped by the dismal print utilized for this transfer (featuring washed-out colors and the wrong aspect ratio to boot)! By the way, a sure sign of the film's rushed production is its recycled score – comprising the instantly recognizable main theme from MARQUIS DE SADE'S JUSTINE (1968) and, possibly, even cues from COUNT Dracula (1969)!

In conclusion, this one emerges as easily the least of Franco's 'classic monster' films. For the record, its viewing was promptly followed by THE EROTIC RITES OF FRANKENSTEIN (1972) – by way of the version the director himself preferred. His most respectable efforts in the genre remain COUNT Dracula (not really connected to the others, as it was a Harry Alan Towers rather than Robert De Nesle production) and DRACULA'S DAUGHTER (1972; a contemporaneous release with, again, much the same cast and crew but which is altogether more satisfying – mainly in view of its novel giallo elements).

The problem with "Drácula Contra Frankenstein" is not its cheesiness--though the film is truly the Velveta of horror films. The low production values and silly props can be forgiven. But what cannot be forgiven, especially in a film of this genre, is the amazing dullness of this film. If you were to go to the nearest branch of Madame Toussand's wax museum to cast a film, you couldn't get any less life-life and uninteresting people than the idiots who play monsters in this film. First, the Frankenstein looks like he was created by a group of 4th graders--complete with scars that are obviously drawn onto it face and skin that looks like green bonito shavings (fans of Japanese cuisine, this comment's for you). Second, Dracula could have almost as easily been played by a mannequin, as much of the film he stares into space like Captain Christopher Pike's head in Star Trek's "Menagerie". Most of his "action" is confined to widening his eyes--a bit. What makes it even more ridiculous are the bats that the vampires supposedly turn into, as they are the worst and most unrealistic bats you'll ever see (this includes in Ed Wood films and Three Stooges shorts as well as the little plastic ones you buy around Halloween).

For about the first 50 minutes or so, not a whole lot happens in the film. No, wait,...after 50 minutes STILL nothing happens in the film....nothing. There is almost no dialog (perhaps to supposedly make it easier to dub for international release)--with very, very long stretches with nothing being said or a bit of over-dubbed speech only. The "dialog" in many places consists of heavy grunting and a hilarious scene where a woman writhes about screaming like she's passing a kidney stone--a kidney stone the size of a basketball! Towards the end, there is more dialog but actual conversations between characters are almost completely absent. In some cases, the face was filmed from the nose up--so you couldn't see the mouth moving (again, to make over-dubbing easier). The net effect of all this is appallingly dull.

The plot, when it is at all apparent, involves Dr. Frankenstein reviving Dracula to be his slave (ooh, that won't end well) as well as the evil scientist reviving his green cheese-like monster. Dracula makes some female vampires and eventually a wolf-man shows up...though I have no idea why. It was as if the lack of coherent plot and dialog could somehow be compensated for by tossing in more and more monsters. Heck, I was almost expecting the Creature from the Black Lagoon or Godzilla to eventually make an appearance!! And they might have, had director Franco thought of it! The only thing going for this terrible film are the locales. Because it was filmed in Europe, the settings can't help but look pretty good. That alone is the only reason I gave this movie a score as high as 2--otherwise, it's even more dull and stupid than an Al Adamson horror film.

In a final note, you PETA-types out there may want to skip this one. Aside from the cheap fake bats, there are a some real ones that are mistreated rather badly. One was either drowned or near-drowned in blood in a jar and another one is held by his wingtips and made to flutter wildly (as best it could). I must say it was the first film I ever saw that made me feel sorry for the poor creatures.

A creepy castle; rubber bats on string; hot women; stock sound effects*; crash zooms; out of focus shots; extreme close-ups of eyes. Be warned... with Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein, we're not just in vampire territory - we're in Jess Franco territory as well, which is not for the faint-hearted. Those who venture forth will face a nonsensical story, erratic pacing, and a general feeling that no-one involved really knew what was going on.

The film begins as Doctor Jonathan Seward (Alberto Dalbés) tracks down Dracula (Howard Vernon, employing the one expression throughout the entire film) and despatches the vampire using a teeny tiny travel hammer and stake, small enough to fit neatly in one's hand luggage. Dracula transforms into a little dead bat, but is rescued by Doctor Frankenstein (Dennis Price), who, assisted by scarred mute Morpho (Luis Barboo) and his loyal monster (Fernando Bilbao, sporting truly awful make-up), is able to revive the flying mammal by soaking it in the blood of a sexy bar singer (Josyane Gibert).

With Dracula in his power, Frankenstein sets about assembling an army of obedient vampires, including Doctor Seward's voluptuous patient Maria (Paca Gabaldón). Seward attempts to stop the megalomaniacal scientist and his unholy army with a little help from a band of gypsies, a jealous female vampire (Carmen Yazalde) and, in the film's chaotic finalé, a wolfman (Brandy, whose monster make-up is even worse than Bilbao's).

Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein sees Franco at his laziest, the director chucking in everything but the kitchen sink with little regard for logic. Of course, this totally haphazard approach and the sheer silliness of proceedings will no doubt hold some appeal for fans of schlock Euro-horror and avid Franco fans, but those unaccustomed to the Spanish director's 'style' will more than likely struggle with the general slipshod nature of the movie.

4/10. Very little in the way of gore and nekkidness - just a little blood and some 'cheesecake' (the lack of nudity is especially surprising given it's a Franco flick).

*We never actually see that bloody peacock!!!

Bram Stoker and Mary Shelly would be spinning in their graves had they watched this, the story tells of Dr Frankenstein wanting to take over the world with the aid of Dracula and his vampire brides, Frankensteins monster is also involved, he kidnaps victims so the doctor can drain them of their blood , the film reaches its climax by having a mangy werewolf join in at the end and have a fight with the monster , the end What could go wrong with the classic monsters of yesteryear? Loads ! ... Dracula says nothing , he just grimaces baring his fangs , Frankensteins monster has a flakey chin and painted on stitches and the werewolf looks like he has pubic hair glued to his face replete with joke shop fangs, was this film supposed to be set in Spain or Eastern Europe? Was it supposed to be set in the 19th century? the most disturbing thing of all was seeing a real bat drowning in blood in a big jar all in all dull and recommended for insomniacs

Jesús Franco (aka uncle Jess) decided here to put every possible movie monster together(Drácula, Frankenstein and the werewolf) and "Dracula vs Frankenstein" was spawned. Dr. Frankenstein creates an obedient monster with his illegal activities. Then, Count Dracula (Howard Vernon) also joins Frankenstein army. This is maybe one of the oldest Dracula ever, he is so old that is a joke. The old Dracula and the evil monster begins their reign of horror in the town, fortunately for the people, the werewolf is there to help the town against Dracula and the monster (yes, this movie is a complete non-sense). Apart from the non-sense of everything here, we have a good staff of young and beautiful chicks. OK, Dracula Vs Frankenstein is more an unintentionally comedy than a horror movie, not even a 5 year old girl can be scared by this one, its even cheesier than any Ed Wood movie, but it is funny. Its one of those "so bad its good" movies, pure grade Z fun. Unfortunately, we have no gore or sex in this Franco movie, but still is recommended.