Blackenstein

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...

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.

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.

After the huge success of "Blacula", Sam Arkoff made plans for a similar knock-off called "Blackenstein". In the meanwhile, write-producer Frank Salteri decides to beat him to the proverbial punch by taking the Black Frankenstein concept, dashing out something resembling a script, gathering together a considerably less than stellar cast (including ex-mob moll Liz Renay and a couple of 40's has-beens who appear to have needed some extra bucks to pay the phone bill that month), and spending what appears to be about $30, slaps out one of the worst pieces of cinematic drek to have ever played inside the confines of a movie theater. If the wooden acting and laughably inept gore effects don't get you, how about the inappropriate musical and stand-up comedy routines (such as they are), or the long-shot camera work during crucial scenes, or how the title character shuffles about with his arms outstretched, just like every parody of Frankenstein you've ever seen.

For years, Sam Arkoff has taken the blame for this cinematic blunder. Sam: A lot of people owe you a hell of a big apology!!!!

I thought fellow-blaxploitation horror flick "Blacula" (1972) had slipshod production values and was campy, but, wow, it's "Citizen Kane" compared to "Blackenstein." I understand the other IMDb reviews and voters who voted this movie 1/10, a rating I usually reserve for motion pictures that lack even the most basic of technical competence, for which in many ways this one is wanting. But, I found its wretchedness to be amusing.

The story is thin, the plotting repetitive (the monster interrupts three near rapes, Malcolm exchanges way too many creepy glances, and there are far too many lingering exterior shots of Dr. Stein's residence), the science-y stuff is ludicrous. the monster is pathetically slow and his victims hilariously too stupid to just keep running away, or merely walking away at a comfortable pace, and the editing is some of the worst I've ever seen. I wonder if the film was cut for censorship or something during its violent scenes, because the version I saw was extremely choppy. But, the editing is bad all over the place. The cuts to close-ups of Malcolm and Dr. Walker, for instance, which are also poorly directed and acted--I didn't even know what the movie was trying to convey, at first, until Malcolm declared his love for her.

Like "Blacula" and its sequel "Scream Blacula Scream" (1973), "Blackenstein" has at least one nightclub interlude, where we're treated to a stand-up act and some singing. The dog joke, though, as with much of the movie, is bad, although it's not nearly as atrocious as the use of dogs in the film's conclusion. The actor playing Eddie turned the monster has his arms and legs covered by blankets in too obvious of a way during the scenes where he supposedly has no arms and legs. Choppy editing and dark lighting help hide the later makeup job, where he's made to look like a cross between Universal's Frankenstein monsters and a giant Neanderthal. Additionally, "Blackenstein" doesn't deal with anything like the racial issues that elevated the Blacula films beyond mere camp. The semi-mad doctor Stein is white, but there's also a female black doctor assistant. One detective is black, the other white. Race is never really mentioned. And you can forget about there being any intelligent reworking of Mary Shelley's novel.

But, Dr. Stein's lab is fabulous. I have nothing bad to say about it; it's all I could hope for from a low-budget, bad 1970s exploitation monster movie trying to rip-off the 1931 "Frankenstein," complete with pseudoscientific gizmos, beakers that are always burning with bubbling liquids, shadows cast on the walls, flickering lights, spinning things and other nonsense. The film's lingering and repetitive shots and scenes also are put to good use in showing off the space.