अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंMoira Frankenstein, the grand-daughter of noted mad scientist Dr. Frankenstein, has become obsessed with the work of her ancestor and she decides to pick up the family business where he left... सभी पढ़ेंMoira Frankenstein, the grand-daughter of noted mad scientist Dr. Frankenstein, has become obsessed with the work of her ancestor and she decides to pick up the family business where he left off.Moira Frankenstein, the grand-daughter of noted mad scientist Dr. Frankenstein, has become obsessed with the work of her ancestor and she decides to pick up the family business where he left off.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
"Lust of Frankenstein" is a worthless piece of garbage made by Jesus Franco.The incredibly old and unattractive Lina Romay plays Moira,the daughter of Dr.Frankenstein,who does not like her widowed stepmother.Anyway,Moira discovers the hibernating body of another of her dad's experiments,this time of a woman.The monster,whose name is Goddess is played by the aging Michelle Bauer.Moira falls in love with Goddess and goes on a wild sex-spree that includes killing a bunch of people.The film features tons of sleaze and nudity,but the sex scenes are absolutely unerotic and laughably unconvincing.The action is incredibly slow and there is no gore.Avoid this piece of trash like the plague-just watch again "Female Vampire","Barbed Wire Dolls" or Borowczyk's "The Beast".2 out of 10 and that's being kind.
Lust for Frankenstein (1998)
* (out of 4)
Softcore take on the famous story has Moira Frankenstein (Lina Romay) seeing a vision of her dead father and bringing back his creature (Michelle Bauer). Franco had previously made two other Frankenstein films, both in the 70s and while neither of them are classics they certainly are miles better than this thing, which is just downright trash. The film pretty much brought a new style in Franco's career, which has become known as the One Shot years. I'm not a fan of this period and for countless reasons that could be seen here. For starters, the film looks incredibly cheap even by Franco standards with its digital video. The movie features all sorts of strange visual effects, which don't add anything. The worst thing is that the film is pretty much disgusting as it features the elderly Romay in all sorts of sexual situations. She's certainly seen better days and I'm not meaning to insult the elderly folks out there but when you make an erotic movie it's probably better that you show two young people making out the entire time. I think it's a sad state for Romay who really comes off bad in this film but it would get worse with future One Shot films. If someone can find an actual story in this movie then they'll win a dollar from me because I couldn't spot one.
* (out of 4)
Softcore take on the famous story has Moira Frankenstein (Lina Romay) seeing a vision of her dead father and bringing back his creature (Michelle Bauer). Franco had previously made two other Frankenstein films, both in the 70s and while neither of them are classics they certainly are miles better than this thing, which is just downright trash. The film pretty much brought a new style in Franco's career, which has become known as the One Shot years. I'm not a fan of this period and for countless reasons that could be seen here. For starters, the film looks incredibly cheap even by Franco standards with its digital video. The movie features all sorts of strange visual effects, which don't add anything. The worst thing is that the film is pretty much disgusting as it features the elderly Romay in all sorts of sexual situations. She's certainly seen better days and I'm not meaning to insult the elderly folks out there but when you make an erotic movie it's probably better that you show two young people making out the entire time. I think it's a sad state for Romay who really comes off bad in this film but it would get worse with future One Shot films. If someone can find an actual story in this movie then they'll win a dollar from me because I couldn't spot one.
What the hell was this movie about? What was the point of it? What were they thinking when they made it?
You should not - I repeat, NOT - spend a cent of your own money to watch this crap. But if there was some kind of a fly-on-the-wall documentary available, that might shed light on what they were thinking, I'd pay good money to see it.
What happened to Jess Franco? He started out with a classic horror film, 1961's "The Awful Dr. Orloff", and just drove his talent straight into the ground. This isn't even really a movie.
Ignore any "plot description" you might find online. This movie has no plot. It's also not related to the classic Frankenstein story in any sense at all. The movie basically just shows Lina Romay wandering around, often undressed, and Michelle Bauer naked with fake stitches on her body and bolts on her temples. It is amusing to see her stomping naked up to people and killing them by twisting their heads, which she does once or twice. What the hell did she think about her role in this movie? Some might say it's kind of degrading.
Who wants the sight of their naked body to be met with laughter? Especially a beautiful woman like Michelle Bauer.
The movie has minimal dialogue, and what it does have is weirdly filtered so you can't understand it. Much of the footage is also filtered, so that even on DVD, it looks like you're watching a decaying VHS tape. Actually, these visual effects are so weird and pointless and ugly that I wonder if they were even done on purpose. Perhaps Franco just spilled something on the lens, or accidentally pointed it at the sun and didn't realise until too late.
You know, the kind of mistakes you'd expect from a forty year veteran of the film business.
There are only two things you could possibly remember about "Lust for Frankenstein". One is the shocking ineptitude in its filmmaking, and I believe I have made that point strongly enough. The other is the fact that the movie features a liberal dose of sex and nudity from its two middle-aged stars. There are regrettably few movies in which we are given an opportunity to admire the beautiful bodies of 40+ year old ladies. It's such a shame, then, that they had to use such a crappy movie to provide us that.
You should not - I repeat, NOT - spend a cent of your own money to watch this crap. But if there was some kind of a fly-on-the-wall documentary available, that might shed light on what they were thinking, I'd pay good money to see it.
What happened to Jess Franco? He started out with a classic horror film, 1961's "The Awful Dr. Orloff", and just drove his talent straight into the ground. This isn't even really a movie.
Ignore any "plot description" you might find online. This movie has no plot. It's also not related to the classic Frankenstein story in any sense at all. The movie basically just shows Lina Romay wandering around, often undressed, and Michelle Bauer naked with fake stitches on her body and bolts on her temples. It is amusing to see her stomping naked up to people and killing them by twisting their heads, which she does once or twice. What the hell did she think about her role in this movie? Some might say it's kind of degrading.
Who wants the sight of their naked body to be met with laughter? Especially a beautiful woman like Michelle Bauer.
The movie has minimal dialogue, and what it does have is weirdly filtered so you can't understand it. Much of the footage is also filtered, so that even on DVD, it looks like you're watching a decaying VHS tape. Actually, these visual effects are so weird and pointless and ugly that I wonder if they were even done on purpose. Perhaps Franco just spilled something on the lens, or accidentally pointed it at the sun and didn't realise until too late.
You know, the kind of mistakes you'd expect from a forty year veteran of the film business.
There are only two things you could possibly remember about "Lust for Frankenstein". One is the shocking ineptitude in its filmmaking, and I believe I have made that point strongly enough. The other is the fact that the movie features a liberal dose of sex and nudity from its two middle-aged stars. There are regrettably few movies in which we are given an opportunity to admire the beautiful bodies of 40+ year old ladies. It's such a shame, then, that they had to use such a crappy movie to provide us that.
Hot, lesbian scenes starring an aging scream queen and an aging vamp (Michelle Bauer and Lina Romay) are the highlights of this direct to video take on the Frankenstein mythos. The he/she monster becomes jealous of her master's love affairs and take things in it's own hands (and other parts of it's body). Bauer's electro-altered voice is enough to rate this film "scary" and director Franco's Spanish scenery shots are always beautiful. Pick up the unedited version for the sex scenes.
This erotic-horror movie is an extremely annoying one. There is absolutely no story and the movie is impossible to follow, also due to the horrible accents of the main characters.
Why on Earth did they ever casted two over 40 year old to play the main characters? They also managed to cast about the two least attractive 40 year old which makes this movie also a disgusting one. Yesterday I posted a comment for "Dracula Vs. Frankenstein" saying that the Frankenstein creature never looked worse, well I was wrong, this Frankenstein monster is even uglier and she doesn't need no make-up effects for that!
And what is up with the endings of Jesus Franco's movies? He always seems to put in a surprise ending in his movies but problem is that the endings never make any sense and are extremely confusing for all the wrong reasons.
Every time when you think you have figured the story out, it turns out to be totally different. Nothing about the story makes any sense and the movie therefor is almost completely unwatchable.
And what was with those high peeping sound during the 'resurection' scene's? I thought my head was going to explode and I seriously had to turn the sound off to not go completely mad.
Horrible, disgusting movie!
2/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Why on Earth did they ever casted two over 40 year old to play the main characters? They also managed to cast about the two least attractive 40 year old which makes this movie also a disgusting one. Yesterday I posted a comment for "Dracula Vs. Frankenstein" saying that the Frankenstein creature never looked worse, well I was wrong, this Frankenstein monster is even uglier and she doesn't need no make-up effects for that!
And what is up with the endings of Jesus Franco's movies? He always seems to put in a surprise ending in his movies but problem is that the endings never make any sense and are extremely confusing for all the wrong reasons.
Every time when you think you have figured the story out, it turns out to be totally different. Nothing about the story makes any sense and the movie therefor is almost completely unwatchable.
And what was with those high peeping sound during the 'resurection' scene's? I thought my head was going to explode and I seriously had to turn the sound off to not go completely mad.
Horrible, disgusting movie!
2/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
क्या आपको पता है
- कनेक्शनReferenced in Die schlechtesten Filme aller Zeiten: Die sieben Männer der Sumuru (2014)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Lujuria por Frankenstein
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें