Dracula prisonnier de Frankenstein

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

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!!!

"Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein" is a so-so monster mash from the prolific Euro-cult filmmaker Jess Franco. Dr. Seward (a bland Alberto Dalbes) eliminates Count Dracula (Howard Vernon) once and for all - or so he thinks. Dr. Frankenstein (a bored-looking Dennis Price) soon shows up to resurrect the vampire, and turn him loose so that Dr. F can have an army of vampires to command.

For me, there wasn't much that was excessively tacky about this opus; at least, I was able to take it seriously enough (although the excellent music score by Bruno Nicolai & Daniel White may have played a big part in that). There was just nothing particularly *interesting* here; it felt like just about everybody involved was just going through the motions. That is, except maybe for Genevieve Robert as the gypsy who cares for Seward when he almost perishes.

Throw in a "Frankenstein monster" (Fernando Bilbao) and a werewolf (Brandy) who only shows up at the end, and there's something here that is watchable enough, but pretty easy to forget.

Five out of 10.

Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein (1972)

** (out of 4)

This Franco product, also known as Dracula CONTRA FRANKENSTEIN is perhaps one of his most seen films because with a title like this, people are going to check it out. In what was rumored to have been his attempt at a HOUSE OF Dracula remake, Dr. Frankenstein (Dennis Price) brings Dracula (Howard Vernon) back to life so that he can use him as a slave. At the same time he creates a monster and soon everyone is doing battle as a female vampire (Britt Nichols) also shows up. Oh yeah, a werewolf shows up out of nowhere as well. Those going into this expecting a pure homage to the early Universal films are probably going to be disappointed because this aspect of the film doesn't happen until the final five minutes. For the most part this film comes off as an attempt for the Spanish director to make a silent film because there's very little dialogue here. I've heard some say this was to make the film more marketable around the world but I doubt this since dubbing wouldn't have been that big of an issue. The film doesn't really work for several reasons but the biggest is that it's never quite clear what's trying to be done. As I said, the first seventy-five minutes features very little action while the final five minutes goes into overdrive in terms of camp. The final showdown between Frankenstein's monster and the werewolf is bound to get many laughs as it's extremely funny especially the sequence where the werewolf goes to jump on the monster but misses. The fake bats used here are among the worst I've ever seen and why Franco uses a real bat shown drowning to death is beyond me. The make up on the monster is pretty bad but it's unique in a strange way. Vernon looks the part of Dracula but he doesn't really do too much. Price, who would die the following year, doesn't look too good as he comes off ill and doesn't get to do that much either. Nichols is always easy on the eyes even though she actually doesn't get naked here for a change. In the end, most people are going to find the film extremely boring and I really don't blame them. I do respect what Franco was going for in regards to the silent nature of the film but in the end it just doesn't work.

I guess your name simply has to be Jess Franco if you shamelessly steal the sagas of no less than three immortal horror icons (Count Dracula, Frankenstein's Monster and the Wolf Man) and still manage to make a dreadfully boring and incoherent piece of cinematic garbage out of it. How does one man pull it all off? I caught myself staring at the TV screen for several whole minutes before all of a sudden realizing there's actually nothing happening at all. There's something remotely resembling to a storyline, but you'll have to cut and edit the pieces together yourself, as good old Jess clearly didn't bother about continuity, periodic accuracy, tension building or even just plain common sense. The most astonishing thing, however, is that during the opening sequences, our director almost tricked me into believing "Dracula: Prisoner of Frankenstein" could actually become a worthwhile effort! The movie opens with atmospheric images of ominous dark castles and creepily isolated landscapes, guided by an unsettling Bruno Nicolai score. It suspiciously looks as if Franco carefully watched and studied the contemporary Hammer highlights (including the entire Dracula and Frankenstein franchises) and took notes on what scenery to use and how to create a setting. Unfortunately he quickly turns into his incompetent self again shortly after the opening credits and comes up with a totally ludicrous plot. The nauseatingly pale body of Count Dracula lies died in his coffin (perhaps that is because all the vampire attacks take place in broad daylight, duh!) when no less than Dr. Frankenstein invades the castle turf. The power mad doctor – NOT Baron this time – instructs his homemade monster to abduct a strip dancer and subsequently uses her blood to resurrect a bat. I think the bat is meant to represent Count Dracula or at least some vampire, as it is Frankenstein's intention to raise an army of vampires under his command and then overtake the earth. After this series of retarded plot twists, I just lost all further interest, so don't even ask me at what point the Wolf Man joined in. This is just an incredibly retarded movie and I honestly can't fathom that nobody who was involved in this production seemed to notice so as well. Wasn't there any of producers, cast or crew members courageous enough to step up and say something like: "Sorry Jess, no offense but … this is absolute rubbish we're filming here!" No? Anyone? Although it's probably a good thing, there are hardly any lines or dialogs in this movie. It takes nearly twenty minutes before anyone speaks and the characters that do open their mouths only talk nonsense. The sleaze factor is disappointing, the amount of gore and bloodshed is weak and the make-up effects are embarrassing. The Frankenstein creature looks like a cheap mannequin doll from a bankrupt Halloween store, the Wolf Man is just some Spanish bloke with a severe body hair problem and Dracula …well… Howard Vernon looks pathetic in his umpteenth collaboration with director Jess Franco. Personally I think Vernon owed Jess Franco a lifetime of favors for borrowing money once, or something, and therefore was forced to star in each and every dud the director ever made.