haxan
Joined Jan 2002
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews6
haxan's rating
"What the hell" is a phrase you will likely find yourself uttering frequently during this film. Donald Pleasence and "little person" Michael Dunn (The Mutations, Frankenstein's Castle of Freaks) are the only non-Spanish participants in this film as far as I can tell. At least theirs are the only voices that do not seem dubbed into English.
This is not a film for the average viewer. A normal person is likely (and advised) to turn this film off in the first 5 minutes. But those who like very strange and frequently inept movies could get some laughs out of this one.
There is so much nonsensical crap in this movie that I'm not even going to try to recount it here - it wouldn't be funny anyway, for the sheer idiocy of it you must see it.
This is not a contender for one of the worst films ever (anything by Ray Dennis Steckler would probably beat this one for that title) but it IS bad. And more than just bad, it is weird. The tone shifts regularly and chaotically from being mean spirited to (an attempt at being) tender. And the characters (particularly Michael Dunn) say and do things that make you wonder what the makers of this were thinking.
In short, not the worst film I've seen nor the weirdest. But it is a unique combination of the two.
This is not a film for the average viewer. A normal person is likely (and advised) to turn this film off in the first 5 minutes. But those who like very strange and frequently inept movies could get some laughs out of this one.
There is so much nonsensical crap in this movie that I'm not even going to try to recount it here - it wouldn't be funny anyway, for the sheer idiocy of it you must see it.
This is not a contender for one of the worst films ever (anything by Ray Dennis Steckler would probably beat this one for that title) but it IS bad. And more than just bad, it is weird. The tone shifts regularly and chaotically from being mean spirited to (an attempt at being) tender. And the characters (particularly Michael Dunn) say and do things that make you wonder what the makers of this were thinking.
In short, not the worst film I've seen nor the weirdest. But it is a unique combination of the two.
This film definitely dropped the ball in the story/writing department. The way things started out it could really have gotten dark, creepy, and interesting. Unfortunately, pretty shortly into the film I realized that wasn't going to happen.
HOWEVER - the film is a visual treat that is matched by few films (Titus, Sleepy Hollow) of recent years. And really that makes it worthwhile for me.
I am always a strong proponent of viewing films in their original widescreen format. With this film, though, I would say that you should only watch the film if you can see it in widescreen.
Listening to the audio commentary by the director on the DVD, one gets a better insight into what he was trying to do with this film - the visuals were deliberately emphasized, realizing that was the focus. Singh mentions some of his favorite director's and films (he saw David Cronenberg's eXistenZ 7 times in the theater) and I found his comments overall helpful in enjoying the film for what it is. It could have been a true classic if the writing had been better - but that is frequently the case with many films. Great writing is just hard to come by, especially in genre films, and even moreso in films with big budgets.
HOWEVER - the film is a visual treat that is matched by few films (Titus, Sleepy Hollow) of recent years. And really that makes it worthwhile for me.
I am always a strong proponent of viewing films in their original widescreen format. With this film, though, I would say that you should only watch the film if you can see it in widescreen.
Listening to the audio commentary by the director on the DVD, one gets a better insight into what he was trying to do with this film - the visuals were deliberately emphasized, realizing that was the focus. Singh mentions some of his favorite director's and films (he saw David Cronenberg's eXistenZ 7 times in the theater) and I found his comments overall helpful in enjoying the film for what it is. It could have been a true classic if the writing had been better - but that is frequently the case with many films. Great writing is just hard to come by, especially in genre films, and even moreso in films with big budgets.
Horror comedies rarely work, in my opinion. Either the humor is unsuccessful or the horror is. Or both. In this case, there is a good combination, although ultimately there is more humor than horror.
The setting is modern day (1984) France and (what we find out) is a descendent of the Frankenstein family is continuing to work on the same old experiments. However this time around he is more successful and the "creation" is rather civilized (wearing jeans and a sweatshirt for much of the film) for the most part although he does have some anger management problems.
The humor is not heavy handed and in my opinion that helps it work better.
A good example of a funny bit early on is when the doctor, stealing an arm from a laboratory, accidentally drops it while climbing over the fence only to have it picked up by a dog. This results in a brief struggle for the arm. Not hilarious, but funny. There is a lot of that in the film.
This is a more down to earth version of Frankenstein. It is without the drama and grandiose aspects many of them have. It addresses, in some manner, the real problems that might come up if one had assembled a human/creature from dead body parts.
Some of the humor is a bit dark, naturally, and there are some genuinely atmospheric moments in the form of a dream sequences.
I'm sort of surprised this film doesn't have a greater cult following, although maybe it does and I'm just not aware of it. Maybe it will now since Anchor Bay has just released a nice looking DVD of the film.
For fans of the bizarre and humorous, I suggest checking this one out.
It is worth comparing this film, in a way, to the other comedy film based around the Frankenstein story - Young Frankenstein. I enjoy that film very much but this one has a different feel to it. It has some darker moments, thematically, and some darker comedy. Simply put, this one is French and the other is a Mel Brooks film made in his prime.
The setting is modern day (1984) France and (what we find out) is a descendent of the Frankenstein family is continuing to work on the same old experiments. However this time around he is more successful and the "creation" is rather civilized (wearing jeans and a sweatshirt for much of the film) for the most part although he does have some anger management problems.
The humor is not heavy handed and in my opinion that helps it work better.
A good example of a funny bit early on is when the doctor, stealing an arm from a laboratory, accidentally drops it while climbing over the fence only to have it picked up by a dog. This results in a brief struggle for the arm. Not hilarious, but funny. There is a lot of that in the film.
This is a more down to earth version of Frankenstein. It is without the drama and grandiose aspects many of them have. It addresses, in some manner, the real problems that might come up if one had assembled a human/creature from dead body parts.
Some of the humor is a bit dark, naturally, and there are some genuinely atmospheric moments in the form of a dream sequences.
I'm sort of surprised this film doesn't have a greater cult following, although maybe it does and I'm just not aware of it. Maybe it will now since Anchor Bay has just released a nice looking DVD of the film.
For fans of the bizarre and humorous, I suggest checking this one out.
It is worth comparing this film, in a way, to the other comedy film based around the Frankenstein story - Young Frankenstein. I enjoy that film very much but this one has a different feel to it. It has some darker moments, thematically, and some darker comedy. Simply put, this one is French and the other is a Mel Brooks film made in his prime.