Frankenstein vs. the Creature from Blood Cove (2005) Online

I really enjoyed Frankenstein vs. the Creature From Blood Cove! It was just what I wanted it to be, a very fun, good natured ride.

I grew up watching the Universal Horror classics as well as the great AIP and Hammer flicks...along with a huge amount of Grade Z films and I could tell watching this film that the makers had just as much affection and love for those films as I did. Unlike Lost Skeleton of Cavdavera (which I did like, though IMO it kind of wore it's one joke out pretty early) "Frankenstein..." isn't meant to be a comedy parody of the old classic horror films. Nor is it strictly an homage. I mean, you just can't make a movie like that anymore. What it is, is just a good time, with grave digging, werewolves (Butch Patrick!) mad scientists (including a lovely blond one with a British accent...you don't get better than that,) the Frankenstein monster, ghosts and a Creature from the Black Lagoon-ish monster. And it's all handled in such a fun way that I couldn't help but be entertained. And hey, I'm an adult, and I've got no problem with the R-rated take on the film. To me, it just adds to the fun and enjoyment. The nudity, etc is handled in the same fun/good natured way as the rest of the film. It comes across as anything but sleazy.

So if you're looking for a fun movie with monsters, silliness, beautiful girls and some of their beautiful assets, and you'd always thought it would be kinda cool if the Frankenstein Monster and the Gillman could've been in the same movie together, I think you'll have a good time with this film. Don't go into it expecting "Lost Skeleton" or a die-hard facsimile of one of Universal's monster-mash films cause it is definitely not that. But it is a blast.

When I was a kid it always used to bother me that the Creature from the Black Lagoon was listed among the Classic Universal Monsters, but never encountered any of the others. My favorite Universals were always the "monster rallies", such as "Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman" and I've had a terrible hunger for more such films, but sadly there just weren't any more to be had.

As an adult, I've always wanted to see "Retro-Horror" films, films in the style of the Classics I loved.

"Frankenstein vs the Creature from Blood Cove" is a Monster Rally in the grand old sense. FINALLY I get to see a "Creature" interacting with another classic monster. This is as close to "Frankenstein vs the Creature from the Black Lagoon" as we will ever get to see. It's not just a fun film, it is the realization of a dream I've had since I was a kid. And it is proof that "Retro-Horror" CAN be done and that there is a market for it.

FvtCfBC features not just the two lead monsters, but also has a Werewolf, a Bride of Frankenstein, the ghost of Dr. Frankenstein and more--all in designs that are spectacular, given the limitations of the film's budget! "Frankenstein vs the Creature from Blood Cove" may not please some of the stuffier fans of the classics that inspired it, but nevertheless it is a great fun romp of a movie, made with a profound love of those classics and with a wee bit of spice for the modern audience. In that regard, it has a lot in common with the AIP b&w classics of the '60's. It's sort of Frankenstein meets the Creature on Del Tenney's beach. Sort of.

Destined to be a Cult Classic!

Hey Ghouls and Goblins! Arkansas' favorite (and only) late night Horror Host here to give my two shekels about this movie. We hosted Bill's hilarious romp last year for our Halloween special and received more positive comments on this episode than our big 3-D special last April.

First of all, I gave this movie a 10 not for being a cinematic masterpiece, but because the producer/director did exactly what he set out to do in paying homage to all those moldy strips of celluloid that made some of us who we are today. The film is genuinely funny while capturing the feel of 1950's monster movies but setting at all in modern times. The creature makeup is excellent, the script well written, (and there's boobies!).

As a horror host, we see a lot of what we can only refer to as "pure-dee crap". Some films we host wouldn't work if we didn't mock them with added inserts and soundbites. It was great to show a film that was already loaded with laughs and was truly entertaining on its own. Yes, the Great Pumkin was kind to us last Halloween, allowing us a chance to be entertained.

One last point to remember is that "Frankenstein vs. the Creature from Blood Cove" is a true DIY production. This is not the same tripe we see constantly pumped out of Hollyweird. In the recent trend of horror genre films based on video games, and the all of stale dull re-makes lately, the genre needs films like this. It takes a passion and love for film making to throw oneself into the ring all alone and up against the corporate competition. Keep this in mind before you post a negative comment about this one or any independent production. If it wasn't your thing, that's no need to trash it.

Besides, how many fanclubs have formed around the sickeningly lame Wal-Martish re-make of "House of Wax"?

Buzzard

So it is Halloween evening, and I am cruising channels on my TV set late at night. I even flip through the stations that are public access, i.e., homemade productions given to local people. I noticed on a particular station that the program on seemed to be of MUCH higher quality than the typical fodder on these stations. Granted, it was still low budget, but blew the usual crap out of the water. So my interest was piqued. I remained tuned in.

To my surprise, there was plenty of "adult" language and pretty girls without their tops. My interest was again piqued. This is usually taboo content for my local basic cable channels.

Then I noticed a loose plot developing. Three members of a photography school are chased by a sea monster to a hidden lab (not so hidden in a house at the top of a hill) where the sea monster was originally created, along with the resurrection of Frankenstein's monster. The lab people are evil. Poorly acted (except for the lead scientist, he was actually pretty good). One of them is busty and later topless.

Nudity is inter-spliced periodically throughout for what appears to be an attempt to keep the audience's attention. It's almost as if the director/writer knew that the feature being put together here was obviously campy and overwhelmingly low budget and needed some "spice" to act as the glue for this jigsaw puzzle lacking all its pieces. Acting is not commendable, monster make-up is sub-par, editing jumps around with missing time & events periodically.... there are many flaws in this one. My main critique is that much of the low-budget quality of the make-up and monsters' costumes could have been disguised with more shadows in the cinematography -- and at the same time the shadows would have added to the dark elements of the film. Much of the 1930s-50s monster films relied on heavy light/dark contrasts, which added to the mood. This film was mostly shot in light (understandable since much was shot at the beach).

Yet somehow I was still drawn to this piece. What was mentioned earlier by another reviewer is the obvious admiration by Bill Winckler for old monster movies of Hollywood from long ago. I will agree with this statement, and anytime another person shows this admiration on film it is always interesting how the person treats the object of their affection. Winckler's treatment is the highpoint of the film; the monsters are indestructible and never made fun of or made the comedic relief. They are the respectable part of this film.

The DVD supposedly has extras. Seems interesting, maybe I'll pick it up. Not just for the extras, either. This movie grew on me for some reason. I'm not sure what connection Chad Byers has to the production, but he had a Svengoolie/Elvira skit show between various parts/intermissions of the version I saw of the film. Nice touch, provided more comedic relief.

Rating: 5/10 Not for everyone, but once you ignore the crappy elements there is a bright spot or two.

While perhaps not entirely the homage that the advance publicity advertised (honestly, what movie ever lives up entirely to its advance billing?), this picture is definitely fun and clearly made with love and respect for the classic Hammer and AIP horror films. Director/producer/writer William Winckler wonderfully captures the look and feel of those vintage features, while at the same time updating the plot with flashes of gore, T&A, and, believe it or not, a storyline that loosely ties in to modern-day terrorism. Perhaps that's why the 2006 World Horror Convention awarded the adventure with "Best Feature Film" honors. It's not a perfect picture, but most classic horror film fans should find it appropriately spooky and entertaining. Recommended!

I hate to trash a movie whose creators seem so sincere in their attempt to craft an old fashioned entertaining movie but the fact is this is a mess. I can't even figure out whether it's supposed to be a "homage" to the black and white drive-in movies of the 50s or a spoof of them. There's so little humor that I suspect we're supposed to take it seriously (as the makers of, say,FRANKENSTEIN'S DAUGHTER clearly meant it to be taken seriously) but then we have the lab table made from a beach chair and the silly gags in the strip joint and really, what are we to make of that? And FRANKENSTEIN VS.... lacks even the rudimentary professionalism that ATTACK OF THE CRAB MONSTERS or I WAS A TEENAGE FRANKENSTEIN could boast. The acting ranges from adequate to awful, the shot on video production screams student film, and the most baffling things are the monster costumes. The Gill Man, for example, clearly had a lot of attention devoted to it but the head is so obviously a mask just sitting on top of the body, with no attempt to blend it in so that it looks like part of the same creature, that it ALMOST seems to be a deliberate joke. But I don't think it is. I think the makers of this movie just didn't know any better. It's too bad.

And all those ten star ratings! It's nice when your friends try to help out, but please.....

*Spoiler/plot- 2005, Rather mad scientist movie. Near an isolated Californian beach, in a laboratory of horror, three renegade scientists have resurrected Frankenstein's long dead monster. The legendary indestructible corpse comes back to life again. At the same time, these scientists have biogenetically engineered a half-man half-fish abomination intending to use both brutes as weapons against worldwide terrorism. However, disaster strikes when the chemical brainwashing used to control these beasts fails. Instead of stopping terror these beings create terror in the beach community. The terror starts when the fish beast kills a gorgeous model while shooting a glamorous photo shoot. The scientists take the photo crew hostage. These crew survivors must find a way to escape both their mad captors and the rampaging monsters and warn the world of this danger spreading.

*Special Stars- Larry Butler, Bill Winkler, Dezzi Ascalon, Cory J. Marshal, Gary Canavello, Alison Lees-Taylor, and Lawrence Furbish. Dir: William Winckler.

*Theme- Scientists are always causing problems in society.

*Based on- Frankenstein myths and 50's Drive-in movie genres.

*Trivia/location/goofs- Shot entirely in black and white in Southern California. There is some superfluous female nudity and mediocre bloody violence at the beach. Look for the obvious cheap 'stock shots' from local aquariums to supply the underwater ocean scenes. This film is a weak attempt to reproduce a loving tribute to those classic horror and atomic age monster movies from the classic drive-in movie era.

*Emotion- A somewhat forgettable film from a small independent Southern California producer with his wife and his group of industry friends that supply all the writing, acting, makeup, and just about everything else needed for this film to be made. However novel this approach is to filmmaking, unfortunately the film fails in its pacing, direction, action scenes and believability. This means the film suffers and causes a premature demise of viewer's attention for this film's audience. I found myself fast-forwarding through this video to possibly get to better scenes. There were not any and that is death for a scifi video of any sort. This is a shame to see.

I have one positive thing to say about this film: the black-and-white cinematography was excellent! Too bad that's the only good thing I can say about the film. Dumb plot, wild over-acting, offensive gay character, rubbery monsters, and that's just the beginning. The movie doesn't know what it wants to be: horror film or camp comedy. It succeeds at neither and fails at both.

Which is unfortunate. The enthusiasm seems to be there, but while it is a slick-looking film, it's Grade-Z roots scream louder than the stereotypical gay character (why is he even there?).

Also, since it seems to be playing on the concept of the Universal monsters, this might lure small children into watching, and it is definitely an R-rated flick, with lots of topless women posing and touching themselves in the water, which seems to be the real reason for this film's existence. And the ending is just dumb. Why make the ghost of the doctor more powerful than the ghosts of the monsters? Is the director in love with that character? I'm a fan of the old Universal classics, and this is not an homage, it's an insult.

After reading several of the glowing reviews on IMDb for Frankenstein vs. the Creature from Blood Cove, I feel like I'm in the minority. I really do not care at all for the film. In fact, I pretty much hate it. My 2/10 is incredibly generous. The plot isn't worth going into, the acting is about as amateurish as I've seen, the direction is poor, the special effects are laughable, and everything else scrapes the bottom of the barrel. When Ron Jeremy is the biggest name actor in the cast, you know you've got problems. I've seen people call this movie an homage to the Universal monster films of the 30s. I find that notion insulting. I think the movie might have been trying to do to the Universal monsters what The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra did to 50s sci- fi or what Scream of the Bikini did to 60s Eurospy. Unfortunately, it fails miserably.

So, if it's so bad, why haven't I rated the movie lower? Two words - Carla Harvey. I watched the movie because Carla Harvey, one of the lead singers for Butcher Babies, has a very, very small role. She's in the movie for less than 5 minutes. She pops up on the beach, poses for a photographer, takes her top off, and gets killed. That 5 minutes of Carla Harvy is worth a rating point to my way of thinking.

If you like the old school horrors were we don't have blood in it and monsters are walking around, by which I mean, people in a suit than this flick is surely one for you. If you look closely to the title then you could guessed it already. Now I'm not into horrors from the 50's and 60's but I do like the older ones.

The story is roughly based on Frankenstein but they did add the monster from The Creature From The Black Lagoon to it. And I must say that I enjoyed it. Maybe it is a bit too long clocking in at 9à minutes. The could have gone for 70 minutes like the old ones. It's shot in black and white but it all happens nowadays. As I have said, there isn't any gore or almost no red stuff in it but I was surprised that they added some gratuitous nudity in it were one was a strip scene. It's weird that the producers dared to make such a old school one in a time were gore is hot. I liked it but I can understand that some won't.

Gore 0/5 Nudity 3/5 Effects 0/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5

Every once in a while I stumble upon an independent movie that succeeds on sheer bravado and love of its inspirations. The horribly named FRANKENSTEIN VS THE MONSTER FROM BLOOD COVE is one of those. In the tradition of Universal monster mash-ups like THE HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN comes this story of a mad scientist who is endeavoring to create a race of super-monsters to fight terrorism. Or some such nonsense. Despite any delusions the filmmakers might have had about topicality, the framework is just an excuse to hang as many creatures as possible on the story.

And creatures there are. Not content with Frankenstein's monster and the Monster From Blood Cove (an endearing Creature From the Black Lagoon type beast), Writer/Director William Winckler introduces a slew of loosely related beasts. A werewolf shows up for no apparent reason, only to be gunned down within minutes. The ghost of Dr. Frankenstein even drops by to choke(?) several victims.

As if that weren't enough, this black and white tribute throws in every stock supporting character/location from the Universal classics. There are Gothic looking exteriors. There's the mysterious gypsy woman who issues cryptic warnings. There's the disfigured/conflicted lab assistant, played by monster designer Chris Knight.

And if this weren't enough, there are also nods to the films of Ed Wood (the obviously cornball dialog, the lawn chair/lab table the monster lies on, etc.).

But this isn't Mel Brooks, people. This is low-budget film-making. It may be sincere and creative, but those looking for sophistication would do well to pass on this. The acting is universally bad, even by the standards of these films. There are some intrusive nude photo sessions/stripper performances that seem to have been randomly added to titillate adolescent boys and pad the running time (girls strip, dance, and then get killed). And there is an offensive gay stereotype that is repeatedly played for "comic" effect.

But all this is secondary to the creatures. Rubber-looking they might be, but they're retro-cool and well executed…and they are what lift this production to a noteworthy level. Their battles might be a letdown – more Godzilla than Universal – but perfectly in keeping with the limited intent. This is definitely a deserving entry in the low-budget monster sweepstakes.

William Winkler Jr. has put together a wonderful tribute to those cheesy "B" movies we know and love with "Frankenstein vs. the Creature from Blood Cove." Monsters are back and this movie has them in spades. This is a film that Roger Corman would be proud of...no it's better than most of his work. Now the truth be told, there is a smattering of nudity in the form of topless and beautiful young ladies, but then again, this is the 21st century and that's not only expected by distributors, but also welcomed by a large part of the audience....including me! This is a film that screams out for a hot date by your side, a couple of cold ones in hand and a big tub of popcorn nearby. It's a fun romp!

The DVD's director stated that he wanted to pay respect to the black and white Universal classics of the 1930s through 1950s, but did those films have topless babes at the beach and a slinky nightclub stripper? That's just part of the problem of this poorly scripted (by the director), inanely scored, and mostly indifferently acted piece. The leading lady (the director's wife) at least shows some personality through the shoddy proceedings. A mad scientist creates an amphibian man and secures Frankenstein's original monster to "conquer terrorism" (huh?), but they break loose, wreak havoc, and fight each other (a disappointing shoving match). Beast costumes are stiff and low-budget, with Creature faring better, and the Monster resembling the 1925 Phantom of the Opera (his nostrils) and a zombie-hippie, both poorly mimed by stunt men. Even the lead (also writer-director) also states at the end "Frankenstein is dead!", which refers to the creator, not the monster. There's also a flamboyant gay character for comedy relief, yet this feature conjures no suspense or terror, or even laughs, murder scenes are badly lensed. Other than some good monochrome cinematography, skip it.