Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

Cleveronix A different way of telling a story

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

MartinHafer This film starts off hilariously bad. First, there is some little prologue about vampire curses and the Frankenstein family becoming were-wolves--now they are the 'Wolfsteins'! Then, as the film opens, you see a ball--at which point, two men do A LOT of exposition--in other words, through their conversation (which sounds totally fake), they explain all the back story. It's really dumb and a terrible way of film making--and boded very poorly for the rest of the film. Soon, satanism was tossed into the mix. About the only things NOT in the first 3-5 minutes of the film were mummies or zombies and I held on---waiting to see if they, too, would be in the movie! Well, soon two old ladies begin talking--again, it was all exposition. They talked and talked about Count Waldemar Daninsky--telling all about him, his family, etc.. Couldn't SOMEONE in the film have a normal conversation that was NOT telling the audience the back story of various characters?!?! Sloppy....very, very sloppy.A bit later, a gypsy and his very buxom girlfriend are stranded in the rain. The Count advises them to take cover in a nearby castle--Wolfstein castle! Once there, they begin looking the old and seemingly abandoned home. They take to opening up family tombs and robbing the dead. However, one corpse looks pretty fresh and when they remove the silver cross-like dagger, he comes to life as a wolf-man and kills them. It was a neat scene--at least until the end, when the lady spasmodically writhes like a go-go dancer who is magnetized to the wall!! Pretty dumb.After these two get torn to pieces, the villagers and the Count go looking for the wolves that supposedly did this grisly deed. The Count is bitten during the hunt...and he's cursed to be a were-guy. Soon we see Count Waldemar turning into a were-wolf--in one of the worst transformation scenes I've seen. "The Were-wolf of London" and "The Wolf-man" did this much better--several decades earlier. His friends try to help him through this, but they seem powerless to do anything.A bit later, Dr. Janos Mikhelov and his wife arrive. They claim to be able to perhaps cure Waldemar! In the meantime, they chain him up so he can't hurt anyone--a prudent thing that they never seem to get around to doing in other films. BUT, unfortunately, it's not because they are saints. On the contrary, they are satanists who wish to use their unearthly powers to turn Waldemar into a servant of Satan! If this doesn't sound dumb enough, later you learn that the Mikhelovs are, in fact, vampire satanists!!!! And, in a never-ending need to feed and make more vampires, they decide to make the moves on Waldemar's friends. In the end, Waldemar takes on the satanist-vampires and it's, of course, a fight to the death (or at least, death for the undead).Overall, the story is bizarre and suffers from the kitchen sink approach--they toss everything into the plot and hope it all works. It isn't a terribly inspired approach and the dialog bogs the film down horribly. However, the film does have creepy music and a nice creepy look to it, so for the less demanding horror fan out there, there is probably enough to merit seeing it. All others, though, should stick to the better monster films from Universal and Hammer--they are light-years ahead of this one.

Lee Eisenberg I think that Jacinto Molina - known as Paul Naschy in the English-speaking world - had appeared in a few movies before this one, but it was in "La marca del Hombre-lobo" (called "Frankenstein's Bloody Terror" in the US) where he played werewolf Waldemar Daninsky for the first time. And you gotta love it! Anyway, the story goes that he's helping hunt a werewolf on the loose, but it bites him before he kills it. Now stuck with the curse, he enlists the help of some doctors who turn out to be vampires. Needless to say, everything results in a final showdown.I get the feeling that these Euro-horror flicks from the '60s and '70s may have influenced some of the American slasher movie directors, what with gore and sexuality. One scene in particular shows some transients frolicking erotically and...guess what happens to them! A precursor to the scene in "Scream" where the guy notes that "sex=death" in horror movies.Overall, this is one of those movies that you just gotta see. I would assume that they named the character Waldemar Daninsky so as to give the film a more Gothic feeling (and it pretty much works). I wonder how the movie would have been had they set the movie in their native Spain and given the character a corresponding name.

clint2442000 Despite my summary, the DVD version from Rareflix may be worth buying only for the extras: Sam Sherman's interesting commentary on film distribution rigors to drive-in theaters during the 1960's and early 1970's, and the added original promotional trailers and a copy of the original movie poster inside the DVD box. We learn the reasons Sherman fraudulently hyped this movie as a "Frankenstein" film, as even the title would suggest, despite the fact Frankenstein appears nowhere in the film. I recall when this theater played at the local drive-in in Madison, WI in 1971 when I was a kid. My neighbors, who went to the film, which was on a triple bill with two Hammer Dracula pictures, endlessly complained how the advertising was a complete "rip off" as it was an lousy werewolf movie containing no Frankenstein. Obviously, they did not recommend it, but I remained intrigued all these years only due to that great movie poster referenced above. Sherman states on the commentary that he believed at the time people would see what a good film it was and "forgive him" for the misleading Frankenstein promotion. After buying and viewing the DVD a few weeks ago, I disagree. The film itself is a complete bore, with a plot about as interesting as it is comprehensible. Like many Euro horror pictures of the time, we have a constant repetition of a few seconds of action abruptly interrupted by more inane plot. I'm sure many people's heads were nodding inside of their cars trying to stay awake while attempting to watch this flick at U.S. drive-ins in the 1970's. Again, only interesting as a period piece to catch the kind of unambitious, over-hyped trash all too often once shoveled into drive-in theaters by distributors like Independent-International. Sam Sherman's company nonetheless did bring a handful of good movies to the drive-ins. "Satan's Sadists" comes to mind. This surely ain't one of them.

lordguano This film is absolutely NEVER aired on TV anymore and is nearly impossible to find on video. I remember seeing it several times as a staple on one of the numerous horror movie shows that used to air in NYC years ago (Creature Features, Thriller Theater, etc.) I would love to revisit it.As a cheapo horror movie buff (and veteran of the "old" Times Square horror/kung fu/blacksploitation double-feature movie houses), I've since learned that like many other European horror movies of the era, the version seen here in America (Frankenstein's Bloody Terror) is a truncated version of the original Spanish print. Stripped down from 93 minutes to just 78 minutes only added confusion to plot points that were vague or contrived to begin with. I'm keen on seeing the original version, but I'm sure the shorter randomly edited version is probably a lot more fun (as is often the case -- see The 7 Brothers Meet Dracula for another example).The only Naschy werewolf film that I've seen in video release is Fury of the Wolfman, which doesn't hold a candle to this movie in terms of pure kitschy so-bad-it's-good delight.