Sadly Over-hyped

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

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

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

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.