Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

udar55 Dr. Hackenstein (David Muir) is trying to resurrect his dead wife before her severed head totally decomposes. Unfortunately, the grave robbing couple he hired (Logan and Anne Ramsey, the latter from THROW MOMMA FROM THE TRAIN) bring him male body parts. Hack gets a lucky break though when Melanie (Stacey Travis) and three of her cousins crash their car nearby. The doctor offers to let them stay, giving him the chance to pluck plenty of parts off their bodies. It almost seems like destiny that I should see this movie. I gasped when the credits started with Vista Street Entertainment and shuddered in fear when I saw the "Executive Producer Jerry Feifer" credit. Yup, this is the first film from Feifer, who used this to get a foot in the industry to create the WITCHCRAFT films, a series of 13 movies of which I descended into hell to watch. Hell, the main location is even the familiar WITCHCRAFT house. Knowing my luck, I'll probably inherit it. Anyway, this is as polished as the first WITCHCRAFT and has the same video wipes. The acting is tons better with Muir and Travis being very capable leads. In addition to Anne Ramsey, you have Phyllis Diller pop up for one scene. Plus, you get some nudity (thankfully not from Ramsey or Diller) and semi-gory KNB effects work. Writer-director Richard Clark puts some effort into the 1912 setting. Unfortunately, he can't decide on a tone. Is it a comedy? Serious horror? Who knows? He gets points automatically deducted for including a "Dr. Hacken-steen?"/"No, it is it Hack-en-stiiiiiine" exchange. None of this is helped by an oppressively plucky score by Randy Miller, who also did the scores on WITCHCRAFT and WITCHERY.

Coventry Apparently there's a very good reason why I never heard about "Dr. Hackenstein" before me and a couple of mates accidentally stumbled upon it and stupidly decided to give it a chance. That reason is: it sucks! It's a very pointless, dull, imbecilic and totally unmemorable horror comedy/parody. Actually, to be honest, I'm not even sure if this was meant as a comedy because sometimes the script takes itself quite seriously and tries really hard to be a really ambitious and original late 80's horror effort. In the year 1909, at the dawn of a new era in medical science according to the opening sequences, Dr. Elliot Hackenstein needs exactly three women – no more, no less – to refurbish his beloved wife whom he accidentally killed. She's only just a living head left now, but the stupid body snatchers only provide male cadavers. So when Dr. Hackenstein yells out "I need three female bodies to bring back my wife", his words aren't even cold and there just miraculously appear three young females (and one really annoying nerdy kid) with car trouble show up at his doorstep. Why doesn't that ever happen to me? "I need a bunch of sexy voluptuous women to fill up my empty harem!!!" … See, nothing! Anyway, the good Doctor sees his wish fulfilled, but unfortunately – for science that is – he develops sympathy for one of the three girls. "Dr. Hackenstein" is a lame film that tries to cash in on the success of "Re-Animator" and even blatantly steal some of the comical aspects of that classic, like a severed head talking one-liners. It's easy to see why this film is never mentioned anywhere, as it doesn't appeal to fans of neither the horror nor the comedy genre. The funniest character is undoubtedly the loud-speaking female grave robber Ruby; depicted by the anti-cherubic Anne Ramsey. 80's horror buffs will certainly remember her from Wes Craven's "Deadly Friend", where she played the nasty old hag neighbor who gets decapitated by a basketball. "Dr. Hackenstein" supposedly takes place in the early 1900's, but there are hardly any attempts to re-create the atmosphere of that era (except maybe for some automobiles). Dr. Hackenstein's laboratory is a quite clichéd 80's set piece, with all sorts of smoky cauldrons and test tubes full of fluorescent colors.

movieman_kev Two sisters, their perverted brother, and their cousin have car trouble. They then happen about the home of Dr. Hackenstein whom conveniently needs the body parts of three nubile young women to use in an experiment to bring his deceased lover back to life. He tells them that he'll help them get home in the morning, so they spend the night. Then the good doctor gets down to work in this low-budget horror-comedy.I found this to be mildly amusing, nothing at all to actually go out of your way for (I stumbled across it on Netflix instant view & streamed it to the xbox 360), but better then I expected it to be for a Troma acquired film. Most of the humor doesn't work, but their are still some parts that caused me to smile. Plus the late, great Anne Ramsey has a small part and she was always a treat to watch.Eye Candy: Bambi Darro & Sylvia Lee Baker got topless My Grade: D+

Son_of_Mansfield This movie features an o.k. score and a not bad performance by David Muir as Dr. Hackenstein. The beginning and end credits show along with the most of the actors and the "special effects" that this is a low budget movie. There is nothing in this movie that you could not find in other mad scientist, horror/comedy, or low budget movies. Not special for any nude scene buffs or bad movie lovers either. This movie is simply here. Anne Ramsey and Phillis Diller are nothing to get excited about as well. If you are curious as I was and can actually find this, you will realize the truth of the one line summary.