With a trash cast consisting of Edmund '2019: After The Fall of New York' Purdom, Gordon 'Frankenstein '80' Mitchell, Luciano 'Rather a lot of films' Pigozzi and Mike 'Strike Commando' Monty, you'd come to this film expecting a lot, and leave feeling kind of let down. How can a film featuring a necrophile dwarf get it so wrong?Well for starters it probably should have spent more time concentrating on the horror angle than all the other stuff it fannies about with in the first hour of the film. To set the scene: Count (?) Frankenstein lives in a huge castle with his band of freaks who like to do grave robbing with him, including sidekick Luciano Pigozzi, a hunchback guy who's having it off with Luciano's wife, then there's big Gordon Mitchell, and a dwarf who looks like Nicholas Cage in miniature form who gets up to all sorts of mischief, including fondling exhumed girl corpses and donking up Frankenstein's newly acquired dead Neanderthal. These cavemen have been plaguing the countryside for ages, and the local villagers are blaming Frankenstein for that and the girl's body going missing. It's up to Edmund Purdom as local policeman to sort all that out. Plus, just to increase the cast and pad out the film more, Frankenstein's daughter, boyfriend and her top heavy pal come to visit, which gives the film and excuse for nudity and most of the staff of the house peeking in on naked ladies (through the eyes of a portrait, naturally). The plot trundles along lamely while we watch Luciano Pigozzi scheme against the dwarf, and the dwarf gets exiled and ends up shacking up with another Neanderthal, played by The Beast from The Beast In Heat, a man who has no need for make up to play either. The movie then concentrates on the more important plot points like whether or not rabbit should be eaten raw or cooked. I suppose some skinny dipping does keep from falling asleep, mind you.Things are all gearing up for a Neanderthal Frankenstein monster versus regular Neanderthal battle at the end, but the film completely forgets to include any horror, unless savage throttling counts as horror. Worse still, Gordon Mitchell is barely in it and has nothing much to do, and although Luciano Pigozzi at least stands out as the scheming servant, Edmund Purdom just sort of runs around pointing at the things. Not the best Gothic horror then. Shame. It's too well made to be stupid in that sense either.

This is better then the original Frankenstein. Most you probably never saw the original Frankenstein. It a silent movie from 1910 that is twelve minutes long. The 1931 version of Frankenstein is better. It has better actors. It also has a better story line. It is scarier. But still this a good movie. Something that as the same story line as the book Frankenstein and has some nudity does not make it porn. It is not porn. This is an i.t.a.l.i.a.n movie. And you are forgetting i.t.a.l.i.a.n.s are very lead back about nudity a lot more then some countries are. This movie is pretty scary. The acting is pretty good. And the story line is great. If you like really scary movies then you should see this movie.

When I was 11 or 12, I remember liking these kind of films late at night on TV, but time has moved on and so has film-making tastes.I find it very hard to watch these poorly directed poorly dubbed movies any longer.Brazzi plays mad Dr. Frankenstein, Dunn is an evil dwarf and Lugosi (no relation to Bela) is a Neanderthal man. Add a monster named Hulk, and some nude women for sexploitation value, and you have the plot.In other words, there IS no plot!The film is typical 70's shlock Italian horror. Old dark castle, lot's of zooming to eliminate the need for an actual production crew with multiple camera set ups, and really bad dubbing that over shadows the bad acting!This mix makes for one smelly cocktail. Unless you're 10 or 11, then you may very well love it.

Now this is my idea of a Gothic sick comedy, dry, brisk and more or less random plot—wise. Unlike other Italian thrillers, this one, vaguely inspired by Frankenstein's tale, looks like a bit of a Hammer pastiche; and it has a buxom starlet (Christiane Royce, as 'Krista'), likable and interesting actors (but the whole thing is direly acted), nice sets, the playful, ironic brio and briskness of some Italian period movies, generally a sense of leisure, common to many Italian B movies and European TV shows …—and it seems to have been given some budget—as well as some thinking. As a matter of fact, the movie has some TV feel to it. It's the score who leaves to be desired, a quite ineffective, random and unconvincing movie music. IL CASTELLO … is enjoyable, deliberately and dryly goofy—unsparingly and dryly goofy, I should say; I agree with B. Gauss that it resembles, by its dry humor, and mere pointlessness and randomness of the plot, the Spanish genre flicks, but the 90' movie I have seen didn't have that much nudity on display … (he also gives different names for the starlets, but nonetheless loosely resembling those screened on the credits of the movie I saw). The atmosphere is generally sunny and bawdy, the plot is leisurely narrated, the naked women: worth viewing—the landscapes, awesome. The plot involves revenge, lust, the servants' loves, women keen on science; a vengeful midget befriends a Neanderthalian ('Ook'), together they kidnap a girl and the midget rapes her, in front of the suddenly interested caveman. The viewers should respect the director for giving credit to the Frankenstein trope—instead of complaining about it being changed.(The 'Frankenstein' trope has trenched, at least partly decaying corpses—the 'Dracula' trope has spiked corpses. The former is, in a way, more morbid.)The wicked Count is played by Brazzi, Simone Blondell plays the Count's daughter. Mitchell, the '60 muscle-man, perhaps not even then as well known as Park, Scott and Reeves, sometimes player in movies about Maciste ('61, against the Cyclops), Ali Baba or Sinbad (in '63), Brennus (in '64), and even about Caesar (in '62), Achilles (also '62), Vulcan (in '60), got here a more becoming part—a bit part as one of Frankenstein's creatures and henchmen. In '83, he still got a part in a late _peplum. In the B movies' history, there were two Mitchell—Gordon& Cameron, and also two Gordon—Scott& Mitchell. Which of the three do you like better?The basic idea is that of a mad scientist bringing corpses back to life, reviving corpses by means of electricity; but the story also brings in Neanderthal survivors, without much other explaining about their fate--one of them uses a knife, and wears funny rags .... The screenplay belongs to M. Smith, W. Rose, and R. Spano; R. H. Oliver directed, and if he wouldn't have mentioned Frankenstein, if he would of skipped crediting Frankenstein, his work would of passed as a rip--off; like this, it passes as a . The score is by M. Gigante; sometimes atmospheric and cool, in a Lynch vein, but most times--ineffective.The movie is thematically grim, but light--hearted, feel--good, refreshing, and, I believe, intentionally funny; it's a weird comedy, a grim comedy.There's a bit of Lynchian TV leisure, in this bizarre comedy, that makes the gruesome weirdness seem light--hearted; stylistically, there are quite a bit of things to be added in its favor, as this approach is basically absent outside Latin western Europe (Italy& Spain).