X-Ray Spex

The Mad Playboy of Art

2009-11-22T11:04:00.005-06:00

Here, courtesy of a link at Tom Spurgeon's The Comics Reporter, is a video appreciation of my favorite cartoonist of all time, the late, great Will Elder. It features comments by everyone from Harvey Kurtzman to Bill Gaines, Terry Gilliam to Jack David and Al Jaffee to Jerry Garcia, and even a few words from Villie himself. Plus, it has tons and tons of great Will Elder art.

I wrote up my own appreciation of Elder when he died last year, but I can't overstate the impact his work had on me -- not just as a comic book fan, but as a person, as a guy who looks for the hidden details or always suspects there's a joke lurking somewhere in the background. When I saw that copy of the MAD SUPER SPECIAL that reprinted his "MOLE!" story or borrowed THE MAD READER from the library and laid mine eyes on DRAGGED NET!, STARCHIE! and GASOLINE VALLEY!, it felt like a switch was flipped somewhere and things were never quite the same.

Do yourself a favor and order up a copy of WILL ELDER: THE MAD PLAYBOY OF ART. Not only does it have tons of Elder's work, from childhood drawings to classic comics to late-in-life paintings, but it also has an intro by Dan Clowes that sums up Elder's unique talent more effectively than anything I've ever read:

How could such a man as Will Elder exist? This was a force of nature, a Mozart of zaniness, a vessel from which a seemingly endless cascade of insane humor poured forth, not only onto Bristol board, but into the minutiae of his daily life! And somehow, by some unlikely combination of genetics and environment, he also had within his makeup the patience, conviction, dedication and control to have produced some of the most perfectly realized, technically astounding work ever seen in comics! And magazines!

It's hard to believe this much stupid stuff happened in a single decade...

2009-11-21T08:46:00.004-06:00

... but here's your proof in just over seven minutes. Naturally, to make room for Madonna kissing Britney and Howard Dean's scream they had to leave out footage of my new wife and I wincing through "Proud to Be An American" at our three-weeks-after-9/11 wedding reception. That's a moment from the 2000s I'll never forget, no matter how hard I try.

Mixing pop and politics, he asks me what the use is

2009-11-19T22:41:00.005-06:00

All this Cold War nostalgia has me thinking back to the music of the era. World War I had "Over There," World War II had "I'll Be Seeing You," and the end of the Cold War, well, it had songs like this.

First, a little something from the left side of the aisle...

From the scratch-mixing of Nixon in the opening to the WrestleMania style battle between Reagan and Konstantin Chenenko (I almost forget who he was -- he only served as Soviet chief for 13 months), this video virtually screams "Hey! I'm from the 1980s!"

Not, however, as much as this one does. From the right side of the aisle...

That bad parachute special effect? That "computer" lettering? Sammy's "hard rocker's juice panel"? That yellow jumpsuit? Good god, that yellow jumpsuit? This might be the most ridiculous video ever made, and believe me, that's a category with some stiff competition. Best of all, I think the Samster is serious! USA! USA!

Nice to see the Post hasn't lost its touch

2009-11-15T15:20:00.005-06:00

From Saturday's paper, with news that terrorists will face trial in civilian courts in the city that never sleeps...

Eighties flashback: Why yes, now that you mention it, I do have some memories of the Berlin Wall I'd like to share

2009-11-14T20:41:00.000-06:00

A few days ago, I reprinted a column I wrote during my last semester of college while I was managing editor (and thus could print whatever I damn well wanted) at the Daily Kent Stater. Here's another one from that bygone era. It originally ran on Nov. 17, 1989, which makes it exactly 20 years old Tuesday. And, like many 20 year olds, it dates rather obviously. This one is more serious than the last one -- in fact, it's more serious than just about everything I've ever written -- and that's not a point in the plus column.

So, in advance, I'd like to apologize for sentences like "A tangible, visible news event that let us remember Jan. 28, 1986 more clearly than the days surrounding it" and "... I (and, by extension, my generation), never had a national tragedy I could call my own." I promise I'll never write anything so agonizingly voice-of-my-generation-ish again.

And now that that's out of the way, here it is, straight from the last days of the 1980s...

Seeing history develop from a Wall

My friend Eric, who graduated last year with degrees in history and political science, now lives in Virginia near a sizable Navy base. Upon hearing about the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, he put some luggage in his car and is now waiting for the first sign of troop movements as his signal to leave his primary-target residence and head back to Ohio.

This man, who in college specialized in post-World War II European developments, is genuinely frightened that the Wall's demolition will lead to a reunited German and eventually, nuclear war.

I don't agree with Eric, but his fear illustrates a point. We are witnessing history. Since 1961, our world has been based on a balance of Eastern and Western power, and that balance had no greater symbol than the ominous Wall dividing one of the more famous cities on the planet.

Of course, it wasn't symbolic of the guards or mine fields that killed 191 people who tried to escape to the West between 1961 and last week. The Wall was very real, and its threat was not to be taken as a metaphor for the Cold War.

It's precisely because the Wall was so real and so tangible that its demolition has fascinated the world. The Wall coming down doesn't mean Germany is reuniting, though some experts claim it may. So, the balance of power still holds, and German is still two countries. A number of political moves by both Eastern and Western powers have probably had as great an effect on bringing the hemispheres closer together as the demolition of the Berlin Wall. The fact that it is a wall -- something we can see being scaled and painted and danced on and torn down -- makes it memorable.

While I understand the loss that occurred when Kennedy was shot in 1963, I have a hard time actually identifying with it. A child of the post-Watergate world, I have a natural suspicion of the president that leads me to wonder more about JFK's liaisons in the Lincoln Room than the magic of Camelot. So, while it may sound like a strange thing to complain about, I (and, by extension, my generation), never had a national tragedy I could call my own. Our parents can reminisce about what they were doing when they heard Kennedy was shot, but we have nothing comparable.

Not until Jan. 28, 1986, when I returned to Dunbar Hall and head Dan Rather's voice echoing from each room. My first thought was that Reagan had again been shot, but then I saw the now-familiar footage of a rocket blast followed by a spiral puff of smoke against a gorgeous blue sky.

As we watched the Challenger explode again and again, we discovered that we finally had our Kennedy assassination. A tangible, visible news event that let us remember Jan. 28, 1986 more clearly than the days surrounding it.

I had the same feeling last Thursday when I heard the Wall was coming down.

I'm not saying the events of the Wall will affect the American public like the Kennedy assassination, or even the Challenger explosion. Bad news seems to carry a power good news never does. What I am saying is that we are witnesses to history. The superpowers may grow closer or tensions may increase. Germany may remain two countries or reunite and become the powerhouse on a continent of tourist nations. Eric's fears may even be realized, and the end of the Berlin Wall could lead to the end of the world.

Just remember one thing: You were there when it all started.

Pfeifer is the Stater managing editor.

And, just to prove I was your typical cynical Gen-X college student back then, here's a flyer for a party we threw at our house two weeks after this column ran. I won't both explaining all the pointless in-jokes, but I'm sure you'll notice the timely and tasteful theme we assigned the soiree...

And to be honest, I think we stole the title from an reference in the first issue of AMERICAN FLAGG. Now Howard Chaykin, there's a guy who knows how to combine humor and politics!

Eighties flashback: An artifact from the last days of the Cold War

2009-11-10T15:06:00.007-06:00

This week, with the 20th anniversary of the end of the Berlin Wall, it seems like every journalist who was alive in 1989 is sharing memories of the last rusty days of the Iron Curtain. Well hell, who am I not to jump on the self- aggrandizing bandwagon?

What follows is a column I wrote for my college paper, the imaginatively named Daily Kent Stater, sometime in the fall of 1989. I can't find a date on the clipping, but judging by the fact that I didn't mention it, I'm guessing this was before the Berlin Wall actually came down. At any rate, it offers a glimpse of what life was like back then, in the final days of the Cold War. Like everyone else in my generation, I'd grown up with the Soviet Union as the great enemy of America, the yang to our yin, the Lex Luthor to our Superman. It's weird, but re-reading this piece made me oddly nostalgic for those days, where the big bad was really, really big and we both had a vested interested in keeping a lid on the crazy stuff. Nowadays, who knows?

Anyway, here it is. I didn't correct any spelling or punctuation errors, because I'm sure future historians will want the original version for their archives. And if you don't get some of the references -- like Pravda, ruble or Bret Maverick -- then be grateful you live in the era of Wikipedia, tovarich.

(Oh, and if you think I was sick of hearing the word "maverick" back in the Yeltsin days, imagine how sick of was of hearing it this year in reference to a certain governor from a state that was our last line of defense against Mother Russia?)

Red Square is the cool place to be, comrade

It used to be that for interesting news, the place not to go was that dull, battleship-gray monolith of a country, the Soviet Union. Oh, the arms race was always good for a few inches of story on a slow news day but overall, Mother Russia was known as the place where people drank vodka, ate borschtt (whatever that was) and a series of old, crabby leaders with bushy eyebrows watched parades with lots of tanks and missiles.

Well, needless to say, things have changed. The other side of the globe is fun to watch now that the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe are experiencing political reform on a scale not seen since the days of Lenin (Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov, not John).

For the first time I can remember, the Reds, the Commies, the denizens of the Evil Empire -- are actually seen as the good guys. All it took was Gorbachev saying "Alright, we screwed up. It doesn't work. People like owning things."

And how about this Boris Yeltsin? He comes to America and immediately Pravda accuses him of drunken revelry. I don't know which is nicer -- the idea that a member of the Supreme Soviet could actually be suspected of fun (after all, all those Politburo types look pretty dull, but now, who knows...) or Pravda becoming a scandal sheet like our beloved National Enquirer. Of course, if Gorbachev tries to get Pravda into that lucrative check-out lane distribution, he'll really learn something about the power of labor unions.

I just wish every time (and I mean EVERY time) Yeltsin appeared in a news story, the word "maverick" wasn't right there along with him. In the decadent, television-saturated United States, there's a considerable risk of people thinking the guy's name is Boris Maverick, and that he's the brother of Bret and Bart. Say, now there's a show for that post-Roseanne time slot ... "Comrade Cowboy -- riding the REALLY wide open space of Russia."

Yep, tovarich, big changes are afoot behind the (increasingly rusty) Iron Curtain. A few decades ago, "heavy metal" in the Soviet Union meant Stalin's big tanks on another purge-and-destroy mission, but today it means Bon Jovi and his pals playing to unprecedented crowds of rock-starved Soviet kids and Russian headbangers Gorky Park thanking Mikhail Gorbachev for making their debut album possible. The fact that Gorky Park has avoided the clich of covering "Back in the U.S.S.R" can only be taken as a good sign.

As final proof that the land of borscht and vodka is the hep place to be these days, I offer this bit of news from the latest issue of Newsweek: A calendar featuring nude women walking through Moscow has been given the red stamp of approval and will sell for $20 of the ruble equivalent thereof.

While we in the West debate funing for controversial art and argue the fine line of obscenity and government cash, our fellow Superpower is concentrating on cheesecake photography and (this is the crucial part, global-economics wise) charging a lot of money for it. Love it or hate it, you've got to admit the Sovs are embracing capitalism in a very American way. Now if they'd only take back that damn Yakov Smirnoff.

Pfeifer is the Stater managing editor.

Up next: The column from a week after the Wall went down.

Scalding propulsion and revivifying flames

2009-11-05T20:05:00.007-06:00

After a recent viewing of the documentary JOE STRUMMER: THE FUTURE IS UNWRITTEN, I pulled down my copy of Lester Bangs' PSYCHOTIC REACTIONS AND CARBURETOR DUNG and re-read his long article about touring with the Clash in the early days. And, in doing so, I came across this paragraph, which might be the best thing I've ever read about why, even though concerts can be annoying and expensive and an all-around pain in the ass, they're still worth taking a chance on every now and then...

The politics of rock 'n' roll, in England or America or anywhere else, is that a whole lot of kids want to be fried out of their skins by the most scalding propulsion they can find, for a night they can pretend is the rest of their lives, and whether the next day they go back to work in shops or boredom on the dole or American TV doldrums in Mom 'n' Daddy's living room nothing can cancel the reality of that night in the revivifying flames when for one if only then in your life you were blasted outside of yourself and the monotony which defines most life anywhere at any time, when you supped on lightning and nothing else in the realms of the living or dead mattered at all.

Pretty good, eh? There's a reason Lester Bangs is considered my many (this guy included) the greatest rock writer of all time, and it's not because he told lil' Cameron Crowe to go on the road with the Allman Brothers. It's because, in his prose, he managed to sum up and somehow viscerally convey the elusive energy of rock 'n' roll.

By the way, thanks to my old college buddies Frank and Mike, who basically dragged me to the bookstore and forced me to buy a copy of a book by a guy I'd never heard of, except from that REM song. It was more than worth the initial $19.95 investment, I'm happy to say.

The American Way

2009-11-03T10:38:00.003-06:00

Since it's election day, here's one of my favorite political cartoons. I've been hanging onto it since 1992, when the whole Ross Perot movement was semi-capturing the nation's attention, but if anything, it seems even more timely now.

Sadly.

Thunderbirds are go go go!

2009-11-02T06:01:00.001-06:00

Here's one of the strangest things I've seen on the internet, something so unbelievably, pop culturally amazing that I have a hard time believing it even exists: a vintage spoof of THUNDERBIRDS (and related shows) from Peter Cook and Dudley Moore...

And, if that leaves you with the urge to see the genuine article, why not check out this musical bit from the THUNDERBIRDS movie* featuring Cliff Richards and The Shadows?

* No, not that live-action monstrosity from 2004. I'm talking about the genuine article -- THUNDERBIRDS ARE GO, which hit theaters back in 1966.

Halloween Thrills, Day 31: The terrifying twist ending

2009-10-31T11:02:00.005-05:00

Ten years ago, when THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT hit theaters, people were amazed how scary it was -- especially for a movie where, for the most part, nothing really happened. You had three foul-mouthed slackers lost in the woods, some local legends about evil doings and a couple of sticks tied together. And somehow, those elements -- all filmed through a then-pretty-revolutionary handheld camera -- terrified millions and made the movie one of the most profitable films of all time.

I wasn't terrified, but I was unnerved by THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, and by the final moments, when we got that memorable shot of one of the kids facing a wall before the camera went dead, I felt that invigorating rush of fear that a horror movie can (but rarely) delivers.

But there was something else in that movie, something that was shown for a split second in the opening minutes that surprised me and might have put my nerves slightly, almost subconsciously on edge for the whole film. Remember the grave you glimpse at the beginning, while the legend of the witch is still being set up? No? Well, to be honest, there's no reason you should. But I remember it. In fact, I've never been able to forget it. And do you know why?

Because it was MY GRAVE!

Just kidding, of course. After all, I wasn't around in 1907.

Or was I?

Happy Halloween!

Halloween Thrills, Day 30: One last serving of spooky cheesecake

2009-10-30T06:01:00.000-05:00

Here are a few more selections to add a bit of vintage zing to your Halloween...

Halloween Thrills, Day 29: Minnie the Moocher

2009-10-29T06:10:00.000-05:00

This vintage Fleischer Studios cartoon doesn't have a Halloween theme, but there's no denying that it's wonderfully creepy in that way only a vintage Fleischer cartoon can be. Cab Calloway's signature tune, it goes without saying, is a work of genius, but the Betty Boop treatment makes it even more brilliant.

The song itself doesn't kick in until just past the four-minute mark, but even before then, "Minnie" is plenty strange. Betty's dad changes form, and there's that great little moment when the lipstick print on her handkerchief sings back at her. (Plus, Koko the clown has a cameo!)

And then, when Cab himself shows up -- yowza! I don't know whose idea it was to make him a ghostly walrus, but the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences needs to fire up the time machine and give that man an Oscar toot sweet. Best of all, that rotoscoped Mr. Calloway is only the beginning -- you also get skeletons, ghosts, those singing reflections of Bimbo in the well, a triple electric chair execution and kittens who suck the life from their mother.

By the grand finale, the cartoon just goes crazy, with ghostly apparitions flying out at the viewer (including one with singing tonsils!) and driving poor Betty back to her folks' place. It's jazzy, it's jaunty and yes, it's even a bit spooky. Forget all those toothless Halloween specials and show this one to your kids this year. Believe me, they'll thank you for it.

Halloween Thrills, Day 28: Comics that Creeped Me Out as a Kid, Part 2

2009-10-28T06:10:00.001-05:00

It's easy to blast the Overstreet Price Guide for putting all the emphasis in comic book collecting on the almighty dollar, but when I first got my hands on a copy of the ninth edition, it was a revelation. Suddenly, I had decades' worth of comic book lore in one place. There was an article about Wertham's SEDUCTION OF THE INNOCENT, and the usual thumbnail history of the medium (stretching only up to the late 1970s). And, of course, there were all those titles and covers and, yes, prices.

But the centerpiece of the 1979 Price Guide was "Good Lord! Choke...Gasp...It's EC!," a history of the EC Comics line by E.B. Boatner. It stretched from the early days of Max Gaines up through the final, Code-approved death-spasms of the company, covering the science fiction books, Kurtzman's war comics, the crime and suspense titles and, of course, MAD. But what really got me was the section on the horror titles -- specifically, the discussion of and these panels reprinted from THE HAUNT OF FEAR issue 19 ...

Yes, it's the infamous Al Feldstein/Jack Davis ending to "Foul Play!," the story where a baseball team seeks revenge on a murderous opponent by luring him to a ballpark late one night and then taking him apart and playing ball with his body. It's a story I've written about before, and one so notorious that the good Dr. Wertham reprinted these exact panels in his own book (they're the first images in the picture section, in fact).

Now, looking at them after decades of reading comic books and seeing plenty of horrific images that were much worse, I can appreciate them as being so wildly-over-the-top that they're actually pretty funny, an especially gruesome example of the sort of jet-black humor EC Comics excelled at. I can appreciate Davis' exquisite linework and even enjoy the nostalgic vibe of that distinctive EC Leroy lettering.

But back in 1979, huddled in a chair somewhere, absorbing all that ancient, ominous comic book history in one great rush, those panels -- reprinted in black and white, and damned small on the page -- really struck a nerve. I couldn't stop thinking about them for days, and wondered what sort of twisted mind could conceive of such a thing. Now, of course, I know exactly what sort of mind concieves of such a thing -- the best sort of mind. It's not easy to explode a cultural time bomb twenty-six years later and from hundreds of miles away, but Feldstein and Davis did it, sending an innocent Midwestern kid on a lifelong pursuit of twisted four-color thrills and other oddball pop culture.

And, since they're both still alive, in the extremely unlikely event that they're reading this blog, I'd like to take this opportunity to say "thank you" to Misters Feldstein and Davis. Thank you, gentlemen, thank you for going above and beyond (and below and beneath) the call of duty just to warp my young, impressionable mind.

In all honestly, I don't think I can ever repay you.

Halloween Thrills, Day 27: Comics that Creeped Me Out as a Kid, Part 1

2009-10-27T06:11:00.000-05:00

When I was in seventh grade, way back in the 1979, we had a study hall teacher who, believe it or not, actually had huge stacks of comic books on hand just to shut us up. It was a pretty decent selection of mid-to-late '70s stuff, mostly DC and Marvel, with a good mix of super-hero, war and horror. (I remember reading my first issue of Kirby's MISTER MIRACLE in that study hall and then, I believe, stealing it.) These weren't exactly collectors' copies, mind you. They'd never seen the inside of a Mylar snug, and if the cover was still on, it was probably clinging by a single staple. Still, they seemed to keep the stoners quiet enough, and for a budding comic geek like myself, they were manna from heaven.

There was one issue, though, that genuinely gave me a case of the willies. I didn't know the exactly issue number (or even the series), but thanks to the all-knowing Internet, I was able to not only find out what it was, I was able to find a site actually describing the story, complete with plenty of sample panels. So, thanks to this post from the fine folks at Stupid Comics, I'm able to bring you a recap of the story, "Camp Fear," straight from the pages of DC's THE WITCHING HOUR No. 58. Script by George Kashdan, art by John Calnan...

That's the cover. As Stupid Comics points out, there's not any actual skeleton bus driver involved in the story. No, what happens in "Camp Fear" isn't supernatural, it's just plain nasty. Our hero, Freddy, is sent to an exclusive summer camp by his clueless hipster parents. Sure, it all seems like it's going to be nothing but canoe trips and volleyball...

But, as it turns out, the Crowes are a couple of sadistic bastards...

And it's not just the usual beatings and violence, either. There's some weird stuff going on at this camp. Really weird stuff...

This wasn't just random sadism, either. It was all designed to turn the campers into a bunch of awful kids who would trip a kid with a cane or (gasp!) push a bunch of baby birds out of a nest...

Freddy, who must've had the evil gene to begin with, took to the nastiness like a nasty duck takes to nasty water. For some reason -- maybe because, even as a kid, I was a collector geek -- I remember being specifically upset that Freddy would swipe some kid's stamp collection. (Who takes their stamps to a summer camp, anyway?)

Eventually, for reasons I can't remember, Freddy comes to his sense and tries to escape. Those Crowes chase him, naturally, but he accidentally (well, maybe) causes and avalanche and, yes, kills them.

But at the story's end, when Freddy brings his parents back to the scene of the crimes, he discovers the camp has been abandoned and torched...

Sure, it all looks pretty goofy decades later, but I maintain that there's still something unnerving at the core of this story. Maybe it's because it's all happening to a kid, maybe it's that scene with the "eye for an eye," or maybe it's the same reason I found Rob Zombie's THE DEVIL'S REJECTS so disturbingly effective.

See, I never thought the gory or violent scenes in that film were what really made it stand apart from the pack. For me, the most memorable scene in the movie was when the Firefly family has the innocent folks in the hotel room and they force the women to hit each other. It's not bloody at all, but it's so believable and so realistically nasty that the big scene of gore that follows actually comes as a relief. I mean, you can say "well, that's never going to happen," and you're right. But what goes on in that hotel room -- or what happens with those mean kids in "Camp Fear" -- that's all too down-to-earth. And that's what makes it so danged creepy.

Coming tomorrow: How scary can a baseball game be?

Halloween Thrills, Day 26: To be honest, I'm not sure what this is...

2009-10-26T06:01:00.001-05:00

From the same box that held the Creature Feature cards comes this bit of pop culture arcana from the (very) early 1970s. Measuring about five inches by six inches, it was a scene (in this case, a haunted house) that included a sheet of images that could be rubbed off, thus adding to the hilarity. Here's what the front of the folded-over sheet looked like...

And here's the inside, with that same scene after a very young yours truly worked his magic...

Somehow, either due to artistic license or just plain childhood stupidity, I didn't mimic what was done on the cover and instead placed those Letraset figures wherever I damned well pleased, whether it made sense or not. Guy in a suit of armor dangling from a moose's head? Sure! Why not?

I did, however, add my own bit of creativity by drawing a couple of woman (possibly) next to the dog. Even back then, I couldn't draw an attractive female to save my life.

I don't know much else about this product. Even the ever-reliable interwebs, which had loads of information about those Creature Feature cards, let me down here. Here's the back of the package, which tells you how to operate this amazing printing technology...

Apparently this was one of 24 "titles," though it's the only one I've got, and the only one I remember having. The copyright date is 1970, but I would've only been 3 then, so they must've stuck around on shelves a year or two longer at least. Has anyone else ever heard of these things?

Halloween Thrills, Day 25: More Halloween pinups

2009-10-25T06:10:00.000-05:00

From the vast repository that is the World Wide Web, here are three more vintage pinups that follow a Halloween theme...

Halloween Thrills, Day 24: Warning: Nudity and violence ... and turkey

2009-10-24T06:20:00.002-05:00

Here, from GRINDHOUSE, is the best thing Eli Roth has ever done...

Really , it's amazing how this trailer not only gets every bit of early '80s horror movies right, but actually improves on them. It's funny, sure, but it's also damned creepy. The awkward camerawork, the dim lighting, the POV shots, the unsettling narration and the way even a Thanksgiving parade in broad daylight somehow looks, well, wrong -- it all adds up to a trailer for a movie I'd really like to see, especially if I were a horror fan back in, say, 1982.

Of course, Roth goes a bit far to be strictly accurate -- there wouldn't be any actual nudity in a movie trailer (back in the days before red band) and some of that gore wouldn't make the cut, either. But, Roth being Roth, we can be thankful he was at least mostly restrained here, and the trailer is better for it.

I've heard Roth is working on a full-length version of THANKSGIVING, but if you ask me, this is a big mistake. What works in a two-minute trailer wouldn't necessarily work in a feature film, and I'm guessing sitting through THANKSGIVING would lose its laughs and thrills about 15 or 20 minutes in. Hell, if I want to watch a silly, creepy slasher movie with a holiday theme, I'll just rent MY BLOODY VALENTINE. Or SILENT NIGHT DEADLY NIGT. Or MOTHER'S DAY. Or HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME. Or HALLOWEEN II. Or, well, you get the idea.

Halloween Thrills, Day 23: A Selection from the Library

2009-10-23T06:01:00.001-05:00

I'd bought a few movie books before THE PSYCHOTRONIC ENCYCLOPEDIA OF FILM, and lord knows I've bought plenty since, but no single volume has had the impact on me that Michael Weldon's 1983 movie guide did.

I remember eyeing the ENCYCLOPEDIA in the campus bookstore during my first days at Kent State in the fall of 1985. I'd seen plenty of movies by then, including some pretty off-the-wall stuff, but I'd never even heard of most of the movies in that thick little book. PLEASE DON'T EAT MY MOTHER? INVASION OF THE BLOOD FARMERS? MOVIE STAR AMERICAN STYLE OR LSD I HATE YOU!? What were these titles? Weldon had to be making them up, right? I mean, no one would actually make these movies -- or, for that matter, watch them.

Well, of course they were real, and in the years since I finally screwed up my nerve and plunked down the $16.95 for the book, I've spent considerable time and effort trying to see as many of these movies as possible. (Though MOVIE STAR AMERICAN STYLE, sadly, is apparently a lost film, just like LONDON AFTER MIDNIGHT and the original cut of AMBERSONS.)

The great thing about the ENCYCLOPEDIA -- maybe the single greatest thing -- is that despite its inclusion in this Halloween-themed roundup, it's not a book about horror movies. It's a book about all sorts of movies, from no-budget obscurities to major blockbusters. It's all-inclusive -- if there's a strange movie you love (and if it was released before 1983), odds are, it's in here somewhere.

(Incidentally, Weldon's write-up of STARS WARS is hilariously dismissive. He refers to Chewbacca as "an upright dog" and calls Alec Guinness' character "Ben Kenoby." I think I was actually slightly offended by this as a teenage STAR WARS nerd, but now I see the beauty of Weldon's sloppiness -- any book that devotes more space to the STAR WARS ripoff STAR CRASH is clearly aiming at a different target than more mainstream movie guides.)

By using the term "psychotronic" instead of "horror," "cult" or something else, Weldon was able to include virtually any kind of movie. As he says in the intro...

Psychotronic films range from sincere social commentary to degrading trash. They concern teenagers, rock 'n' roll, juvenile delinquents, monsters, aliens, killers, spies, detectives, bikers, communists, drugs, natural catastrophes, atomic bombs, the prehistoric past, and the projected future. They star ex-models, ex-sports stars, would-be Marilyns, future Presidents (and First Ladies), dead rock stars and has beens of all types.

Weldon's book includes movies of all these stripes and many more, and just browsing through its pages was like taking a master-level course in offbeat cinema. And remember, this was in 1985, in the early days of home video. In that (wonderful, beautiful, magical) pre-Blockbuster era, there were plenty of mom and pop stores who made their bread-and-butter renting obscure stuff like DR. BUTCHER M.D. or THE HUMAN DUPLICATORS (and, admittedly, porn), but I never would've known these movies existed without Weldon's book prying open my eyes and shoving them in front of my face.

Thanks to his oddly simple yet oddly infectious descriptions and the well-chosen illustrations, you couldn't help but want to watch those films after spending a few minutes with the ENCYCLOPEDIA. The fact that finding many of these movies back then was damn near impossible just meant more time curled up with the book itself.

Nowadays, I've got dozens of cult movie books on my shelf, including Weldon's own sequel, the even-bigger PSYCHOTRONIC VIDEO GUIDE, and my DVD shelves are full of movies mentioned in the ENCYCLOPEDIA, including films I thought I'd never see, like MR. FREEDOM and LAST HOUSE ON DEAD END STREET (about which Weldon notoriously asked "Have you ever heard anyone even admit that they saw it?") But having those movies doesn't make the ENCYCLOPEDIA less valuable, it just makes it seem more impressive.

Somehow, Weldon was able to write about obscure movies that would still be worth seeing 25 years later, and he was able to write about them in a way that would make a film fan -- aka, yours truly -- want to see them more than just about anything else.

Oddly enough, I remember being a bit hesitant about buying THE PSYCHOTRONIC ENCYCLOPEDIA OF FILM back in 1985. It's not that it didn't seem interesting -- hell, I looked at it every time I stopped by the bookstore -- but as if somehow, I knew once I bought this book, there would be no going back.

I'm happy to say I was right. There wasn't. And that's why it's one of the greatest books I've ever owned.

Halloween Thrills, Day 22: More selections from the DVD shelves

2009-10-22T06:10:00.002-05:00

Yesterday, we covered the classics. Today, some horror films of a sleazier nature.

Dario Argento gets us started with the three-disc SUSPIRIA from Anchor Bay (including the original soundtrack by Goblin), followed by another "collector's edition," CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST, with an optional version that cuts out the animal killing scenes (classy!). Then we've got the three Coffin Joe discs from the coffin shaped boxed set (though I tossed the cheap-o coffin years ago). The DVDs, however, still contain those creepy little comic books they came packaged with.

Next up is the metal box TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE set Dark Sky films released in 2006, followed by the disturbing double feature of LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and the much harder-to-find (trust me on this) LAST HOUSE ON DEAD END STREET. Then there's Larry Cohen's great oddball New York monster epic Q: THE WINGED SERPENT and two twisted classics from Synapse, STREET TRASH and THRILLER: A CRUEL PICTURE. (The STREET TRASH disc is worth the price for the making-of doc alone, which is much longer than the actual movie.)

After that, we switch gears and toss in a few DVDs from Something Weird: SCARE THEIR PANTS OFF and SATAN'S BED (featuring, believe it or not, an early appearance by Yoko Ono), DAY OF THE NIGHTMARE and SCREAM OF THE BUTTERFLY, DOCTOR OF DOOM and WRESTLING WOMEN VS. THE AZTEC MUMMY (highly, highly recommended) and finally, trashmeister Andy Milligan's THE GHASTLY ONES and SEEDS OF SIN.

The collection (or, at least, this portion of it) concludes with Jack Hill's black comedy SPIDER BABY, BELA LUGOSI MEETS A BROOKLYN GORILLA (worth having just for the appearance by Jerry Lewis clone Sammy Petrillo), the excellent '70s horror doc THE AMERICAN NIGHTMARE, the Japanese Saturday afternoon favorite DESTROY ALL MONSTERS and the wacked-out Japanese/U.S. co-production, THE MANSTER. Lurking above these discs are some less-sleazy selections: 28 DAYS LATER and the Criterion MONSTERS AND MADMEN collection.

And, if you noticed that this shelf is actually the exact same shelf as the one we saw on the previous day, congratulations. You know what else? King Kong was a model, and Godzilla is just a guy in a suit.

Coming tomorrow: If only there was a book that had listings for all these movies...

Halloween Thrills, Day 21: Selections from the DVD shelves

2009-10-21T06:10:00.005-05:00

Today, for a change of pace, I thought I'd take the lazy man's way out and upload two pictures of horror DVDs in my collection. First up, the "classics."

Warner Bros.' top-notch Val Lewton collection leads things off, followed by the Martin Scorsese "presented" documentary, VAL LEWTON: THE MAN IN THE SHADOWS. Next up, continuing the Lewton theme, is CURSE OF THE DEMON (aka NIGHT OF THE DEMON), which was directed by Lewton's top guy, Jacques Tourneur.

Then we've got Tod Browning's FREAKS, the Turner Classics Lon Chaney collection, the already-referenced-in-this-series NIGHT OF THE HUNTER, Warner Bros. LEGENDS OF HORROR collection (with MAD LOVE, DOCTOR X, THE DEVIL DOLL and others), and the FRANKENSTEIN trilogy: the original, the BRIDE, and ABBOTT AND COSTELLO MEET...

Next up is that swell version of GOJIRA (aka GODZILLA) that came out a year or so ago, followed by the WOLF MAN and CREATURE OF THE BLACK LAGOON sets. Then there's THE BELA LUGOSI COLLECTION (with one of my all-time favorites, THE BLACK CAT), and the unsung BAT WHISPERS, with both versions of the film -- including one in widescreen. Last but not least "collectors" edition of KING KONG, complete with a replica of the original program and that swanky tin box.

And finally, stretched out luxuriously across the top, are the Criterion editions of HAXAN, THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER and CARNIVAL OF SOULS (which includes educational films by directer Herk Harvey.) Under them, for no good reason, is the MOTHRA VS. GODZILLA disc that should by all reason be next to GOJIRA. Sue me.

Coming tomorrow: The classic horror shelf's sleazy cousin.

Halloween Thrills, Day 20: Poster Children, Part 4

2009-10-20T11:13:00.007-05:00

Our survey of horror movie posters ends today with LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT. The original 1972 film, written and directed by Wes Craven (long before NIGHTMARE ON ELM ST.) and produced by Sean Cunningham (long before FRIDAY THE 13th) isn't exactly what I'd call good, but it is effective. Lacking the unnerving pacing and complete control of THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, LAST HOUSE goes for the gut -- literally.

The story, famously based on the same folk tale as Ingmar Bergman's THE VIRGIN SPRING (now there's a good movie) is simple and brutal. Two young women headed for a rock concert in the big city try to buy pot from a gang of scary hippie types. The hippies torment, torture and kill them. Then, seeking shelter, the hippies have the astounding bad luck of stopping by the home of one of the girl's parents. The parents realize what happened and violently kill the hippies. The End. Oh, and spoilers, I guess.

So how do you sell such a sleazy, nasty story? You make sure the poster leaves no doubt as to what the audience is going to see...

The fact that every tagline on that poster is a a killer isn't hurt by the fact that almost none of them are accurate. The house itself isn't anything scary, unless you're talking about the early '70s decorating scheme (zing!). I'm not sure if that whole bit about "the very center of hell" is supposed to imply some sort of supernatural element, but this movie is strictly human evil. And yes, Mari did live in the last house on the left, but as for the "the worst is yet to come" line, as I recall, even the killers seems taken aback by the savagery of the murder, and when she's dead, they pretty much leave her alone.

The best line of all, though, is that last one, and whether it's original to this movie or not, it's justifiably become a classic. "To avoid fainting keep repeating, it's only a movie...only a movie...only a movie..." is actually better than anything in the movie itself. In fact, I liked it so much, I stole it for a CATWOMAN story arc a couple of years ago...

So that's the original. When I heard this was slated for the remake process, I'll admit I was surprised. The only reason the original is still talked about is that it's so vile. It's not especially scary or suspenseful, but it does take you places few other movies are willing to go. And those places, I figured, are not the sort of destinations you find in a big-budget, major-studio movie.

And I was right.

THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT remake of 2009 changes the story significantly. Oh, the basic elements are there -- murderous criminals, pot-smoking teens, surprisingly violent parents -- but they've been tellingly rearranged. Now the criminals (led by Garrett Dillahunt of DEADWOOD, who was born to play a nasty SOB) take the girls hostage because they're desperate prisoners on the lam. Now one of the girls survives to make it back to her parents' lake house (not, significantly, their actual home), and now the parents' brutal violence can be excused as necessary to protect themselves and their daughter instead of being just a bitter bit of ugly (though arguably justified) revenge.

Not a bad movie, but it lacks the sheer intensity of will that its predecessor. It needs to be nastier, crazier and more over-the-top. And so, needless to say, does its poster...

They dump one of the greatest poster lines of all time and replace it with "If bad people hurt someone you love, how far would you go to hurt them back?" Really? That sounds more like the first pitch of a line, something someone blurted out in a development meeting, than words that would actually be printed on thousands of posters. And again, the design is solid -- I especially like the type treatment of the title -- but it's bland, and it's safe. Design-wise, that original poster is a mess, but it has some sort of undeniable power, something that makes you curious about seeing something you know damn well isn't going to be pretty.

And that, my friends, is what horror movie posters are -- or at least should be -- all about.

Halloween Thrills, Day 19: Poster Children, Part 3

2009-10-19T06:01:00.000-05:00

Today's poster is for what I consider one of the all-time great horror movies. Few films conjure a sense of overwhelming dread as well as Tobe Hooper's THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, which is why the movie manages to be so horrifying and yet show you so little. By the time the bad stuff starts -- and make no mistake, what happens is very, very bad -- you're so primed to respond that the movie doesn't have to cover the screen in blood to do its job.

Here's the original poster...

Now this, my friends, this is how you sell a horror movie. You have a terrible looking man wearing what appears to be a human face trying to start a chainsaw as a screaming girl hangs helpless in the background. You have one of the all-time great come-on lines with "Who will survive and" ... and here's the killer ... "what will be left of them?" And you've got that title, which has become such a part of pop culture you forget how devilishly clever it really is. "Texas" implies scary, out-of-the-way Southern horrors. "Chainsaw" tells you what the weapon of choice will be. And "Massacre" lets you know that there are going to be several victims. Even the word "The" hints that this is some legendary, one-of-a-kind event, something you should have heard about -- unless people just aren't talking.

With all that, you don't even need the two bonus taglines, "America's most bizarre and brutal crimes" and "What happened is true. Now the motion picture that's just as real." For one thing, it's obviously not a true story (though it, like PSYCHO, was inspired by the crimes of Wisconsin's Ed Gein), though horror movies have a long tradition of implying they're "based on actual events." But, in the ad line's defense, I would agree that TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE feels uncomfortably real. Like some critic whose name I can't remember said, it's like they gave the camera to the people and had them film their own crimes.

One more design point about this poster: For such a dark movie, the poster is surprisingly bright -- and all the more effective for it. All those elements -- the "what will be left of them" line, the illustration and the title (in bright, lurid red) -- explode out of that white space. You can see -- and read -- this poster from a mile away.

Unfortunately, you can't say the same for the remake poster...

Now this, this is just dull. It's one thing to coast on a movie's reputation and assume the audience knows at least the rough story of what they're getting, but it's something else to just stick a murky close-up of Leatherface (looking unusually soulful) on a black background, put the title in tasteful white type and stick a standard "Inspired by a true story" tagline at the bottom.

All this tells me is that (a) someone has made a slick, big-budget remake of a horror classic, and (b) it has none of the wit, originality or balls of the original. And, having seen both versions of CHAINSAW, I can say that impression is accurate. There's nothing particularly wrong with the remake, but there's also no reason for it to exist (except, of course, to make money). The original CHAINSAW is a bracing, brutal experience even decades after its release. This one is too slick, to polished and too damn calculated to be anything more than a reminder to watch Hooper's version.

Coming tomorrow: LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT

Halloween Thrills, Day 18: Poster Children, Part 2

2009-10-18T08:01:00.001-05:00

Continuing the comparisons between posters for original movies and posters for remakes, we make a brief stop at Camp Crystal Lake...

That's the poster for the original version of the movie. Here's what it contains: a bloody knife (not a machete), a shot of the camp, some scared looking soon-to-be-victims and the tagline "They were warned... they are doomed. And on Friday the 13th, nothing will save them."

Here's what it doesn't contain: A hockey mask.

Instead, the killer is the shape that creates the image, but other than that knife, we don't know anything about him/her. (And, as we were all reminded in the opening of SCREAM, the killer in the original FRIDAY THE 13th was Jason's mom, not Jason himself). The focus in this poster is squarely on the victims. That's interesting, because of all the slasher movies of the first big cycle, this one was marketed squarely at the same age group whose fictional counterparts were hacked and slashed all over Camp Crystal Lake.

Here's the remake poster...

There's one big image, and it's Jason -- complete with hockey mask and machete. This movie -- which is awful, by the way, even worse than the asinine original -- gets the whole Jason's mom plot out of the way before the opening credits and leaves the rest of the movie (and the murders) to her more-famous son. After all, audiences in the 21st century don't want to spend a whole movie having the killer's identity hidden only to find out at the end that it's some old lady. This is FRIDAY THE 13th. They want to see Jason.

Like the Rob Zombie HALLOWEEN poster we discussed yesterday, you could make the argument that this remake one-sheet is a sharper, more subdued piece of design -- more ominous, more forboding. And, like the HALLOWEEN poster, it can afford to be that way. It doesn't have to actually sell the movie, it only has to remind audiences that Jason is back, complete with his mask and machete.

I would argue that this poster lacks the tension and menace of the better-designed Rob Zombie one-sheet, though. It's a dull, dingy image. Nicely rendered, I supposed, but not a lot of zip. Certainly nothing to compare to the bloody, gaudy original.

By the way, that line about this remake being "from the producers of the TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE" is a bait and switch. They're referring to the bland, boring remake, not the biting, bracing original. And speaking of...

Coming tomorrow: THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE

Halloween Thrills, Day 17: Poster Children, Part 1

2009-10-17T07:01:00.000-05:00

I'd like to start a little game of compare and contrast with four horror remakes -- specifically, their posters. Today, we'll focus on HALLOWEEN.

Here's the one for the Rob Zombie remake...

This won't always be the case, but both HALLOWEEN posters have their strong points. The composition of the Zombie poster is much more sophisticated, with Michael being cut off by the right edge of the sheet so it looks like he's moving -- specfically, moving past us and on to his next victim. It's actually an understated take on the story, too, with a desaturated color scheme and the almost relaxed pose of Michael -- shoulders slumped, head down, knife held at his side. In fact, if it weren't for that blade (and the mask), this might look like a poster for a drama.

But of course, it's not, and we know it's not because it says HALLOWEEN in big letters. That's the advantage this poster has over the original Carpenter ad. We already know HALLOWEEN is a violent horror movie, so we don't need the poster to tell us that. All it needs to do is remind us the title of the movie (check!), reassure us that, yes, Michael Myers is indeed killer in question (check!) and tell us who's behind this remake (check! -- with Rob Zombie's name in bigger type than John Carpenter's ever was).

Even the tagline, "The evil has returned," could refer to the plot of Michael Myers seeking revenge or the fact that the HALLOWEEN franchise is back in theaters. It doesn't really matter -- audiences already know the basics.

The audience for John Carpenter's original, of course, didn't have that luxury. So the poster had to tell them, in no uncertain terms, what they were going to be watching...

First of all, "understated" is the last word that describes this poster. Only the fact that it lacks actually bloodshed keeps it from landing in the "lurid" category. That knife, instead of being held limply at someone's side, is either poised for business or already headed into a downstroke. And the way it morphs -- in a distinctly non-Photoshop, 1970s way -- into the meanest pumpkin ever carved, manages to be both goofy and creepy at the same time.

The tagline also can't be a subtle come-on/shout-out like the Zombie version, either. At this point in horror movie history, no one knows what the hell HALLOWEEN is about, so "The Night He Came Home!" is used to promise something is coming back, and whatever it does isn't going to be pleasant. That's a lot for a poster to accomplish, and it couldn't afford to go under the radar. It had to go over the top.

Still, I guess it did the trick, didn't it? We got about a billion sequels and, eventually, that Rob Zombie remake. And, of course, a sequel to that.

Coming tomorrow: FRIDAY THE 13th

Halloween Thrills, Day 16: Yikes! It's Janet Leigh!

2009-10-16T06:02:00.000-05:00

Here's a vintage Halloween pin-up of screen legend Janet Leigh, all dressed up in her witch's outfit ...

And here's another one, this time with some cheap paper skeletons to add to the seasonal atmosphere. Janet still looks great, though...

Like most Hollywood starlets of the classic era, part of her job was posing for these sorts of generic cheesecake photos, both to keep her face (and the rest of her) in the public eye and generate interest for whatever film the studio had lined up for her next.

Of course, in 1960, Janet Leigh would combine sex appeal and horror in one of the greatest movies ever made -- a movie so groundbreaking it probably helped bring an end to the era that produced thephotos pictured above. But you've all seen her revealing moments from that movie, right....?

It's an amazing film -- but not quite as innocently fun as those witch pin-ups.