If I’m going to be this long in coming, I can at least have the decency to bring a whole crapload of reviews with me, right? First the roundtables…
Here’s the Bad Place, which I’ve perverted into an examination of gothic romance:
Crimson Peak (2015), in which the house is full of ghosts, but they’re the least of anyone’s problems…
Dragonwyck (1946), in which you’ll know the girl is in trouble when her charming rich relative turns out to be Vincent Price…
The Maze (1953), in which the gothic and the Lovecraftian meet…
and…
Rebecca (1940), which, so far as the movies are concerned, is kind of the start of the whole thing.
And here’s Dino De Laurentiis (or at least a downpayment on him):
Hannibal (2001), in which De Laurentiis and Thomas Harris foolishly turn Hannibal Lecter into a franchise character…
and…
Mandingo (1975), in which Dino convinces Paramount Pictures to help him impersonate Franco Prosperi and Gualtiero Jacopetti.
Finally, here’s everything else:
Americathon (1979), in which the White House launches a telethon to keep the USA in business…
Cobra (1986), in which crime is a disease, but Golan and Globus have found the cure…
Hercules (1983), in which Luigi Cozzi splits the difference between cashing in on Conan and cashing in on Star Wars…
The Adventures of Hercules (1984), in which he does it again…
Midnight Special (2016), or Close Encounters on Witch Mountain with D.A.R.Y.L. the Extraterrestrial…
Moon Zero Two (1969), in which Hammer gets an early start on their notorious 70’s out-of-touch-ness by offering a boring space Western in riposte to 2001.
and…
Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015), which was almost worth suffering through the prequels.
#1 by lyzard on June 1, 2016 - 2:40 am
Quote
Good God! Yes, I think we can honestly say that was worth the wait! 😀
(And I was starting to worry just a little…)
#2 by lyzard on June 1, 2016 - 2:42 am
Quote
What does it say about me that I started with Mandingo?
#3 by Jason Farrell on June 1, 2016 - 1:40 pm
Quote
What does it say about me that I started with COBRA?
#4 by TangerinePython on June 1, 2016 - 7:23 am
Quote
Must it always be feast or famine with El Santo?!
So glad to see you’re back in fighting form.
#5 by Redcrow on June 1, 2016 - 8:09 am
Quote
Yay, I’ve got my wish for cannibals with capital H in this roundtable! Thanks!
A small correction, though, and I hope I won’t get yelled at: Lecter/Clarice doesn’t qualify as a “slashfic”, due to it being heterosexual relationship. “Slash” is used to denote m/m and f/f stuff only, and has been so for years. (Why yes, I’m one of *those* people; nope, not ashamed. Fanfiction isn’t inherently more ridiculous and derision-worthy than any other hobby.)
#6 by El Santo on June 1, 2016 - 10:33 am
Quote
Interesting. Okay, in that case, what’s the accepted term for the analogous fanfic genre focused on extra-canonical m/f couplings? Or do not enough people ship Barclay and the Duras Sisters for that sort of thing to need a name of its own?
#7 by Redcrow on June 1, 2016 - 1:04 pm
Quote
Het. From “hetero”.
#8 by El Santo on June 1, 2016 - 2:06 pm
Quote
Hmm… Is there a single term encompassing all fanfic premised on extracanonical romantic relationships, regardless of the sexual orientation of the participants? ‘Cause so far, this is looking like I have a choice between a not-quite-right term that communicates the desired meaning to a general audience, and a correct term that no one outside of fanfic culture will understand.
#9 by Redcrow on June 1, 2016 - 2:56 pm
Quote
Just “romance”. I don’t think it’s helpful for what you’re trying to convey. Sorry.
Melodrama, maybe? “Vile out-of-character fanfic of his own book”? “Melodrama” or “fanfic”, I think, could work in context.
#10 by supersonic man on June 6, 2016 - 6:06 pm
Quote
I’m pretty sure I’ve seen the term slashfic widely used for hetero relationships. This may be incorrect to purists but I would bet that it’s the easiest way to be widely understood.
I definitely have to check out Crimson Peak.
#11 by PCachu on June 7, 2016 - 4:02 pm
Quote
I think the term you’re looking for here is “shipping”, the extra-canonical assertion of relationSHIPs between characters, typically intimate in nature (though there is the occasional exception), both biologically-aligned and what-have-you. I will grant that this is a term whose use is largely reserved to the most overzealous of fandoms, but if you were willing to use “slashfic” as a descriptor, that can’t be as off-putting as I’d think otherwise.
#12 by Redcrow on June 1, 2016 - 8:25 am
Quote
Also thank you for the great review of Crimson Peak.
#13 by Jason Farrell on June 1, 2016 - 1:26 pm
Quote
My lord, that was quite the word count on your update!
Thanks El Santo…the trailer for CRIMSON PEAK made it seem like another urban-fantasy romance…had no idea it was a Del Toro…immediately went and bought the DVD at Amazon
#14 by The Rev. on June 2, 2016 - 11:21 am
Quote
Yeah, I’m still puzzled at how I missed a del Toro movie this completely. I will also be finding it ASAP. I’m also interested in the other movies from the “Bad Place” roundtable he reviewed, having seen none of them.
#15 by goddessoftransitory on June 1, 2016 - 6:00 pm
Quote
Crimson Peak!
Here’s a hysterical and spoiler-riffic take on the movie from the site The Toast:
http://the-toast.net/2015/10/22/movie-yelling-with-nicole-and-mallory-crimson-peak/
Also, El Santo,
**SPOILERS**
What do you think of the theory that the siblings are ghosts or vampires? The pictures of them from their former hunting sites are dated quite far apart, yet they don’t appear to have aged–but nothing seems to be made of this in the film.
#16 by El Santo on June 1, 2016 - 9:20 pm
Quote
Wait– that’s a real thing? The people who make that suggestion… Did they watch the whole film? Like, including the part at the end where **SINCE WE’RE ALREADY TALKING ABOUT SPOILERS AND ALL THAT** they both die and then come back as ghosts?
#17 by goddessoftransitory on June 1, 2016 - 6:30 pm
Quote
Annnnnd Rebecca!
In the film’s defense, neither Selznick nor Hitchcock wanted to change the circumstances of Rebecca’s actual death. They were basically forced into it by the Production Code, which stated no character could profit from, or remain unpunished for, committing a crime.
This changes Max’s entire personality from the novel–while he’s just as much of a rotter, his seizing of power back from Rebecca’s endless, vile mechinations gives him the strength to face down the perils of the last part of the novel alongside the narrator and puts them on a far more equal footing, albeit one of somewhat flexible morality, to say the least.
#18 by Shelomit on June 2, 2016 - 1:07 am
Quote
El Santo and Redcrow–would “shipping” work here, i.e. shipping one character with another regardless of canon?
#19 by Redcrow on June 2, 2016 - 7:04 am
Quote
“Some deeply disturbed fan’s baroque shipping”? “The vile shipping conclusion”? Doesn’t sound right to me. I’d just go with “baroque fanfic” and “vile pseudo-romantic (or just “romantic” in quote marks) conclusion”, but I’m not the author here.
#20 by Anna on June 3, 2016 - 12:02 am
Quote
Awesome already, glad to see you back-to-battery. 🙂
“Cobra” seemed remarkably stupid to me even back in the day, friends rented it once at a birthday celebration. I guess I was the only one that didn’t like it. For me, I just don’t enjoy violent cop/vigilante movies, unless they have something to say, I really do enjoy “LA Confidential”, forex. Stallone does have a good line, about not finding any new leads while Brigitte was in the Lady’s Room. I always enjoy Brian Thompsen too. Remember when he played a Klingon on ST:TNG?
My ex-GF bailed on me twice when I offered to take her to see “Force Awakens”, from your review, it seems pretty ‘meh’.
I think non-canon romance stories are just called “Shipfics”.
#21 by El Santo on June 3, 2016 - 8:56 am
Quote
“I just don’t enjoy violent cop/vigilante movies, unless they have something to say”
And to the extent that Cobra does, everything it has to say is reprehensible.
“Remember when [Thompson] played a Klingon on ST:TNG?”
Not only do I remember that, but I also remember watching what turned out to be the final episode of “Werewolf” (it was intended merely to be the season finale, but the show wasn’t renewed for a second season), and being vaguely mollified that if they had to kill off Janos Skorszeny, at least they were bringing Thompson in as a replacement villain.
#22 by Anna on June 3, 2016 - 10:46 am
Quote
“Reprehensible” is the appropriate word, yes. 🙂 At least the original “Mad Max” makes the point that their cops are as crazy as the gangs. Movies like “Cobra”, et al. seem to be saying that cops *should* be no different than terrorists.
I remember “Werewolf”. Thompson was on the TV show based on the “Vampire:The Masquerade” pen-and-paper RPG as well.
#23 by goddessoftransitory on June 3, 2016 - 2:04 pm
Quote
Yeah, my husband and I watched Cobra a while ago and spent the whole time going “but he’s basically a serial killer in the pay of the cops. This is some of the worst ‘police’ work we’ve ever seen on film and that is saying something. HE JUST FLAT OUT MURDERED THAT GUY” the entire time.
We did enjoy the fully-functioning-while-entirely-deserted steel mill right next to the equally abandoned cornfield, both a quarter mile out of LA, though.
#24 by Richard on June 8, 2016 - 4:43 pm
Quote
El Santo, you mention in your review of “Mandingo” that “pretty, put-upon Scarlet O’Hara is actually the villain of” Gone With the Wind….
I’d pay good money (well, metaphorically speaking) to read your review of GWTW…..
#25 by RogerBW on June 20, 2016 - 1:01 pm
Quote
Being reminded of Cobra, which yeah, I actually paid to see in the cinema, suggests that, while it might be a little outside his usual remit, I’d love to read El Santo’s take on the Dirty Harry series some time. (Particularly bearing in mind how very clearly the first one wasn’t meant to be part of a series at all.)
I take it you’ve seen the Emo Kylo Ren (@kylor3n) twitter account…
I suspect the “female dullard” thing may be to encourage the (female) viewer to think “I could do better than that”.
Julianne Moore has always been one of the troupers, for me: nothing amazing, but even with a novice director and a lousy script she’ll carry a role and get it basically right.
#26 by Vlad on July 15, 2016 - 3:35 pm
Quote
It looks like El Santo’s site is down. Anybody know what’s going on? Is he OK?
#27 by Fuzzy on July 19, 2016 - 4:24 pm
Quote
I was wondering the same thing, but as of today it appears to be back up. He’ll probably give an explanation in his next update; hopefully it was just a hosting issue, rather than something more serious.
#28 by El Santo on July 20, 2016 - 1:54 pm
Quote
And now you all know what it looks like when someone doesn’t pay their domain registry fees on time…
#29 by PB210 on June 8, 2022 - 6:09 pm
Quote
“Think New Gods; think Jack Kirby’s run on The Mighty Thor; most of all, think Jacques Lob and Georges Pichard’s Ulysses. That’s the intended register for Hercules— larger-than-life heroism, magic technology, and drugged-out mysticism all at the same time. There aren’t a lot of movies to fit that bill, either. Cozzi’s Hercules films and Masters of the Universe were pretty much it until Marvel Studios released Thor in 2009”.
It actually came out in 2011. Your error ensues perhaps from a thread from circa 2008 regarding the then upcoming Thor film, then anticipated for 2009; in said thread Count Karnstein stated the following:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/monsterkidclassichorrorforum/marvel-s-thor-2011-t14587.html
First, I consider the Batman (1966) movie to be the finest superhero movie ever. Totally correctly done, faithful, etc. But I hate Batman! Well, not hate, but he’s probably not even in my Top 100 Comic Book Characters of All Time…..Put it this way. I’d much rather be dead wrong about Iron Man, and much rather be dead, period, than have a sucky Thor movie”.
Regarding Count Karnstein’s asserted favorite, it did not stray that far from the feel of the comic books from 1944-to-1964. As the poster Count Karnstein pointed out, those comic books:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/search/topic/topic/14587
“had giant pennies and stuffed dinosaurs, was wearing caveman, zebra, and rainbow costumes, teamed up with Bat-Mite, split in two, melded with Superman, fought a living #2 pencil, drowned in giant gravy boats and menaced by giant sized water pistols, tennis rackets, and all sorts of insane absurdities long before the Batman movie or tv show were released….Dozier was bringing the characters to the screen in the manner in which they had been portrayed in the comics. Was there ever a silly, absurd, ridiculous Green Hornet comic book? If so, it’s escaped my attention for the better part of 40 years. Did we ever see a Caveman Green Hornet or a Green Hornet in a rainbox/zebra/dayglo red suit? Did we ever see Green Hornet being drowned in a giant gravy boat or being chased by aliens and dinosaurs? Was there ever an Ace the Green Hornet Dog? How about a Hornet-Mite?
No? I didn’t think so. There’s your answer. It’s literally that simple. Dozier was taking characters and putting them on the screen. Green Hornet was always played straight and serious in the comics/strips/radio, so he was done that way for tv. Batman was as absurd, silly, goofy, and ridiculous as anything else that has ever appeared in comics, and so that’s how he appeared on-screen”.