It’s an AYCYAS! – Braineater joint!
For this Roundtable, I’ve had the pleasure and the honour of tag-teaming with Will Laughlin, as we tackle two versions of the same hominid film: Ishirō Honda’s long-MIA Jūjin Yuki Otoko (Beast-Human Snowman).
Three years after its Japanese release, the film appeared on American screens in the hardly recognisable form of Kenneth G. Crane’s Half Human; which, sadly, has been almost the only way to see this film at all over the past five decades.
.
Braineater reviews Jūjin Yuki Otoko (1955).
And You Call Yourself A Scientist! reviews Half Human (1958).
.
.
#1 by Blake on May 31, 2010 - 6:50 pm
Quote
My mother forked over 15 good dollars back in the day to buy the Rhino VHS of “Half-Human” back in the day. I watched it once, was bored to death, and never tried to watch it again. The Leonard Maltin Movie Guide review (at least the old one) said that the movie was about “a prehistoric zombie monster”, which sounds infinitely more interesting than “Half-Human” actually was.
#2 by Blake on May 31, 2010 - 7:13 pm
Quote
Oh, and I just wanted to say that I love you two for reviewing these two films.
#3 by Blake on May 31, 2010 - 7:29 pm
Quote
(If Read can post multiple comments in a row, I can too) Lyz, I simply cannot wait until your attention to order brings you to review “Beauty and the Liquidman”.
#4 by Read MacGuirtose on June 1, 2010 - 1:45 am
Quote
For some reason, when I mouseover footnote 14 in Will’s review, instead of seeing the footnote I jump to the end of the review… not sure what’s going on here; this happening to anyone else?
By the way, it’s entirely possible I’m missing something here, but I found it a little odd that both reviews referred to Iijima and Machiko as, well, Iijima and Machiko. Isn’t the former a surname, and the latter a given name? It seems to me it would be more natural to refer to them as Takashi and Machiko, but, as I said, maybe I’m missing something…
#5 by Braineater on June 1, 2010 - 7:48 am
Quote
Well, Lyz took her names directly from my synopsis, because the American version doesn’t bother to name them (and when it does name them, it’s wrong). As for my decision, it’s simple: Iijima is introduced as “Iijima”, and is usually referred to as “Iijima” by the other members of the party. Only Machiko calls him “Takashi-san”.
(On the other hand, I can’t refer to Machiko by her family name, since in the original version there are two other members of her family involved. That would be confusing.)
I admit there may be some latent sexism here, too, referring to the helpless screaming female by her familiar name.
Now, about footnote 14: No idea what’s going on. I changed it a little: try it again and let me know what happens.
#6 by Read MacGuirtose on June 1, 2010 - 9:14 am
Quote
Still seems a bit odd to refer to Iijima by his surname when all the other characters in his age group are referred to by their given names—I assume Nakata, Gen, and Kaji are given names? Though I may very well be wrong; I admit I’m not too familiar with Japanese names. (And if those aren’t their given names, then of course never mind.) Still, I suppose it would have been equally odd to refer to him as “Takashi” when nearly every character in the movie refers to him as “Iijima”, so maybe there was no way to avoid a bit of oddness.
As for the footnote… I’m still having the same issue. Although, after a little experimentation, I find that the problem only occurs with Google Chrome (which happens to be the browser I was originally reading the review with); in Firefox the footnote works fine. So… well, probably not important, anyway.
#7 by Braineater on June 1, 2010 - 10:55 am
Quote
I don’t have any other information for Nakata (family name), Gen or Kaji (given names). As far as I can remember, nobody calls them anything else.
It’s mostly relative to age, gender and social position: Gen and Kaji were friends on the ski trip, the same age and gender as Iijima… er, Takashi… so they get called by their given names. But, e.g., the unseen Takeno was older than the others, so Iijima/Takashi/”the boy” calls out to him as “Takeno” during the search.
(Finally, I found “Iijima” much easier to type quickly than “Takashi”, and that may have influenced my decision on some level.)
#8 by Mr. Rational on June 1, 2010 - 5:27 pm
Quote
Lyz: Working at an American university as I do, perhaps I can shed some light on this…
“Rayburn offers to tell the story of his experiences to the men who are both his ‘colleagues’ and ‘his dearest friends’….which I guess explains why he proceeds to address them as Dr Osborne and Dr Templeton. (Although it doesn’t explain why the credits call them both ‘Professor’.)”
Well, okay, I can’t explain the whole “I call my closest friends by their formal titles” business. But my guess? The “writers” of Half-Human were among the first generation to be influenced by the loosening of the formal atmosphere in American academia. Following World War II, when the GI Bill went into effect, this was a common occurrence, and remains so to this day — particularly with regard to the proper form of address for faculty members.
In many American colleges and universities, it’s been the case for a while now that “Professor” is the generic term of address for anyone who holds a certain type of position at a university, much like you might call a high school teacher “Mrs.” or “Miss” or “Mr.” So anyone who is the teacher of record for a class at an American institution of higher learning might well be recognized in conversation by that title, whether they are a lowly graduate assistant with a master’s degree (like me) or a university professor with a doctorate. This is in contrast to other countries — for example, Germany, where they’re quite strict about who gets to be called “Professor.”
I think the reason behind this Americanism is that most people at large don’t really understand the distinctions that academics make amongst professors. For example, in order of importance from least to greatest rank, we have: adjunct, assistant, associate, full, university/distinguished, and emeritus professors. It’s easier to just use the generic. And a professor with a doctorate will often be called both “Professor” and “Doctor,” with no implication of a lesser status attached to either of those titles. That sort of casual titling is probably what’s going on here, and most academics have come to accept it. (In fact, since most professors have their doctorates, many people now make the mistake of using “Professor” and “Doctor” interchangeably, even when addressing people like me!)
#9 by The Rev. D.D. on June 1, 2010 - 6:42 pm
Quote
I was spared seeing Half-Human when I chanced upon that Rhino VHS by recalling reading somewhere (probably from G-Fan) that it was a butchered version of a Japanese movie.
Nowadays, of course, I kind of wish I had it, but anyway.
I envy Braineater for getting to see the original. It is second on my kaiju eiga wish list after Wangmagwi.
#10 by Braineater on June 2, 2010 - 8:50 pm
Quote
Oh, Wangmagwi! Somebody online who’d seen it said there really wasn’t much of a plot. “Unfortunately, this means that the monster is what takes up the movie’s running time as it wanders around the city,” he said.
To which I say: Droooool.
But that’s just me, the guy who ran to the store the day Yongary came out in widescreen. I have a feeling if Wangmagwi was released on video outside Korea, after the initial shock passed, it would lose its allure pretty quickly. Still, if I ever get my hands on it, you’ll be the first to know, Rev.
#11 by The Rev. D.D. on June 2, 2010 - 9:05 pm
Quote
I appreciate it, and would reciprocate, but honestly I can’t imagine anyone out-tracking you on these sorts of things.
I’m sure it’s not that great, and much like with Yongary I’d end up thinking, “Great, seen it at last. Now I don’t have to ever again.” Still, giant monster movies are my weakness and I’ll watch one at least once, no matter how bad (Zarkorr the Invader!, Gamera vs. Zigra…looking at you here.)
#12 by The Rev. on March 9, 2015 - 6:26 pm
Quote
This seems a relevant bit of thread-cromancy…
I thought Will, and anyone else who likes the giant monsters, might be interested in this; apparently there’s an effort to get Wangmagwi put onto YouTube by “The Korean Film Archive” for all to enjoy. I was led to a note about this; I don’t believe I can post links, so look for “Kaijusaurus” on tumblr. And take a few grains of salt with it, I suppose.
#13 by Braineater on March 12, 2015 - 9:20 am
Quote
We can hope. The KFA has a copy they trot out for festivals now and then. They seem to be remarkably uninterested in making it available for viewing on video or online, though they do make other interesting films available. Every few years somebody outside Korea makes an attempt to persuade them to change their minds, but it hasn’t happened yet.
I’d heard it was scheduled to be broadcast on Korean TV — I don’t remember if that was in 2013 or 2014, but I’d hoped somebody would DVR it and put it up somewhere. That also hasn’t happened, as far as I know.
#14 by The Mud Puppy on June 2, 2010 - 11:37 am
Quote
I love the lines asking about whether the baby snowman would be able to “differentiate between male and female” and whether he would have a “marked preference.” There’s only two ways to read that line and they’re both kooky:
1. The way Lyz reads it, which makes you wonder why exactly they’re so concerned over the creature’s sexual preference
2. They’re asking if it could change sex if it so chose. Which, um…yeah. I’m not aware of any primate being able to do that, but sure, might as well ask if a Yeti could…
#15 by lyzard on June 2, 2010 - 4:25 pm
Quote
The “scientific” dialogue in Half Human almost takes away the bad taste from the misuse of the original film.
Pup, what they’re actually asking here is whether the Snowpeople can tell the difference between male and female humans; but really, this passage of dialogue couldn’t be any more garbled if it were the deliberate work of seven expert screenwriters…instead of, you know, none.
Mr R., I know that films don’t understand (or care) about the correct gradations of academic titles, so I’ve long given up on expecting accuracy, and just accepted that anyone in any way connected with a university will be “the Professor”. However, a little internal consistency would be nice! (I didn’t even mention that Dr Templeton calls his colleague Professor Osborne!)
Blake, thank you, and I will certainly get around (eventually) to Beauty And The Liquidman…not least because it has SUBTITLES, glorious SUBTITLES!! 🙂
#16 by Mr. Rational on June 2, 2010 - 6:26 pm
Quote
“(I didn’t even mention that Dr Templeton calls his colleague Professor Osborne!)”
Oh. My. :::chuckles::: In the immortal words of Malcolm Reynolds, “Well, now. That has an effect on the landscape.” You would think anyone writing a segment of a film featuring academics would at least endeavor to ascertain how they talked to each other. Then again, given some of the whoppers you quoted in your review, I’m not surprised the lack of accuracy extends to inconsistent titling.
Sorry to bend your ear with my previous overlong opus.
#17 by lyzard on June 2, 2010 - 7:43 pm
Quote
Oh, that’s okay. I gave up on the notion that anyone ever tried to find out how scientists talk, at least, when it first dawned on me that films always have them addressing one another as, Doctor. (Even in Them!, where the scientists in question are father and daughter!)
#18 by Read MacGuirtose on June 2, 2010 - 8:03 pm
Quote
I have a short film I’m writing that I plan to shoot one day fairly soon in which this is actually sort of a plot point. The characters are four entomologists who are all long-time colleagues and most of whom call each other by their first name — but one character addresses all the others as Dr. [Surname]. (That is, as “Dr.”, followed by the surname, not literally as “Dr. Surname”.) At one point about in the middle of the short, another character finally points out to him how odd this is and asks him why he does it, and…
Well, anyway, I don’t want to give a complete synopsis here; mostly just wanted to agree that, yeah, having scientists on close terms address each other as “Doctor” is kind of silly, and that I was planning on doing something with that concept…
#19 by Braineater on June 2, 2010 - 8:31 pm
Quote
Don’t give up on this Diabolical Dr. Surname character. I think he’s got possibilities. Years from now, cult movie fans on whatever-comes-after-the-Internet will testily remind people that it’s pronounced “Suer-NAHM…”
#20 by The Rev. D.D. on June 2, 2010 - 9:08 pm
Quote
Oh dear.
Do I laugh, or do I try hard to reach through my monitor and slap you?
*bonk*
…Laughter it is. You win this round, Laughlin.
#21 by Baron Scarpia on June 3, 2010 - 1:53 pm
Quote
For some reason, I’m reminded of the part in The Swarm with Richard Chamberlain and Jose Ferrar calling each other ‘Doctor‘ as if they were saying ‘Bastard‘.
It always makes me giggle, I’m afraid.
#22 by lyzard on June 4, 2010 - 5:50 am
Quote
Aack! You’re making me want to re-watch The Swarm! – speaking of bastards…
#23 by The Rev. D.D. on June 7, 2010 - 11:20 am
Quote
Bastard-coated bastards?
#24 by lyzard on June 7, 2010 - 4:19 pm
Quote
…with bastard filling.
#25 by The Rev. D.D. on June 8, 2010 - 10:01 am
Quote
But that’s the worst kind!!
#26 by MatthewF on June 5, 2010 - 1:59 am
Quote
Don’t do it, step away from the dvd, there’s only suffering here.
#27 by Baron Scarpia on June 6, 2010 - 2:39 am
Quote
The best way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it…