- Published on
Readers, take note: this is why I always (ALWAYS!) caution folks to never get all that attached to projects before they're actually scheduled for release.
In all honesty, I thought something might be up when -- not all that long ago -- there was a sudden flurry of news blurbs hitting the Information Superhighway about (all of a sudden) these Warner Bros. and DC Comics properties being turned into major motion pictures, telefilms, and television series. Why, it seemed like a week wouldn't go by without yet one more piece of comic book intellectual property was going to be given an adaptation! Casts were announced! Directors were hired! Scripts were being written! By gosh and by golly, it just seemed like there would be no end to it!
And -- dare I mention this -- it all happened not all that long after Hollywood superspender and creative AntiChrist (my term) JJ Abrams was suddenly gifted All Things DC by the suits at Warner Bros.
Hmm ...
Even back at the time, I thought a number of these projects were a bit suspect. After all, a few of them involved superheroes that -- no disrespect intended as I'm one of DC Comics' longer lasting fans -- just weren't big names. You know? They certainly didn't have marquee credentials. Blue Beetle? The Wonder Twins? Batgirl? Yes, yes, yes, each property -- along with their respective characters -- certainly have their own audience. It'd be silly to argue otherwise. But a solid handful of them going into active development ... all at the same time ... with no advance preparation or market testing or anything that's typically gone into building a brand? Really?
Lo and behold, a few months back it was announced that Warner Bros. new management had begun rethinking some of these assignments. From what little speculation had been put into the blogosphere, some of this was owed to the creative destruction left in the wake of the Justice League movie -- don't even get me started on the whole Joss Whedon and Zack Snyder business -- as well as the fact that none of these projects had turned much (if any) profit. And -- if memory serves me -- it was about this time that the blibs and blurbs started to leak out about how the DC TV properties on The CW had, essentially, bankrupted a network and even pushed the whole shebang so very deeply into the red that the channel was put up on the seller's block for anyone who wanted it. The future of these shows was suddenly in question, and word recently hit the web that the beloved incarnation of The Flash starring Grant Gustin would be ending with a truncated season next year. (Mind you: all of this hit also not all that long as did the news involving the silver screen 'star' Ezra Miller had been engaging in what looked to be a life of debauchery while on Warner Bros.'s dime.)
See ... nothing in or about Hollywood happens in a vacuum, people. If you're hearing these things being featured so predominantly in the press, then that likely means that somewhere some suit wants you to hear these things ... and that suit is likely hoping it'll inflict the maximum amount of damage to serve whatever secret and nefarious cause he or she supports.
It looks like that goal was achieved. Executives have been fired. The future of The CW, HBO Max, and a whole lot of intellectual property has been put in doubt ... and now the Batgirl film -- which has actually been completed -- is being permanently shelved so that the studio can claim its $90 million budget as a tax loss.
Ouch.
Just how bad must that film be?
Anyone who has done any bit of serious reading regarding some of the dumbest things Warner Bros. executives are allegedly to have said about the DC Comics films knows that this hasn't been the happiest creative marriage in all of Tinseltown. As is often the case when mergers of this sort happen, there's a love/hate relationship that blossoms very quickly; when those emotions are not brought under control, then both sides are apt to develop some bad blood along the way. I'm not entirely certain what any suit who greenlit a Batgirl movie was thinking -- especially putting it in the hands of a two-person directing team with no established track record in genre projects much less superhero stuff. Perhaps they thought, "Well, Batgirl isn't a big name, how big could the risk really be?" "Maybe it'll score well with the kids." "If anything, maybe the youth will confuse it with a Marvel movie and come to ours anyway?"
Whatever the truth may be and whatever efforts that went into creating a film that has been dubbed "irredeemable" by test audiences, I suspect there will be a few more heads chopped in the days ahead for the Batgirl supporters.
At least we can watch that from afar and enjoy the popcorn.
-- EZ
In all honesty, I thought something might be up when -- not all that long ago -- there was a sudden flurry of news blurbs hitting the Information Superhighway about (all of a sudden) these Warner Bros. and DC Comics properties being turned into major motion pictures, telefilms, and television series. Why, it seemed like a week wouldn't go by without yet one more piece of comic book intellectual property was going to be given an adaptation! Casts were announced! Directors were hired! Scripts were being written! By gosh and by golly, it just seemed like there would be no end to it!
And -- dare I mention this -- it all happened not all that long after Hollywood superspender and creative AntiChrist (my term) JJ Abrams was suddenly gifted All Things DC by the suits at Warner Bros.
Hmm ...
Even back at the time, I thought a number of these projects were a bit suspect. After all, a few of them involved superheroes that -- no disrespect intended as I'm one of DC Comics' longer lasting fans -- just weren't big names. You know? They certainly didn't have marquee credentials. Blue Beetle? The Wonder Twins? Batgirl? Yes, yes, yes, each property -- along with their respective characters -- certainly have their own audience. It'd be silly to argue otherwise. But a solid handful of them going into active development ... all at the same time ... with no advance preparation or market testing or anything that's typically gone into building a brand? Really?
Lo and behold, a few months back it was announced that Warner Bros. new management had begun rethinking some of these assignments. From what little speculation had been put into the blogosphere, some of this was owed to the creative destruction left in the wake of the Justice League movie -- don't even get me started on the whole Joss Whedon and Zack Snyder business -- as well as the fact that none of these projects had turned much (if any) profit. And -- if memory serves me -- it was about this time that the blibs and blurbs started to leak out about how the DC TV properties on The CW had, essentially, bankrupted a network and even pushed the whole shebang so very deeply into the red that the channel was put up on the seller's block for anyone who wanted it. The future of these shows was suddenly in question, and word recently hit the web that the beloved incarnation of The Flash starring Grant Gustin would be ending with a truncated season next year. (Mind you: all of this hit also not all that long as did the news involving the silver screen 'star' Ezra Miller had been engaging in what looked to be a life of debauchery while on Warner Bros.'s dime.)
See ... nothing in or about Hollywood happens in a vacuum, people. If you're hearing these things being featured so predominantly in the press, then that likely means that somewhere some suit wants you to hear these things ... and that suit is likely hoping it'll inflict the maximum amount of damage to serve whatever secret and nefarious cause he or she supports.
It looks like that goal was achieved. Executives have been fired. The future of The CW, HBO Max, and a whole lot of intellectual property has been put in doubt ... and now the Batgirl film -- which has actually been completed -- is being permanently shelved so that the studio can claim its $90 million budget as a tax loss.
Ouch.
Just how bad must that film be?
Anyone who has done any bit of serious reading regarding some of the dumbest things Warner Bros. executives are allegedly to have said about the DC Comics films knows that this hasn't been the happiest creative marriage in all of Tinseltown. As is often the case when mergers of this sort happen, there's a love/hate relationship that blossoms very quickly; when those emotions are not brought under control, then both sides are apt to develop some bad blood along the way. I'm not entirely certain what any suit who greenlit a Batgirl movie was thinking -- especially putting it in the hands of a two-person directing team with no established track record in genre projects much less superhero stuff. Perhaps they thought, "Well, Batgirl isn't a big name, how big could the risk really be?" "Maybe it'll score well with the kids." "If anything, maybe the youth will confuse it with a Marvel movie and come to ours anyway?"
Whatever the truth may be and whatever efforts that went into creating a film that has been dubbed "irredeemable" by test audiences, I suspect there will be a few more heads chopped in the days ahead for the Batgirl supporters.
At least we can watch that from afar and enjoy the popcorn.
-- EZ
- Published on
On this day in 2013 (in the great down under that is Australia), These Final Hours enjoyed its first theatrical presentation ever when it played for audiences in attendance of the Melbourne International Film Festival.
Written and directed by Zak Hilditch, this Apocalypse/Drama took a rather dark look into -- as the title suggests -- mankind's final hours inhabiting this Big Blue Marble. It starred Jessica De Gouw (from TV's short-lived Dracula series as well as a short guest-starring stint aboard the CW's popular Arrow), Nathan Phillips (from the very good single season Syfy series Hunters), and Angourie Rice (Marvel's Spider-Man: Homecoming, Spider-Man: Far From Home, and Spider-Man: No Way Home). Here's the plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:
"A self-obsessed young man makes his way to the party-to-end-all-parties on the last day on Earth, but ends up saving the life of a little girl searching for her father. Their relationship ultimately leads him on the path to redemption."
To the film's credit, These Final Hours enjoyed a wealth of praise by way of the awards it was nominated for and/or won from a variety of sources.
The film was nominated as the 'Best Feature' at the 2013 Adelaide Film Festival, an international event held over two weeks in October in Adelaide, South Australia. [ Website ]
In 2015 at the Australian Film Critics Association Awards, actress Sarah Snook took home the 'Best Actress In A Supporting Role' for her work in the motion picture while Angourie Rice and Nathan Phillips had to settle for nominations alone in their respective categories of 'Best Actress' and 'Best Actor.' [ Website ]
In 2015 at the West Australian Screen Awards, Stuart Campbell and Nathan Stone were nominated in the category of 'Best Visual Effects.' [ Website ]
Written and directed by Zak Hilditch, this Apocalypse/Drama took a rather dark look into -- as the title suggests -- mankind's final hours inhabiting this Big Blue Marble. It starred Jessica De Gouw (from TV's short-lived Dracula series as well as a short guest-starring stint aboard the CW's popular Arrow), Nathan Phillips (from the very good single season Syfy series Hunters), and Angourie Rice (Marvel's Spider-Man: Homecoming, Spider-Man: Far From Home, and Spider-Man: No Way Home). Here's the plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:
"A self-obsessed young man makes his way to the party-to-end-all-parties on the last day on Earth, but ends up saving the life of a little girl searching for her father. Their relationship ultimately leads him on the path to redemption."
To the film's credit, These Final Hours enjoyed a wealth of praise by way of the awards it was nominated for and/or won from a variety of sources.
The film was nominated as the 'Best Feature' at the 2013 Adelaide Film Festival, an international event held over two weeks in October in Adelaide, South Australia. [ Website ]
In 2015 at the Australian Film Critics Association Awards, actress Sarah Snook took home the 'Best Actress In A Supporting Role' for her work in the motion picture while Angourie Rice and Nathan Phillips had to settle for nominations alone in their respective categories of 'Best Actress' and 'Best Actor.' [ Website ]
In 2015 at the West Australian Screen Awards, Stuart Campbell and Nathan Stone were nominated in the category of 'Best Visual Effects.' [ Website ]
- Published on
Regular readers 'round these parts know all too well that I don't always agree with the politics that actors tend to wrap around themselves like a security blanket, but I do have to say that one of the most inclusive talent I'd ever had the opportunity to listen to was the great Nichelle Nichols.
Honestly, I can't remember what the issue was I heard her discuss was ... and that's largely because she never let her passion for the subject run away with it (the way so many do), instead just choosing to maintain a focus on pointing out why it mattered to her while also allowing for a difference of opinion. That alone is something I find refreshing -- especially amongst Star Trek's die-hard Left-leaning contingent of on-screen and behind-the-scenes talent. Again: I don't harbor ill thoughts toward anyone's politics ... I just resent having it thrust down my throat. Ms. Nichols was far more accomodating and understanding than those she surrounded herself with, and maybe that's owed to the sum total of her life experience. I couldn't say ... I'm only hypothesizing.
In any event, she was definitely a pioneer among some of TV's greats of her era. I think we've all heard the story about her wanting to leave Trek behind during its original run because she wasn't getting enough to do, only to have the great Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. give her exactly the words of encouragement she needed at such a pivotal time in both her life and ours (as a species). Who knows? Maybe because someone saw something special in her -- while they had a difference of opinion -- she committed her life to giving others the same consideration? Stranger things have happened.
I suspect for many of us, we'll always see her as one of the key members who served aboard the fateful Starship Enterprise, and -- though I could be wrong -- that's a legacy I think she adored in her own way. She definitely burned a bright flame while serving as a member of one of TV's most important ensembles ... and we'll always have to commitment and dedication to appreciate in even the darkest of times.
Thoughts and prayers are extended to the family and friends of Ms. Nichols. May she forever rest in peace.
-- EZ
Honestly, I can't remember what the issue was I heard her discuss was ... and that's largely because she never let her passion for the subject run away with it (the way so many do), instead just choosing to maintain a focus on pointing out why it mattered to her while also allowing for a difference of opinion. That alone is something I find refreshing -- especially amongst Star Trek's die-hard Left-leaning contingent of on-screen and behind-the-scenes talent. Again: I don't harbor ill thoughts toward anyone's politics ... I just resent having it thrust down my throat. Ms. Nichols was far more accomodating and understanding than those she surrounded herself with, and maybe that's owed to the sum total of her life experience. I couldn't say ... I'm only hypothesizing.
In any event, she was definitely a pioneer among some of TV's greats of her era. I think we've all heard the story about her wanting to leave Trek behind during its original run because she wasn't getting enough to do, only to have the great Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. give her exactly the words of encouragement she needed at such a pivotal time in both her life and ours (as a species). Who knows? Maybe because someone saw something special in her -- while they had a difference of opinion -- she committed her life to giving others the same consideration? Stranger things have happened.
I suspect for many of us, we'll always see her as one of the key members who served aboard the fateful Starship Enterprise, and -- though I could be wrong -- that's a legacy I think she adored in her own way. She definitely burned a bright flame while serving as a member of one of TV's most important ensembles ... and we'll always have to commitment and dedication to appreciate in even the darkest of times.
Thoughts and prayers are extended to the family and friends of Ms. Nichols. May she forever rest in peace.
-- EZ
- Published on
As I’ve come to understand the facts of the matter, 1965’s Voyage To The Prehistoric Planet is a bit of a cinematic mash-up, much of which can be traced back to genre legend Roger Corman.
Wikipedia.org reports that Corman was in need to some footage to craft a few theatrical epics of his own, so he purchased the rights to re-use scenes and sequences from a handful of Soviet releases: Nebo zovyot (1959), Planeta bur (1962), and Mechte navstrechu (1963). Nebo zovyot is the story of two countries competing against one another to land on Mars; Planeta bur spins the yarn of cosmonauts encountering hungry creatures on Venus; and Mechte navstrechu involves Earth space forces coming to the aid of a rocket forced to land on the Red Planet. The features – in their original Russian formats – do have varying reputations, but an examination of their respective ratings shows them all leaning heavily into the middle ground when it comes to their quality. I suspect Corman – with his learned eye – saw them perfectly ripe for the picking.
IMDB.com states that the bulk of the footage used to assemble Voyage’s story evolves directly from Planeta bur. However, new scenes were planned out and shot with American actors in order to give the Corman product its own narrative though heavily borrowing on the original’s aesthetics. Here’s the plot summary as provided by the website:
“In 2020, after the colonization of the moon, the spaceships Vega, Sirius and Capella are launched from Lunar Station 7. They are to explore Venus under the command of Professor Hartman, but an asteroid collides and explodes Capella.”
Voyage’s original sequences were scripted and directed by Curtis Hannigan. For his film, he cast such recognizable faces as Oscar-winner Basil Rathbone (The Adventures Of Robin Hood, The Magic Sword) and Faith Domergue (This Island Earth, It Came From Beneath The Sea).
Still, both IMDB.com and Wikipedia.org indicate that Voyage never quite completed the voyage to the silver screen as the resulting product bypasses theaters and was – ahem – ceremoniously dumped into the television market. Ouch.
Wikipedia.org reports that Corman was in need to some footage to craft a few theatrical epics of his own, so he purchased the rights to re-use scenes and sequences from a handful of Soviet releases: Nebo zovyot (1959), Planeta bur (1962), and Mechte navstrechu (1963). Nebo zovyot is the story of two countries competing against one another to land on Mars; Planeta bur spins the yarn of cosmonauts encountering hungry creatures on Venus; and Mechte navstrechu involves Earth space forces coming to the aid of a rocket forced to land on the Red Planet. The features – in their original Russian formats – do have varying reputations, but an examination of their respective ratings shows them all leaning heavily into the middle ground when it comes to their quality. I suspect Corman – with his learned eye – saw them perfectly ripe for the picking.
IMDB.com states that the bulk of the footage used to assemble Voyage’s story evolves directly from Planeta bur. However, new scenes were planned out and shot with American actors in order to give the Corman product its own narrative though heavily borrowing on the original’s aesthetics. Here’s the plot summary as provided by the website:
“In 2020, after the colonization of the moon, the spaceships Vega, Sirius and Capella are launched from Lunar Station 7. They are to explore Venus under the command of Professor Hartman, but an asteroid collides and explodes Capella.”
Voyage’s original sequences were scripted and directed by Curtis Hannigan. For his film, he cast such recognizable faces as Oscar-winner Basil Rathbone (The Adventures Of Robin Hood, The Magic Sword) and Faith Domergue (This Island Earth, It Came From Beneath The Sea).
Still, both IMDB.com and Wikipedia.org indicate that Voyage never quite completed the voyage to the silver screen as the resulting product bypasses theaters and was – ahem – ceremoniously dumped into the television market. Ouch.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Truth be told, 1971’s The Omega Man first began life as a printed work of the great Science Fiction and Fantasy author Richard Matheson. First published in July, 1954, the novel “I Am Legend” is largely remembered and credited for being influential in areas of literature focusing on post-Apocalyptical survival and zombies as well as serving to revitalize vampire novels. While the reviews were somewhat mixed, Wikipedia.org reports that it served as chief inspiration for film adaptations (or slight variations) The Last Man On Earth (1964), Night Of The Living Dead (1968), The Omega Man, and I Am Legend (2007).
Here's the plot summary for the film as provided by IMDB.com:
“Biological war has decimated life on Earth. Los Angeles is a windswept ghost town where Robert Neville tools his convertible through sunlit streets foraging for supplies.”
Boris Sagal was hired to direct the motion picture with an adaptation scripted by John William Corrington and Joyce Hooper Corrington. Acting legend Charlton Heston played the film’s hero (a fan of the original novel, he was fascinated with the idea of bringing the story to life on the silver screen). Other names in the cast include Anthony Zerbe (The Dead Zone, Star Trek: Insurrection), Rosalind Cash (The Adventures Of Buckaroo Banzai Across The 8th Dimension, TV’s Knight Rider), and Paul Koslo (Robot Jox, Xtro II: The Second Encounter).
Interestingly enough, in 1971 actress Cash was nominated for an NAACP Image Award for her work in the picture.
Here's the plot summary for the film as provided by IMDB.com:
“Biological war has decimated life on Earth. Los Angeles is a windswept ghost town where Robert Neville tools his convertible through sunlit streets foraging for supplies.”
Boris Sagal was hired to direct the motion picture with an adaptation scripted by John William Corrington and Joyce Hooper Corrington. Acting legend Charlton Heston played the film’s hero (a fan of the original novel, he was fascinated with the idea of bringing the story to life on the silver screen). Other names in the cast include Anthony Zerbe (The Dead Zone, Star Trek: Insurrection), Rosalind Cash (The Adventures Of Buckaroo Banzai Across The 8th Dimension, TV’s Knight Rider), and Paul Koslo (Robot Jox, Xtro II: The Second Encounter).
Interestingly enough, in 1971 actress Cash was nominated for an NAACP Image Award for her work in the picture.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Continuing the work of keeping SciFiHistory.Net's readers informed with the latest and greatest additions to the site, here's an announcement: Antonio Margheriti's The Wild Wild Planet is now showing on the corresponding page of July 10th!
Just for the record, The Wild Wild Planet (or simply Wild Wild Planet in some markets) enjoyed its silver screen premiere on July 10th when it played for audiences in attendance of the Trieste Sci-fi Film Festival in Italy. Margheriti directed a script from Ivan Reiner and Renato Moretti, and the film starred Tony Russel, Lisa Gastoni, Massimo Serato, Carlo Giustini, and Franco Nero. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A deranged scientist is using his employer's top-secret bio-laboratory to engage in clandestine experiments. When he starts kidnapping leading citizens for use in his twisted tests, it's up to rogue cop Mike Halstead to come to the rescue."
From what I've come to understand, The Wild Wild Planet was the first of four films all centered around some adventures in space set aboard the Gamma One Space Station. Utilizing one central setting allowed the four films to re-use some of the props, costumes, and settings -- thus keeping the budgets under reasonable control -- while bringing aboard different cast members. The Wild Wild Planet (1966) was followed by War Of The Planets (1966), War Between The Planets (1966), and -- finally -- Snow Devils (1967). The features were all produced by Mercury Film International and Southern Cross Feature Film Company while being released theatrically under the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) banner.
Just for the record, The Wild Wild Planet (or simply Wild Wild Planet in some markets) enjoyed its silver screen premiere on July 10th when it played for audiences in attendance of the Trieste Sci-fi Film Festival in Italy. Margheriti directed a script from Ivan Reiner and Renato Moretti, and the film starred Tony Russel, Lisa Gastoni, Massimo Serato, Carlo Giustini, and Franco Nero. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A deranged scientist is using his employer's top-secret bio-laboratory to engage in clandestine experiments. When he starts kidnapping leading citizens for use in his twisted tests, it's up to rogue cop Mike Halstead to come to the rescue."
From what I've come to understand, The Wild Wild Planet was the first of four films all centered around some adventures in space set aboard the Gamma One Space Station. Utilizing one central setting allowed the four films to re-use some of the props, costumes, and settings -- thus keeping the budgets under reasonable control -- while bringing aboard different cast members. The Wild Wild Planet (1966) was followed by War Of The Planets (1966), War Between The Planets (1966), and -- finally -- Snow Devils (1967). The features were all produced by Mercury Film International and Southern Cross Feature Film Company while being released theatrically under the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) banner.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Ach. Some days these announcements just hurt.
Bernard Cribbins was born on December 29, 1928 in Oldham, England, and he found success not only in his acting but also with his singing. Though it appears (in a bit of research) that the #1 hit single spot eluded his best efforts, it still bodes well that he topped out with a solid #9 spot with "Hole In The Ground." And it's Cribbins himself who insists that the acting bug truly took hold on January 4, 1943 when he was offered a job with the Oldham Coliseum.
IMDB.com reports that he amassed an incredible 122 different screen credits across his storied career, but perhaps the one that matters most -- so far as this consumer of media is concerned is his time in the wide, wide universe of Doctor Who.
Some may have missed the fact that Cribbins is the only actor to have appeared in both the Doctor Who screen incarnations as well as the relaunched series on the BBC. In 1966, he joined the great Peter Cushing (as the Doctor) aboard Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. only to be called back into service an incredible four decades later during the time in which David Tennant kept the keys to the TARDIS.
Alas, none of us lasts forever, and the media reports that he passed at the ripe old age of 93. I'm not seeing any mention of the cause of his passing, but I am aware that there have been stories about his having to excuse himself from projects citing poor health.
May he forever rest in peace.
Thoughts and prayers are extended to the family and friends of Bernard Cribbins.
-- EZ
Bernard Cribbins was born on December 29, 1928 in Oldham, England, and he found success not only in his acting but also with his singing. Though it appears (in a bit of research) that the #1 hit single spot eluded his best efforts, it still bodes well that he topped out with a solid #9 spot with "Hole In The Ground." And it's Cribbins himself who insists that the acting bug truly took hold on January 4, 1943 when he was offered a job with the Oldham Coliseum.
IMDB.com reports that he amassed an incredible 122 different screen credits across his storied career, but perhaps the one that matters most -- so far as this consumer of media is concerned is his time in the wide, wide universe of Doctor Who.
Some may have missed the fact that Cribbins is the only actor to have appeared in both the Doctor Who screen incarnations as well as the relaunched series on the BBC. In 1966, he joined the great Peter Cushing (as the Doctor) aboard Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. only to be called back into service an incredible four decades later during the time in which David Tennant kept the keys to the TARDIS.
Alas, none of us lasts forever, and the media reports that he passed at the ripe old age of 93. I'm not seeing any mention of the cause of his passing, but I am aware that there have been stories about his having to excuse himself from projects citing poor health.
May he forever rest in peace.
Thoughts and prayers are extended to the family and friends of Bernard Cribbins.
-- EZ
- Published on
The longer I do this -- meaning blog endlessly about Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror projects -- the more surprises I'm treated to from time-to-time.
For example, I know there's a reader out there who only checks in with the site once daily for the sole purpose of getting the straight skinny on genre films released on this day from history. I know my collection is far from complete, but I'm suspecting this fellow might use the information he obtains to inform listeners of his podcast. Who knows? He could do a great deal more research on these films than I do -- that's not out of the question -- but it's reasurring to know that he's found a routine use for SciFiHistory.Net in his daily pursuits ... as that's always been my dream in creating and cultivating such information.
Because I know folks who do use this place with such specificity, I figured I might start doing a feature on the MainPage (here where you are) called 'Now Showing.' This wouldn't be anything fancy: it's just a way for me to announce that I've found another flick that I've added to the appropriate internal pages. This cannot and will not mean that I've covered all of the movie's release dates; however, it will mean that I've properly catalogued its very first exhibition -- be it silver screen, small screen, home video, or the like -- and it will be found on the corresponding Daily Citation Page.
Today's discovery: 1935's Night Life Of The Gods.
From what I've read, this Fantasy/Comedy enjoyed its first release (in the U.S.) all the way back on February 23, 1935. Screenwriter Barry Trivers adapted the Thorne Smith novel -- "The Night Life Of The Gods" published on March 2, 1931 -- for Universal Pictures. Lowell Sherman directed a cast that included Alan Mowbray, Florine McKinney, Peggy Shannon, and Richard Carle. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A scientist named Hunter Hawk invents a device that can turn flesh to stone. While celebrating his discovery he becomes involved with a half naked leprechaun. On a trip to New York, Hunter and Meg (the leprechaun) decide to go to the Metropolitan Museum of Art and turn all of the Statues of Greek Gods into people. What follows in a drunken romp around New York with Medusa's severed head still in Perseus' hand."
Drunken romp about New York City? With a severed head in hand? That sounds like a loud of laughs, indeed!
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
For example, I know there's a reader out there who only checks in with the site once daily for the sole purpose of getting the straight skinny on genre films released on this day from history. I know my collection is far from complete, but I'm suspecting this fellow might use the information he obtains to inform listeners of his podcast. Who knows? He could do a great deal more research on these films than I do -- that's not out of the question -- but it's reasurring to know that he's found a routine use for SciFiHistory.Net in his daily pursuits ... as that's always been my dream in creating and cultivating such information.
Because I know folks who do use this place with such specificity, I figured I might start doing a feature on the MainPage (here where you are) called 'Now Showing.' This wouldn't be anything fancy: it's just a way for me to announce that I've found another flick that I've added to the appropriate internal pages. This cannot and will not mean that I've covered all of the movie's release dates; however, it will mean that I've properly catalogued its very first exhibition -- be it silver screen, small screen, home video, or the like -- and it will be found on the corresponding Daily Citation Page.
Today's discovery: 1935's Night Life Of The Gods.
From what I've read, this Fantasy/Comedy enjoyed its first release (in the U.S.) all the way back on February 23, 1935. Screenwriter Barry Trivers adapted the Thorne Smith novel -- "The Night Life Of The Gods" published on March 2, 1931 -- for Universal Pictures. Lowell Sherman directed a cast that included Alan Mowbray, Florine McKinney, Peggy Shannon, and Richard Carle. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A scientist named Hunter Hawk invents a device that can turn flesh to stone. While celebrating his discovery he becomes involved with a half naked leprechaun. On a trip to New York, Hunter and Meg (the leprechaun) decide to go to the Metropolitan Museum of Art and turn all of the Statues of Greek Gods into people. What follows in a drunken romp around New York with Medusa's severed head still in Perseus' hand."
Drunken romp about New York City? With a severed head in hand? That sounds like a loud of laughs, indeed!
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
I have nothing but high regards for folks who traffic in independent features.
This doesn’t mean I’ll always recommend them. As one who has watched a fair share of genre entries from indie storytellers, it just ain’t easy to always ‘get it right.’ The ones that do typically start out with a very strong story – or an easily-relatable central thread – and then stick as close to that road as is humanly possible. Straying from that central path typically introduces a handful of variables that not only test the limited financing but also the audience’s patience: viewers will only suspend disbelief so far, and some risky secondary plots should really be avoided at all costs.
And independent Horror? That’s an even harder sell. While the major studios can throw all kinds of money into effects both digital and practical, those who shirk away from bigger production houses in favor of more creative control really need to up-their-game with a vital winning concept – i.e. a truly inspired story. If they don’t, then they run the risk of alienating not only anyone who inevitably purchases a ticket but also the investors who shared in that original dream. You lose both crowds, and you’ll likely never film a picture in this town again, a harsh truth indeed.
At the very least, 2010’s YellowBrickRoad swung for the fences (if you get the baseball analogy). While the screenwriting and directing team of Andy Mitton and Jesse Holland may’ve had to settle for a base hit (at best), they still crafted a little something something that occasionally impresses. Sadly, those big ideas failed to reach an equally big destination – so far as this reviewer is concerned – and those muddled last images likely didn’t endear audiences to let them try again.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
This doesn’t mean I’ll always recommend them. As one who has watched a fair share of genre entries from indie storytellers, it just ain’t easy to always ‘get it right.’ The ones that do typically start out with a very strong story – or an easily-relatable central thread – and then stick as close to that road as is humanly possible. Straying from that central path typically introduces a handful of variables that not only test the limited financing but also the audience’s patience: viewers will only suspend disbelief so far, and some risky secondary plots should really be avoided at all costs.
And independent Horror? That’s an even harder sell. While the major studios can throw all kinds of money into effects both digital and practical, those who shirk away from bigger production houses in favor of more creative control really need to up-their-game with a vital winning concept – i.e. a truly inspired story. If they don’t, then they run the risk of alienating not only anyone who inevitably purchases a ticket but also the investors who shared in that original dream. You lose both crowds, and you’ll likely never film a picture in this town again, a harsh truth indeed.
At the very least, 2010’s YellowBrickRoad swung for the fences (if you get the baseball analogy). While the screenwriting and directing team of Andy Mitton and Jesse Holland may’ve had to settle for a base hit (at best), they still crafted a little something something that occasionally impresses. Sadly, those big ideas failed to reach an equally big destination – so far as this reviewer is concerned – and those muddled last images likely didn’t endear audiences to let them try again.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“In 1940, the entire population of Friar, New Hampshire abandoned their homes and walked up a nearby mountain path, never to be seen alive again. Seventy years later, a team of researchers intent on solving the mystery find the long-forgotten trail marker and embark on a journey along the same cursed road.”
Meaning absolutely no disrespect to anyone involved with YellowBrickRoad, but haven’t we seen this film before? Any time there’s a local legend involving some tragedy that’s gone unexplained for years, then somewhere sometime someone is going to go looking into what happened, only to come face-to-face in the same dire predicament with the same bad ending?
Yes, yes, and yes: I suspect each of us has seen some variation on this classic form, but I’d still encourage film students, horror fans, and like-minded folks to invest 100 minutes of their lives in what might be the best education possible on the best ways to make use of creating a creepy atmosphere on a super-affordable budget. Storytellers Mitton and Holland do certainly get their money’s worth in that regard: they take a brilliant conspiracy set-up (reminiscent of the kind of thing The X-Files did only a weekly basis) and transform a nearby woodland into a menace as compelling as Jason Voorhees, Freddy Krueger, and Michael Myers put together. But this indie Horror really runs out of steam for no other reason than we’ve seen it all before … and at a much more palatable length.
YellowBrickRoad’s greatest drawback is that – unlike The Wizard Of Oz, from which their script draws obvious and clever inspiration – it ultimately ends not long after it starts: the events spiral predictably into chaos the audience easily sees coming and, yet, its characters march blissfully onward. Players in even cinema’s biggest Horror franchises have been screamed at by audiences for decades – don’t open that door, don’t look under that bed, don’t go into those woods alone – and somehow it just hasn’t helped scripts grow any smarter. In the event that not everyone reaches that fateful destination (duh), there still must be some reward for those that do … but we’re not even given legitimate closure on that level when this flick’s Emerald City only offers up what looks to be more of the same … meaning nothing more than perhaps an insult slung by the filmmakers: “you’re only watching a movie, doofus.”
To the film’s credit, YellowBrickRoad scored a bit of praise from the film festival circuit, and why shouldn’t it? To some degree, independent features – more often than not – are made exactly for audiences that go to film festivals. It’s the kind of inventive thing they eat up at each and every opportunity. While that doesn’t detract from the film’s strengths – I guarantee you no hiker should look at the average trail the same way after watching this (and, yes, I consider myself a hiker, thank you very much) – it still limits the scope of influence into corners where regular folks just wanna be entertained for 90 minutes. On that regard, YellowBrickRoad could’ve used more traction.
“In 1940, the entire population of Friar, New Hampshire abandoned their homes and walked up a nearby mountain path, never to be seen alive again. Seventy years later, a team of researchers intent on solving the mystery find the long-forgotten trail marker and embark on a journey along the same cursed road.”
Meaning absolutely no disrespect to anyone involved with YellowBrickRoad, but haven’t we seen this film before? Any time there’s a local legend involving some tragedy that’s gone unexplained for years, then somewhere sometime someone is going to go looking into what happened, only to come face-to-face in the same dire predicament with the same bad ending?
Yes, yes, and yes: I suspect each of us has seen some variation on this classic form, but I’d still encourage film students, horror fans, and like-minded folks to invest 100 minutes of their lives in what might be the best education possible on the best ways to make use of creating a creepy atmosphere on a super-affordable budget. Storytellers Mitton and Holland do certainly get their money’s worth in that regard: they take a brilliant conspiracy set-up (reminiscent of the kind of thing The X-Files did only a weekly basis) and transform a nearby woodland into a menace as compelling as Jason Voorhees, Freddy Krueger, and Michael Myers put together. But this indie Horror really runs out of steam for no other reason than we’ve seen it all before … and at a much more palatable length.
YellowBrickRoad’s greatest drawback is that – unlike The Wizard Of Oz, from which their script draws obvious and clever inspiration – it ultimately ends not long after it starts: the events spiral predictably into chaos the audience easily sees coming and, yet, its characters march blissfully onward. Players in even cinema’s biggest Horror franchises have been screamed at by audiences for decades – don’t open that door, don’t look under that bed, don’t go into those woods alone – and somehow it just hasn’t helped scripts grow any smarter. In the event that not everyone reaches that fateful destination (duh), there still must be some reward for those that do … but we’re not even given legitimate closure on that level when this flick’s Emerald City only offers up what looks to be more of the same … meaning nothing more than perhaps an insult slung by the filmmakers: “you’re only watching a movie, doofus.”
To the film’s credit, YellowBrickRoad scored a bit of praise from the film festival circuit, and why shouldn’t it? To some degree, independent features – more often than not – are made exactly for audiences that go to film festivals. It’s the kind of inventive thing they eat up at each and every opportunity. While that doesn’t detract from the film’s strengths – I guarantee you no hiker should look at the average trail the same way after watching this (and, yes, I consider myself a hiker, thank you very much) – it still limits the scope of influence into corners where regular folks just wanna be entertained for 90 minutes. On that regard, YellowBrickRoad could’ve used more traction.
And I’ve never laughed so hard at a scene of a woman losing her leg … especially when that wasn’t the filmmaker’s intention. As much as I love the work of Cassidy Freeman – Smallville and Longmire are TV favorites of mine – not even her undisputed beauty could distract me from this awful, awful practical effects failure.
YellowBrickRoad (2010) was produced by Points North Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated via the folks at Lightyear. As for the technical specifications? Again, I’m no trained video expert … but while I had no problems with the nature of the video quality I’d have to confess this has to be one of the worst sound mixes I’ve had the misfortune to sit through. That isn’t owed to the bizarre nature of the story; rather the recording levels were set so inconsistently I had to crank this thing all the way up in order to even understand most of the spoken words … and still there were a lot of unintelligible sentences. On one hand, the dialogue isn’t as key to the story being told, but that it makes the experience more than a bit uneven at far too many times.
Lastly, if you’re looking for special features, then you’re in for a treat. This Updated Special Edition collection includes:
Mildly recommended.
Generally speaking, I’ve always been a fan on indie Horror, but YellowBrickRoad really tested my sensibilities in a few ways. See, I can look past an inferior effects sequence. I can forgive a weak acting performance. I’ll even overlook the undercooked blemish here and there … but what’s the point of it all if the trip essentially takes you nowhere? If the final destination raises more questions than the film ever asks, was the journey worthwhile? In that regard, it’s hard to enthusiastically recommend a feature I wanted to like but found, ultimately, incomplete, sometimes inaudible, and inconsistent. It feels more experimental – or maybe a benign flick for students to study how to accomplish some things on-a-budget – but otherwise? Meh.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Lightyear provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of YellowBrickRoad: Updated Special Edition by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
YellowBrickRoad (2010) was produced by Points North Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated via the folks at Lightyear. As for the technical specifications? Again, I’m no trained video expert … but while I had no problems with the nature of the video quality I’d have to confess this has to be one of the worst sound mixes I’ve had the misfortune to sit through. That isn’t owed to the bizarre nature of the story; rather the recording levels were set so inconsistently I had to crank this thing all the way up in order to even understand most of the spoken words … and still there were a lot of unintelligible sentences. On one hand, the dialogue isn’t as key to the story being told, but that it makes the experience more than a bit uneven at far too many times.
Lastly, if you’re looking for special features, then you’re in for a treat. This Updated Special Edition collection includes:
- A director’s commentary from Andy Mitton and Jesse Holland;
- A few newly-produced behind-the-scenes ‘making of’ featurettes; and
- A nice collection of interviews with cast and crew looking back on the experience of making the feature film.
Mildly recommended.
Generally speaking, I’ve always been a fan on indie Horror, but YellowBrickRoad really tested my sensibilities in a few ways. See, I can look past an inferior effects sequence. I can forgive a weak acting performance. I’ll even overlook the undercooked blemish here and there … but what’s the point of it all if the trip essentially takes you nowhere? If the final destination raises more questions than the film ever asks, was the journey worthwhile? In that regard, it’s hard to enthusiastically recommend a feature I wanted to like but found, ultimately, incomplete, sometimes inaudible, and inconsistent. It feels more experimental – or maybe a benign flick for students to study how to accomplish some things on-a-budget – but otherwise? Meh.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Lightyear provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of YellowBrickRoad: Updated Special Edition by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
Believe it or not, I was recently asked about the ongoing maintenance of the site.
The question came from a person who curates her own site on the far side of the world from where I reside, and her inquiry was really centered more around whether or not SciFiHistory.Net accepts submissions (of a curious sort, but I won't go into those details). Though I've answered this before (both directly and indirectly), let me sound off again as it has been some time.
Kids: dad doesn't call himself 'the hardest working man in Science Fiction' without having good cause.
Maintaining the Date Pages -- the true intestinal fabric of SciFiHistory.Net -- is a process in and of itself. It doesn't just mean I have to keep abreast of the birthdays and whatnot: it's a constant daily re-examination of each page (usually done in or around its anniversary) to spot spelling errors, chronological errors, graphic errors, and the like. All kidding aside, you'd probably all be godsmacked at the amount of time I'm working behind-the-scenes on this lifelong project ... and I can only hope that my love of genre entertainment shows each and every time you arrive on the site. I'm that committed to making this a useful, daily stop for each and every one of you.
Because I've been encouraged to do so, here's a general 'how does it work' synopsis as best as I can provide those interested.
Take this morning: by doing just a bit of research, I stumbled across a film that I was completely unaware of -- a little something something titled Decoys 2: Alien Seduction (2007) from Alian Girls Films and Decoys Production. My first step is just checking as to whether or not I've highlighted the film's existence, and that starts on its release date: on March 6, 2007, Decoys 2 spawned on home video. So I check my corresponding page (March 6) to -- lo and behold -- find that I've never cited it, causing me to begin scouring the web for graphics so that I can add it in the proper format. As you can guess, that takes a bit of time -- not much, really -- but it still has to be done. Then, I consult all of the film's release schedule -- as provided by IMDB.com -- and I then put myself reminders in each and every one of those upcoming day catalogues that I keep.
Now, there are other steps I take to prepare myself for those citations, but I don't want to bore you to tears with the minutiae of running the site. Essentially, the point of this post was to educate readers that, yes, this place is always growing ... and -- so long as I have the means to do so -- I'll keep updating it with details at every opportunity. Looking at my collection of additions I'm wanting to make to today -- as an example -- my July 27th file has an incredible 66 items just waiting for me to create graphics for, write entries for, add to the corresponding sections (birthdays, movies, TV shows, books, etc.) ... and that's what I mean when I say it takes t-i-m-e. Lots of it.
So, yes, SciFiHistory.Net is always growing. I may not tweak the format all that much -- I'm kinda/sorta used to how it all looks -- but it's always growing.
Thanks for asking!
-- EZ
The question came from a person who curates her own site on the far side of the world from where I reside, and her inquiry was really centered more around whether or not SciFiHistory.Net accepts submissions (of a curious sort, but I won't go into those details). Though I've answered this before (both directly and indirectly), let me sound off again as it has been some time.
Kids: dad doesn't call himself 'the hardest working man in Science Fiction' without having good cause.
Maintaining the Date Pages -- the true intestinal fabric of SciFiHistory.Net -- is a process in and of itself. It doesn't just mean I have to keep abreast of the birthdays and whatnot: it's a constant daily re-examination of each page (usually done in or around its anniversary) to spot spelling errors, chronological errors, graphic errors, and the like. All kidding aside, you'd probably all be godsmacked at the amount of time I'm working behind-the-scenes on this lifelong project ... and I can only hope that my love of genre entertainment shows each and every time you arrive on the site. I'm that committed to making this a useful, daily stop for each and every one of you.
Because I've been encouraged to do so, here's a general 'how does it work' synopsis as best as I can provide those interested.
Take this morning: by doing just a bit of research, I stumbled across a film that I was completely unaware of -- a little something something titled Decoys 2: Alien Seduction (2007) from Alian Girls Films and Decoys Production. My first step is just checking as to whether or not I've highlighted the film's existence, and that starts on its release date: on March 6, 2007, Decoys 2 spawned on home video. So I check my corresponding page (March 6) to -- lo and behold -- find that I've never cited it, causing me to begin scouring the web for graphics so that I can add it in the proper format. As you can guess, that takes a bit of time -- not much, really -- but it still has to be done. Then, I consult all of the film's release schedule -- as provided by IMDB.com -- and I then put myself reminders in each and every one of those upcoming day catalogues that I keep.
Now, there are other steps I take to prepare myself for those citations, but I don't want to bore you to tears with the minutiae of running the site. Essentially, the point of this post was to educate readers that, yes, this place is always growing ... and -- so long as I have the means to do so -- I'll keep updating it with details at every opportunity. Looking at my collection of additions I'm wanting to make to today -- as an example -- my July 27th file has an incredible 66 items just waiting for me to create graphics for, write entries for, add to the corresponding sections (birthdays, movies, TV shows, books, etc.) ... and that's what I mean when I say it takes t-i-m-e. Lots of it.
So, yes, SciFiHistory.Net is always growing. I may not tweak the format all that much -- I'm kinda/sorta used to how it all looks -- but it's always growing.
Thanks for asking!
-- EZ