Print

[bowers]

I think some of you might be interested in a ne detective show that's recently started here in ITV . Vera is a 2 hour crimi with Brenda Blethyn as DCI Vera Stanhope.  Set in the north east of England, the 4 stories are adapted from the novels by Ann Cleeves, 2 0f which I've read. A bit unsettling and well done all round, this is good viewing.
[/quote]
Sounds good, Paw. We'll probably have to wait a year or so, but eventually it will find it's way across the pond. Anyway, please keep posting these program alerts so we know what to look for. Still hoping for a new batch of "Sherlock" and season 5 of "Primeval". One of our local college/pbs stations has been showing an international collection of detective shows, none in English but all with subtitles. Last week I watched a French episode of Maigret with Bruno Cremer in the title role- not bad.  Cheers, Bowers

[josemas]

No, I'm not mis-remembering, what I said was exactly what I saw, and exactly what you described. Obviously, I started watching ONE week before it got yanked off the air, so I only ever got to see the last 2 episodes!

Henry, you got me thinking about this.  Your description of Kelly's appearance on that episode was not what I was disputing only the  statement you made where you said "The following week, Garner had the week off, and the entire episode focused on Jack Kelly!"
I last watched these Bret Maverick episodes a couple of years ago and was pretty sure that Kelly only had a small role in the final episode of the series (and thus could not have had a starring part in any other episode of the series) so I looked it up.  Here's what TV Rage says about the episode-

The Hidalgo Thing- Episode number: 1x18- Production Number: 167517- Airdate: Tuesday May 04th, 1982

Syn: Tom Guthrie is running for re-election as sheriff and wants business partner Bret Maverick to keep a low profile in the campaign but Bret is working on one of the biggest scams of his life and isn't about to be kept under wraps.

Episode Notes: Jack Kelly, who had co-starred with James Garner in the original Maverick series, made his only appearance in the revival series with a brief cameo at the end of this episode. He was slated to become a regular in the series' second season but the show got canceled by NBC.


That's why I was suggesting that maybe your memories over the decades since you saw these Bret Maverick episodes were merging with your memories of Kelly's alternating with Garner from the original Maverick series.  I have certainly done that sort of thing often enough (seemingly more often the older I get!).

Without looking it up, I'll take a guess the later thing was the 3rd Kenny Rogers movie, THE GAMBLER: THE LUCK OF THE DRAW, a 4-hour 2-part story which featured cameos by about a DOZEN different western heroes from 60's TV, as well as David Carridine as Kwai Chang Caine-- 2 years before KUNG FU: THE LEGEND CONTINUES.  An episode of that show later involved "Dark Shadows"-style time travel, and featured further appearances by 2 or 3 of the same characters who'd been in the GAMBLER movie a few years earlier.  (I'd have to look it up to be sure WHICH ones.)

I did watch this movie once back when it first ran, mainly because it featured all those old western characters making appearances in it, but don't really remember anything about it.

By the way, anybody ever see Garner on EIGHT SIMPLE RULES FOR DATING MY DAUGHTER ?  After the sudden death of John Ritter, he became a regular on the series, playing Katie Sagal's father. Her mother (and his ex-wife) was briefly played by Susanne Pleshette. I really got to love that show, despite never seeing it until it was already in reruns.

I only caught a couple of episodes of the show when Garner came on it when they first ran.  Did it run for long after he joined the cast?

Best

Joe

[narfstar]

We watched 8 Simple Rules regularly. I think Garner was on two years along with David Spade

[profh0011]

I've never looked it up, and I admit I haven't seen it since it was on first-run... so it's possible I DIDN'T see the next episiode.  Maybe I just ASSUMED that Jack Kelly was gonna star in the next epsode, but never actually saw it.

I remember the Garner episiode I saw as being one of those "Rube Goldberg" plots, where to do THIS, Garner had to do THIS, but to do THAT, he had to do THAT... there's a DEEP SPACE NINE that was like that, and I figure they probably thought they were being clever and original, but very little on the late-model ST's ever really was.  (I swear to God, more of TNG was paying tribute to dozens of 60's TV shows than it ever seemed to actually "do" STAR TREK. Including the first TNG feature film, which borrowed heavily from the movie THUNDERBIRDS ARE GO.  You think I'm kidding?)   

In any case, I know I was disappointed that I FINALLY got to sit down and watch James Garner, and the next thing, they up and cancelled ths show.  (A friend of mine was poking fun at me recently because 3 or 4 resturants in this area ALL closed up right after I started frequenting them. As if I had anything to do with a still-collapsing economy.)

I was reminded of how I finally got hooked on GUNSMOKE... during its 20th season.  Oh, great, I start watching, they cancel it.



Incidentally, the internet is great in allowing one to look up almost anythig instantly, but every so often, I run across INCORRECT info online.  Some halfwit at the DC Comics message board some years back once got on my case because information listed in several episode guides ran counter to MY personal info, which I KNEW was right, because I was there and saw the show first-run.  AND, my info matched what was published in a book back in 1968! Some people get things wrong... and then everybody else follows their lead.  it does happen.  When you have memory like mine, it can be downright scary sometimes.  So many people I know say they can't remember what they were doing last week, I can't FORGET some things that happened 30-40 years ago.

[profh0011]

We watched 8 Simple Rules regularly. I think Garner was on two years along with David Spade

I believe the show ran 4 years.  2 with John Ritter, 2 with Garner & Spade. The strange thing was, the longer I watched, the more I realized that because of some very good writing, they managed to make EVERY character on the show likeable-- even David Spade, whose character seemed designed to be annoying as hell when he first appeared.  The only character on the show I never got to like was the father (played by John Ritter). So, bad it sounds, I preferred the show after he was gone.  (I know that doesn't sound nice, but there it is.)

I initially started watching because I'd gotten hooked on watching CHARMED, and Kaley Cuoco had become my favorite person on the show (she was only in the 8th season!).  So I wound up watching her on 8 SIMPLE RULES much more than the other show.  When THE BIG BANG THEORY debuted, my best friend told me she was gonna be on it, so I checked it out.  I thought it was AWFUL when it started... and I only watched for her.  But over the first 2 months, to my surprise, the writing steadily improved. And so I was experiencing the unusual phenomena of watching the SAME actress on 3 different Tv series AT THE SAME TIME!  (That hadn't happened with me since the late 60's when I used to watch I LOVE LUCY, THE LUCY SHOW and HERE'S LUCY all at once.)

[profh0011]

THE SAINT STRIKES BACK   (1939)

Awkward, Confused Jumble     **

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

   After Roger Moore, this was my very first SAINT film with George Sanders. Over the years, he's become one of my favorite actors, and there's quite a few other decent actors in this film. However, this gets my vote for the WORST Saint film ever made-- and let me tell you why.

   I sat thru this thing at least 3 times and could not make heads or tails of the plot at all. And then, not long after seeing Louis Hayward in THE SAINT IN NEW YORK, I started reading Leslie Chartis' books. Imagine my surprise and shock when I got to "ANGELS OF DOOM", on which this is VERY loosely based, and not only was it was straight-forward, easy to understand, exciting, entertaining and in places downright hilarious, it also became my favorite novel of all time. It also "explained" to me exactly what was WRONG with this movie!!!

   They took a story that by rights should have been done as a 3-hour film (2 at the absolute minimum) and crammed it into just about 60 minutes. Is it any wonder it makes almost no sense at all? Never mind that they also decided to set it in the WRONG country (San Francisco instead of London), they gutted the plot so much that in order to get even the basics across, about 95% of the film is just people standing around talk talk talking.

   So the plot structure is awful, the directing is appallingly bad, and half the acting in the film is stiff and lifeless, even from normally very talented actors.

   And then of course there's George Sanders, who's COMPLETELY miscast as Simon Templar. I never even really understood the whole aura of "The Saint" until I saw Louis Hayward in action; to date, NOBODY else has ever brought the character to accurate life before (NOT EVEN Roger Moore!! --who usually plays it too SERIOUS, which is mind-boggling when you consider he never took James Bond seriously). The dialog Templar spouts in much of this film would be impossible for ANY actor to deliver credibly, EXCEPT for Louis Hayward, and I doubt even he could have made the story in this one fly. Maybe it wasn't just RKO's low low budget that caused him to depart after only one picture-- maybe he read the script, too.

   In all fairness, and despite himself, the next 4 SAINT films all had the dialog tailored specifically to fit Sanders' personality. How else could he have done such an INCREDIBLE job in THE SAINT IN LONDON, or THE SAINT TAKES OVER (the latter of which, an "original" story, is actually a thinly-disguised-- and BETTER-told-- remake of THIS mess! --and with the same 3 actors in the leads!).

   Half the actors in this I've seen in other "B" movies from this period, and most of them do far better jobs elsewhere. Truthfully, the only one who comes off unscathed is Jonathan Hale, and you can't help but feel sorry for his Inspector Fernack, for the dizzying way Templar leads him on a confused merry chase, on his way to becoming a "hero" at the end.

   As if everything else wasn't so bad, at the end of the film, the "big reveal" as to the true identity of the main villain ALSO is told entirely thru confused dialog, and we find that the baddie got KILLED-- off-screen! I just watched this again today, and the whole time, I wanted to throttle the person who wrote the screenplay!

   It's no wonder after 6 RKO films, series creator Leslie Charteris PULLED the plug and took back the rights. Ironically, RKO distributed the 2 British-made films that followed, and simultaneously did THE FALCON series, initially also with Sanders, which was based on a novel that was the subject of a plagiarism lawsuit brought against it by Leslie Charteris! I guess that didn't bother RKO any...

   Finally, allow me to recommend much better Simon Templar films...

   THE SAINT IN NEW YORK
   THE SAINT IN LONDON
   THE SAINT TAKES OVER
   THE SAINT'S VACATION

[josemas]

Incidentally, the internet is great in allowing one to look up almost anythig instantly, but every so often, I run across INCORRECT info online.  Some halfwit at the DC Comics message board some years back once got on my case because information listed in several episode guides ran counter to MY personal info, which I KNEW was right, because I was there and saw the show first-run.  AND, my info matched what was published in a book back in 1968! Some people get things wrong... and then everybody else follows their lead.  it does happen.  When you have memory like mine, it can be downright scary sometimes.  So many people I know say they can't remember what they were doing last week, I can't FORGET some things that happened 30-40 years ago.

Oh I totally agree with you on this. 

Some years back I was doing a lot of serious film research.  I made several trips over to USC, in Los Angeles, to go through through the files of the Hal Roach Studios which they had in their special collections.  I was digging tons of information out of original production books, original payroll ledgers, etc...

Sometime later I tried dealing with the IMDB to update the info they had on the early Roach productions.  They were pretty good on taking any new info I had to add but sometimes it was really hard getting them to correct bad info that they already had.  Their reasoning was that some of the information I was wanting to correct was already in print in numerous sources so it must be correct.  I tried explaining to them that it was just a case of someone decades back making a research error and that it was then repeated in all the various books and articles that came afterwards.  I let them know that I was actually working with primary sources and gave them details and contact information at USC so they could confirm I had been there, etc... but still I got nowhere in some cases.  I sometimes felt like I was just pounding my head against the wall trying to help them out and eventually just gave up.

Best

Joe

[profh0011]

The instance in question was-- get this-- the 2nd-seaons STAR TREK episode "Friday's Child". It's the 2ND "Klingon" story, and the one which guest-starred Julie Newmar. Of the 3 Klingon stories that year, it's very obvious it was made 2nd and should be viewed 2nd. But (at least here in Philly) it was run 4th-- about a week or two before the END of the season!

As a kid, I almost never saw every episode of ANYTHING. But STAR TREK really got to me during its 1st season, and when they moved it from Thursday to Friday, I was able to stay up without having to haggle with my parents, and managed to see EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of its 2nd season! This was quite memorable for me, as it was the 1st time I had EVER managed it in my life.  (Sort of like how, in 1973, THE GOLDEN VOYAGE OF SINBAD was the very 1st movie I saw in a theatre where I did NOT get up from my seat, not even once, for the entire movie. It's just the sort of thing that was quite memorable to me.)

Now according to uber-fan Bjo Trumble STAR TREK CONCORDANCE book, "Friday's Child" was scheduled for early-December '67. I can guarantee to you, it DID NOT AIR on that date-- at least, not in Philly. It may even have been listed in TV GUIDE, but something else ran that night. Don't ask me what. I clearly remember it airing right near the end of the season, and in Gene Roddenberry's book, THE MAKING OF STAR TREK (which came out a few months later!) that's where it was listed. I mean, what more authoritative source could you have for ST info than the show's creator? Why on Earth would he have it listed at the end of the season, BEFORE the rerun season started, unless it did not air until that point?

Well everywhere you look, it's listed in December '67. Last year, I watched the episodes (more or less) in production order, so it was definitely the 2nd Klingon episode I watched. And it makes sense for it to be early that way. But that's not where it aired. At least, not here. And presumably, not in L.A., either.



Incidentally, the other day I watched a GET SMART where Siegfried makes a brief but very agitated appearance at the beginning of the story, and puts a quarter-of-a-million-dollar preice on Max's head. Since I taped it in the 90's, it's always been very obvious to me this must have been Siegfried's 1st appearance. Max never meets him in this one, and he's not even listed in the credits! But NICK AT NITE or whoever ran it in the middle of the 3rd season episodes (and you knbow it's earlier because of the opening credits).  

I checked the IMDB yesterday, and apparently, NBC ran it about in the middle of the 2nd season. But I bet if you were able to track down the production order, it may well have been the 1st one done that year. Sometimes I really wish networks on both sides of the Atlantic would stop screwig around with shows' running order. The only time running shows out of order ever made sense was with DOCTOR WHO, where location filming dates are often dictated by the weather. (You can only have so much good weather depending on time of year.)  They often planned the order of stories before any of them were filmed, whatever order they were shot in.  Even so, the show's 25th season was run WRONG, and has been run wrong and listed wrong ever since (the "character development" makes this obvious)... blasted sports getting the way of more "important" things!  

[narfstar]

"blasted sports getting the way of more "important" things"
This is a statement frequently echoed in my family 

Something I like about the GCD is their efforts to correct mis-information. They strive hard to be the most accurate possible. Nothing is put on live without being checked by at least one editor. If they have any questions is it discussed. If info that has been reported is wrong it is noted. The verifications process has run some people off but has information is better validated than most other sites.

[profh0011]

Today:  David Niven double-feature!


AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS


THE PINK PANTHER


The 1st may be Niven's favorite role, but the latter is my favorite Niven movie. It's almost like a cross between Alfred Hitchcock and the Marx Brothers. The opening section, where the narrative jumps between multiple locations, has been imitated many times since, but maybe never better. (Perhaps without realizing it, I did it myself a few years ago in one of my own stories.)

But a bizarre as it is, my favorite part of the movie is the part that doesn't seem to have any reason for being there...  Fran Jeffries' singing "Meglio Stasera".  I suspect it sort of takes the place of where an Intermission would have gone.  Also, it's possible Blake Edwards hoped it would be a break-out hit single... but if so, it's VERY peculiar that her version of it has NEVER turned up on any LP or CD!! (It's on mine, but I had to create a custom version myself.) She is so GORGEOUS in that scene!

[paw broon]

Last night the 3rd episode of Vera.  The bleakest one yet.  I think the makers have "outbleaked "Wallender.  Great tv but if it is show in N. America, I think you'll need sub titles.  We had a bit of trouble to start with, with the accents.  This episode also starred Danielle Nardini.  Well done.

[profh0011]

THE AVENGERS: "WARLOCK"

"The Devil's Bride" on a teeny-weeny budget! *****

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A scientist with a side-interest in psychic & occult phenomena becomes a victim of that very thing when the leader of the "group" he joined turns out to be using his influence to sell secrets to the highest bidders.

Although the 2nd Cathy Gale episode filmed ("DEATH DISPATCH" was first), "WARLOCK" was clearly designed & intended to introduce her to the series, and to Steed. It's downright criminal it was run 18th that year instead of 1st, as even with an "introductory" scene at the beginning snipped out, the entire remainder of the story screams that this is Steed & Cathy's 1st time working together!

With his slyly sinister looks and manners, Peter Arne is a fine mix of polite authority and ruthless criminal, never letting his more violent "business partner" worry him. Apart from several later AVENGERS episodes, I've also seen him turn up on THE SAINT ("The Revolution Racket"), THE OBLONG BOX (my favorite of the non-Corman Vincent Price POE films) and no less than 3 PINK PANTHER films (RETURN..., TRAIL... and CURSE...).

With his beady eyes and bald scalp, John Hollis presents a more blunt and brutal form of evil, as his politeness in getting info all too quickly gives way to violence and murder. He's turned up prominently in 2 SAINT episodes ("The Saint Plays With Fire", "The Fast Women"), played a kindly scientist on DOCTOR WHO ("The Mutants"), Billy Dee Williams' sidekick in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, and, uncredited, Ernst Stavros Blofeld (or a lookalike henchman-- who can say for sure?) in FOR YOUR EYES ONLY (voice dubbed by Robert Rietty in any case).

I do wonder why a story so clearly meant as an introduction of a new character was filmed second instead of first, but whatever. Cathy Gale presents a VERY impressive character here, giving Steed info he needs with both authority and open suspicion. Her whole demeanor shows she either doesn't like or doesn't trust this shady guy who's asking about things she knows are more dangerous than most people suspect. So what a surprise (or should it be?) when he finds her sneaking into an apartment he's already broken into, and for the same reason he's there. In the process, he finds it's a mistake to sneak up on her, as she neatly flips him onto the floor before he can even get "What are YOU doing here?" out of his mouth. Definitely not your average 60's TV woman!

As the story progresses, she continues to keep him at arm's length, and you can read so much into Patrick Macnee's body language and facial expressions it's a delight to watch, as clearly Steed doesn't know what to make of his new acquaintance. Dropping him off, she tells him "Why don't you do your OWN work?", a reference to the way Steed enjoys letting other people do his work for him. Later, he sneaks into the baddie's lair and disguises himself in a monk's robe, only to be discovered when the man he took it from recovers and gives the alarm. Considering this was (or should be) the 1st Cathy episode, it's funny this brings to mind the 1st Purdey episode, where once again Steed, disguised in a monk's robe, was found out. ("Sieg-- HEIL! Sieg-- HEIL! Sieg..." "Rule Britannia?")

Steed is once more surprised when Cathy turns out to be even more resourceful than he realized, and saves the day at the end. When he asks why she showed up even though she WASN'T really in a trance, she tells him, referring to her time in Africa, "When I find something worth hunting, I like to be in on the kill." Their mutual smiles show that, at the end, they HAVE become friends! If you watch "DEATH DISPATCH" right after this, her whole attitude in that story toward him makes more sense than if you see that one first. What a good start to a great partnership!

[paw broon]

Excellent episode, indeed.  As for dates, Warlock was recorded on 7th. July '62 and broadcast in U.K. on 26th. Jan. '63.  Death Despatch was recorded on 23rd. June '62 and broadcast on 22nd. Dec. '62.  Both on ITV.  (Source - The Ultimate Avengers by Dave Rogers 1995)  and I believe the info. is from ABC-TV.
Only for info. Please correct me if I've got it wrong.

[profh0011]

I think it was from one of Dave Rogers' books I got the production order. It's just strange that in this case, even that isn't exactly "right", as the 2nd Cathy episode filmed SHOULD be seen 1st. (and vice-versa, I think)


What susprises me at the moment (and I must have noticed this earlier) is that the 6 Venus Smith episodes were filmed WHILE the Cathy Gale episodes were also being filmed.  I'd have thought they'd have all been done before, as a set. I like her, in an entirely different way than how I like Cathy.


By the way, I know it's a US-UK thing, but putting the day before the month just confuses me when I read it!




Just got up to my 1st SECRET AGENT episode, "Fish On A Hook".  I just confurmed it, there were 45 episodes of this.  Well, my PBS station ran 44 of them.  Isn't that a big "WTF"  This was NOT aired, and I got ahold of it later from my video store. However, the sound quality on the rental tape was AWFUL, really harsh on my ears. (Almost makes me wonder if the tape wasn't a bootleg.) Tremendous cast in this one-- Dawn Addams, Zena Marshall ("Miss Taro" from DR. NO), Martin Miller (who I always remember from the PRISONER episode "It's Your Funeral"), Vladek Sheybal (FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE) and Peter Bowles!! (TO THE MANOR BORN)

[profh0011]

Watched GODZILLA, KING OF THE MONSTERS again last night.  As expected, at least half of the IMDB fan reviews consist of slamming the film in favor of its original Japanese version. I can understand that, but, never having seen the original, I'm stuck with the heavily re-edited version which features Raymond Burr. His intense, sombre commentary on the TOTAL DESTRUCTION of Tokyo must add something to make up for whatever was cut in the process.


One person at the IMDB message boards made an interesting commentary on how the original film was a sci-fi allegory for WW2, between the way the Japanese army REPEATEDLY attacks Godzilla, thereby provoking his attack on Tokyo (something MISSING in the US version) to the fact that Godzilla attacks Tokyo TWICE in the 2nd half of the film (mirroring the TWO atomic bombs dropped on the country). I never made this connection before! One bit of commentary left in the dubbed version, which seemed to slip right by, was when the older scientist, when asked of the cause of Godzilla's radioactivity, states plainly he believes it's the direct of result of "repeated H-Bomb testing". Well, it was AMERICA who was doing that, so without naming names, he put the blame for big "G" squarely on the US!


Then you have the scientist, Dr. Serizawa, who accidentaly stumbles upon a TERRIFYING chemical reaction which can destroy all organic life in water, and "turn Tokyo Harbor into a graveyard". Fearful that his discovery could be used as a weapon in the wrong hands, he refusesd to allow its use, until he finally relents, destroying all his notes first, and then committing suicide at the end of the story to make sure no one else will ever get their hands on what he knows. What a powerful anti-war statement.


The main purpose of creating the "Americanized" version of the film, apparently, was to take a COMPLETELY Japanese movie and make it something they could sell to an audience who still remembered all too recently World War 2. One reviewer noted how Burr's reporter character in every scene treats the Japanese characters like normal people, NO racism, NO prejudice, NO slurs. Gene Roddenberry would have been proud.




Tonight, I've got GODZILLA RAIDS AGAIN ready to go. Nowhere near as good as the original, it shares with SON OF KONG in being a very quickly knocked-out sequel made simply to "cash in" on the success of the earlier film. The original's director and music composer did not return, only the special effects guy, and the sped-up fight scenes (intended to be slowed-down) were the result of a cameraman mistaking instructions. (HONESTLY!) The effects guy liked what he saw, and left it in.  Sheesh. Tragically, the film ALSO got "butchered" for American consumption, including changing the name of the lead monster. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE???


I understand that it's only in the last 4-5 years that the original Japanese versions of these things have finally become available over here.  ONE of these days...

[Menticide]

Having watched both versions, on the big screen in both cases, I can attest to the fact that they do have a number of differences. There is more than a half an hour of footage removed from the 1956 American version. Now, that said there is an equal amount of footage added, so it kind of evens it all out, but it also creates a completely different movie. The feel of the 1954 original is very different, it's exceedingly political, and metaphorical, and might I add, understandably so. But, the 1956 version removes most of that context in favor of a sort fun, but silly monster romp, thus creating two drastically different films. Which one is better? Well, in my opinion, I think I slightly prefer the 1954 version, if for nothing else it's serious nature, but on the other hand the 1956 version works on another level, in that it doesn't take itself as seriously, and hence it works as a monster movie, instead of the political allegory that it was supposed to be originally.

[profh0011]

"it doesn't take itself as seriously"

That's really something, considering it's probably the most deadly-serious, sombre, frightening GODZILLA film ever made!

I gotta see the Japanese versions of these one of these days...


By the way, someone online suggested exactly what crossed my mind-- that the special effects shots in the sequel were left as they were (done wrong) not so much because the director liked them, but because the schedule was so rushed they just didn't have time to redo them. (Makes sense to me.)

One comment I found online suggested the 2nd film did have an underlying theme (something nobody else even noticed), which was the idea of people who've survived a great tragedy trying to put their lives back together. Many pointed out that the climax of the film takes place only halfway in-- the 2nd half is mostly taken up with the characters trying to move on... until Godzilla shows up AGAIN.

[josemas]

I gotta see the Japanese versions of these one of these days...

It has been neat watching the original Japanese versions of these films that have been coming out on DVD over the last decade or so however the American edits are not always drastically different than the originals . 
I recently watched Mothra (1961) on the Icons of Scifi:Toho Collection (which has also has The H-Man [1959] and Battle in Outer Space [1960] in the set) and all three films have both the Japanese and American cuts.
I went back and checked out the Japanese version of Mothra after the Lil Missus and I watched the American cut and found very little difference.  The Japanese edit has some scenes that run just a little longer than the American cut (adding a few minutes to the film) but nothing that either adds to or takes away from the film by their presence or absence. 

Best

Joe

[profh0011]

All these years, and there's still so many Japanese giant-monster movies I've never seen!  (It's disgraceful, I know...)  MOTHRA is one I do have on video. Love it.  Especially once I realized that, while GODZILLA was Japan's "answer" to THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS, MOTHRA is japan's "answer" to MIGHTY JOE YOUNG.  Both films involve "good" monsters, cute girls, singing, and show business.

Although they use fictional names in the film, I'm convinced the nightclub where the 2 girls are put on display is supposed to be in Las Vegas. Yes, the villains are Americans!!


It's funny that my first exposure to Mothra was GODZILLA VS. THE SEA MONSTER.  (Also my 1st Godzilla movie, I think.)

Back in 1971, I got to see GODZILLA VS. THE THING (Mothra) on a big screen, on a triple-bill with KONGA and REPTILICUS.  What an afternoon!


I think it was about a year later (though I can't be sure) that I got to see a double-bill of YOG, MONSTER FROM SPACE and DESTROY ALL MONSTERS.  I know it was a few years after DAM came out, so I'd been looking forward to it for some time.

No matter how you look at it, these things are MEANT to be seen on a BIG screen!   

[profh0011]

Okay, my memory was a bit off.  It's Tokyo that gets trashed again in MOTHRA, until the last section, where it's the (ahem) fictional "New Kirk City" in "Rosilica" (it looks like Los Angeles to me!) The film is a jab at capitalism; the villain lets GREED over-ride all other considerations, as he lies, steals, kidnaps, murders, and lets thousands of innnocent people die (and billions in property damage rack up) all while denying any responsibility, and REFUSING to simply let those 2 girls go home!  (What a B******!)

The whole time I was watchig tonight, that guy reminded me of the owner of my last company...

[josemas]

No matter how you look at it, these things are MEANT to be seen on a BIG screen!   

Totally agree! 

(Still glad they're available on DVD though as the chance of seeing more than a few selected older movies on the big screen is unlikely.)

Best

Joe

[profh0011]

Last night:

KING KONG VS. GODZILLA


I hadn't seen this is around 30 years. Yep, it's just as dumb as ever, only now I know why.

For one thing, it was INTENDED as a comedy! But for another, it seems the US version was even more altered than the 2 previous Godzilla movies.  Mind-boggling, isn't it?  At least 10 minutes of original footage was CUT, and replaced with new US footage. Most of what's missing is humor and character development. I thought most of the people in this film seemed to be lacking any real personalities. The only ones who come across decently are the 3 guys from the Pharmaceutical copany-- the owner, and his 2 stooges.

Watchng this film right after MOTHRA is amazing, because "Mr. Tako" is a lot like the villain of the earlier film-- except, rather than someone to hate and despise, Tako is someone to LAUGH at. He strikes me as Japan's answer to Groucho Marx-- with a bit of J.Jonah Jameson thrown in (although this was BEFORE the creation of JJJ, which maskes me wonder if someone at Marvel was inspired by this movie...!).

There's one scene where Kong destroys a train, but, saves one girl before he does it. And the film's "hero" yells, "You can't attack him now-- he's holding my SISTER!" Now, unless MY Channel 9 copy is MISSING something, there was no lead-up to this at all, and I was left thinking, "What kind of coincidence is THAT?"  (It could be among the scenes cut from the US version, but it could also be a case of a local station butchering films as usual.)

All the "new" scenes involving a UN commentator and a scientist try to take the film "seriously", but the result instead makes it feel disjointed and schizo. No wonder people have been laughing AT the film for decades, instead of WITH it.

I also suspect that Kong becoming stronger via electricity is somehow a leftover idea from when the film was supposed to star a giant-sized FRANKENSTEIN. It's funny that NOBODY at the IMDB made this connection!

[narfstar]

I saw KK vs Godzilla at the theater as a kid. I LOVED IT. Still enjoy watching it. These corny movies have been around and shown over and over so there is an affection for them.

[profh0011]

I'm still missing most of them (and there are still many I have never seen yet!), but I do have a few of my faves coming up... DESTROY ALL MONSTERS, KING KONG ESCAPES, and TERROR OF MECHAGODZILLA.  (They went out on a high point with that last one!)


Meanwhile, tonight... THE MYSTERIOUS ISLAND (1961).  One of the coolest Jules Verne movies ever; one of my favorite Harryhausen flicks; one of Herbert Lom's best roles; and some of the most awesome Bernard Hermann music ever!  (Looked for this for months... turns out it was in the same box as GODZILLA RAIDS AGAIN.)

[narfstar]

I thought I was in scifi heaven when I first saw Destroy All Monsters. Not just one but a bunch of these wonderful creatures. Japan knew how to make this little boy happy.