Notes on life, art, photography and technology, by a Danish dropout bohemian.
When you drink the water, remember the river.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Karloff
Boris Karloff in The Mummy. What a face that man had. Plus of course the inspired work by the make-up artist, Jack Pierce (who also did Frankenstein's creature).
He was good too, though I'm a bigger fan of Karloff.
They had a big rivalry going. I once watched a documentary about Legosi. It ended on a triumphant note about Legosi memorabilia outselling Karloff's. Hehe.
Eolake said: "He was good too, though I'm a bigger fan of Karloff."
I haven't actually seen either at work. I saw "Ed Wood," but I haven't seen Frankenstein or Lugosi's Dracula.
As for the name of the monster, I have to say: Although I know it's the scientist whose name is Frankenstein (and that the monster had no name), because of the movies everyone "knows" the monster is Frankenstein. It seems a bit pedantic to refer to him as "Frankenstein's monster." :-)
A clash of the egoes occuring between those two doesn't surprise me.
"Orange soda is not the same as orange juice."
News shocker: "I can't believe it's not butter" is indeed not butter!
Regarding the monster: "Ford", "Daimler-Benz", "Ferrari" were the names of the people who made the cars. Originally. The monster simply became a brand name too. Thanks to the pedants, woo-hoo! High-five, dude! Pedants roolz! :-D
That's because crimson blood is a brain-dead idiot, like everyone else here. If someone doesn't express an opinion he already agrees with, he's lost. I can picture the dolt sitting there at his computer, brow furrowed in a vain attempt to understand... It's gone past humorous and crossed over into sad. What a lost fucking cause these organ banks are.
Quite right. Rejection and grief turned him from victim to monster.
Such a powerful story standing on a few simple truths and symbols, could probably have been written in these days only by a woman. She really impressed me.
The Incredible Hulk is little more than a modern version. Which was enough to make it work well!
But we do need some fresh approaches in the super-hero genre today in 2007. Although issue #666 of Superman [now on sale] worked well, it was entirely borrowed and adapted from the lovecraftian C'thulhu mythos, and rather anti-climactic. (These "K'HELU!" screams on page one are rather transparent...)
Too many ghosts, devils, vampires, mummies, robots, dinosaurs, manga stereotypes... I long for some real creativity. Even the X-Men feel like they're becoming redundant these days. We need new Karloffs, Lugosis, Lovecrafts, Tolkiens, Asimovs and Mary Shelleys.
All things considered, Jurassic Park and Harry Potter worked great in making NEW stories with old images. (Before the herd followed suit, as usual.) Artemis Fowl is creative too. And the 99 are nicely original.
Stephen Fry or Jim Dale? Over here the books are narrated by Jim Dale, of Carry On fame. In the UK it's Fry. Though JD does an excellent job, I would like to hear SF's reading.
I can't understand why they didn't just get Fry to re-record the translated paragraphs, surely that would have been cheaper.
I got book two from iTunes UK, so that's Fry. I got the first book from US, so that must be the other guy. Although it seem the first half of the book was done by a different guy than the second half.
22 comments:
Woah! The guy on the picture looks damn scary.
I found the movie "Ed Wood" to be an interesting insight into the final years of the lonely immigrant horror actor.
Wasn't that Bela Lugosi?
Duh, I feel stoopid now. Yes it was Lugosi. Early morning brain fart....
He was good too, though I'm a bigger fan of Karloff.
They had a big rivalry going. I once watched a documentary about Legosi. It ended on a triumphant note about Legosi memorabilia outselling Karloff's. Hehe.
Eolake said:
"He was good too, though I'm a bigger fan of Karloff."
I haven't actually seen either at work. I saw "Ed Wood," but I haven't seen Frankenstein or Lugosi's Dracula.
As for the name of the monster, I have to say: Although I know it's the scientist whose name is Frankenstein (and that the monster had no name), because of the movies everyone "knows" the monster is Frankenstein. It seems a bit pedantic to refer to him as "Frankenstein's monster." :-)
It seems a bit pedantic to refer to him as "Frankenstein's monster." :-)
For once you actually have a point.
Shocking to say the least.
Without us pedants, the world would surely go all to heck.
Frankenstein was the doctor, "literally" does not mean "practically", and orange soda is not the same as orange juice.
:)
Lugosi and Karloff: two legends.
A clash of the egoes occuring between those two doesn't surprise me.
"Orange soda is not the same as orange juice."
News shocker: "I can't believe it's not butter" is indeed not butter!
Regarding the monster: "Ford", "Daimler-Benz", "Ferrari" were the names of the people who made the cars. Originally. The monster simply became a brand name too. Thanks to the pedants, woo-hoo!
High-five, dude! Pedants roolz! :-D
"For once you actually have a point.
Shocking to say the least."
Once again someone hides behind the anonymous label to insult someone... I mean, sure, it's not like my name's actually Joe Dick, but still...
That's because crimson blood is a brain-dead idiot, like everyone else here. If someone doesn't express an opinion he already agrees with, he's lost. I can picture the dolt sitting there at his computer, brow furrowed in a vain attempt to understand... It's gone past humorous and crossed over into sad. What a lost fucking cause these organ banks are.
Wow, the torching level is really improving these days.
And I don't just mean in the scene where the village mob chases Karloff.
One thing that "Frankenstein" taught us, is that the monster is not always the one it seems.
Although the creature actually was pretty nasty. At least in the book, where he murdered Frankenstein's wife in the most brutal manner.
Quite right. Rejection and grief turned him from victim to monster.
Such a powerful story standing on a few simple truths and symbols, could probably have been written in these days only by a woman. She really impressed me.
The Incredible Hulk is little more than a modern version. Which was enough to make it work well!
But we do need some fresh approaches in the super-hero genre today in 2007. Although issue #666 of Superman [now on sale] worked well, it was entirely borrowed and adapted from the lovecraftian C'thulhu mythos, and rather anti-climactic. (These "K'HELU!" screams on page one are rather transparent...)
Too many ghosts, devils, vampires, mummies, robots, dinosaurs, manga stereotypes... I long for some real creativity. Even the X-Men feel like they're becoming redundant these days. We need new Karloffs, Lugosis, Lovecrafts, Tolkiens, Asimovs and Mary Shelleys.
All things considered, Jurassic Park and Harry Potter worked great in making NEW stories with old images. (Before the herd followed suit, as usual.) Artemis Fowl is creative too. And the 99 are nicely original.
How do you feel about Limoney Snicket then? I can't get through the first book. It takes everything gorey ever drew and puts it into words.
There are lot of comic book cliches, but Scarlet Traces does wonders.
I am finally reading Harry Potter, as audio book. I like it.
I would love to create a new classic monster to go down the ages.
Stephen Fry or Jim Dale? Over here the books are narrated by Jim Dale, of Carry On fame. In the UK it's Fry. Though JD does an excellent job, I would like to hear SF's reading.
I can't understand why they didn't just get Fry to re-record the translated paragraphs, surely that would have been cheaper.
I got book two from iTunes UK, so that's Fry.
I got the first book from US, so that must be the other guy. Although it seem the first half of the book was done by a different guy than the second half.
Still haven't read Lemony Snicket. Or Douglas Adams. Got whole shelves of good books waiting in line.
Looks like I can't afford to die just yet. ;-)
What NO DNA - For Shame...
Post a Comment