Wednesday, May 30, 2012

2012 Drive-In Super Monster-Rama



Well, it's finally happened.  The line-up for this year's edition of the Drive-In Super Monster-Rama has been announced!  What is the Drive-In Super Monster-Rama you ask?  Well if you don't know then here's some background information.

2011 Drive-In Super Monster-Rama marquee
A great retro-styled teaser ad for this year's show from
Nostalgic Drive-In Theater Newspaper Ads


Now in it's 6th year, the Drive-In Super Monster-Rama is simply one of the greatest retro-drive-in shows around.  Over the course of two nights (the Friday and Saturday after Labor Day in September) a total of EIGHT classic drive-in movies from the 1960s and 70s are shown on the big screen at the Riverside Drive-In in North Vandergrift, Pennsylvania.  That's four movies each night!  The show is put on by DVD Drive-In's George Reis--the driving force behind the show.  Admission is only ten dollars per person per night (that's only $2.50 per movie if you're counting!).  You can conserve even more money by taking advantage of the Riverside's offer to camp out at the drive-in for another ten bucks per night!  The Riverside Drive-In has been a great host for this show throughout its run.  They usually close for the season after the Labor Day weekend.  By making themselves available for this mega-show they get a chance to remain open for one last weekend of nostalgic drive-in fun.


So what exactly makes this show so special?  Well if the eight horror movies over two nights aren't enough there are many other reasons as well.  First off, George Reis acquires only 35mm film prints for the show.  It would be a LOT easier and more cost effective to simply throw a movie into a DVD player and project that onto the screen.  Any real movie fan can appreciate how much better it is to know that what you are watching is not only something that would have been seen at a dusk-to-dawn drive-in shock fest back in the 1960s or 70s, but also that it is being projected on the screen in the same way that it would have back then as well.

The Riverside's projector

And some of the 35mm film ready to roll

Here's the list of movies that will be featured at this year's show:

NIGHT ONE--Friday September 7th 



Horror House (1969)


Equinox (1970)


Son of Blob (1972)



NIGHT TWO--Saturday September 8th





Raw Meat (1973)


Psychomania (1973)


As if all that weren't enough, the movies aren't the only thing that you'll see up on the Riverside's giant screen at a Drive-In Super Monster-Rama show.  In addition to those eight films there are also tons of great trailers for all kinds of horror, exploitation and monster movies from around the same period.  Plus there are also many classic drive-in intermission ads before and after the features.  And there are always a few short subjects between the movies too (past shows have had Three Stooges shorts and cartoons like The Pink Panther and Mr. Magoo--just to name a few).  It's two nights (and early mornings) chock full of all kinds of celluloid entertainment.  And of course all of these elements are also projected on the screen via 35mm film stock, just like the main features!

Here are just a few of the trailers from last year's show:







And some images from the intermission ads:





And one of the shorts from last year

Being an active drive-in means that the Riverside also has an extensive snack bar menu filled with all kinds of great drive-in food choices (hot dogs, hamburgers, pizza, french fries, popcorn, candy, soda, and on and on...).  Just check out their menu to see it all:



There are always a few surprise items on the menu too!
The snack bar also features a couple great old pinball machines!

Still not convinced that  the Drive-In Super Monster-Rama is for you?  Well, if you're a fan of drive-ins and these kinds of movies then it really is about as good as it gets.  You get to enjoy all this great nostalgic drive-in fun at an actual operating drive-in and mingle with other fans who have come from all over the country to experience it.  Not only that, but the good folks from Creepy Classics and Monster Bash also set up shop in the snack bar with boxes and boxes filled with hundreds of DVDs for sale.  They also have t-shirts, posters, magazines, books, toys and other wares available.




Of course just being able to watch these kinds of movies in an actual drive-in setting is pretty special in itself--especially these days.  Drive-ins are becoming more and more rare every year.  The steady and unfortunate decline that has been occurring for decades is now about to be sped up due to Hollywood's move to replace film-based movies with digital versions.  It's not a huge problem for the big megaplexes, but for small independent theaters (including drive-ins) the cost of buying one of the new digital projectors to be able to show these movies--not to mention retrofitting the projection booth to accommodate the new technology--is prohibitive.  Many of these places barely get by as it is, and they will simply have to close if they can't afford to follow Hollywood's orders.  There are a couple of very important reasons to make the effort to get to the Drive-In Super Monster-Rama this year if you've always wanted to go but have never been able to make it in the past.  First off--and to be blunt--the Riverside Drive-In might not even be open next year.  As far as I know they haven't made a decision yet as to whether they will go digital or not.  If they don't then 2012 will most likely be the Riverside's last season.  Even if they do manage to find a way to afford the digital upgrade, the Drive-In Super Monster-Rama could still be in its final year there.  This is because of the fact that the show uses 35mm film prints for all of its movies, trailers, shorts and drive-in intermission ads.  If remaining drive-ins are forced to go digital the Monster-Rama will not be able to find a home.  I certainly hope to see a seventh Drive-In Super Monster-Rama in 2013, but it's far from a certainty at this point.



For more on the Drive-In Super Monster-Rama and a closer look at what it's all about, here are my previous blogs looking at the 2010 and 2011 editions of the show:




Thursday, May 17, 2012

"Men in Black 3" and Weekly World News: Best Movie Promotion Ever?




In all the excitement about the much anticipated recent opening of "The Avengers" I almost forgot about another sure-fire summer 2012 blockbuster that's going to hit the screens soon.  "Men in Black 3" looks like it will be pretty good from what I've seen so far.  I remember really enjoying the first "Men in Black" (1997) when it came out.  That was during Will Smith's reign as Summer Box Office King.  Five years later "Men in Black II" (MIIB) (2002) came out.  It was pretty good, but seemed to suffer from a case of sequel-itis.  It's now been ten years since "MIIB".  This one will hopefully be worth the wait.

I was reminded about "MIB3" when I went to see a late-night screening of "The Three Stooges" on May 3rd--the night before "The Avengers" was released.  I forgot that there would be midnight screenings of it on the third though.  When I got out of the practically empty theater after watching the new Stooges around 11:45 I was surprised to see hundreds of folks milling about the lobby waiting for "The Avengers".  This was obviously the height of Avengers-Mania, but it was also the night that I was reminded that "Men in Black 3" would be coming out soon too.  It wasn't because I saw a trailer for the movie before "The Three Stooges" (I didn't).  Considering that "MIB3" will be out in just over a week I'm kind of surprised at how relatively low-key the promotion for it has been lately.  In this case it was a little bit of physical promotional material (as opposed to film-, TV- or web-based) that reminded me about the movie as I left that night.

It's not unusual to find various mini movie posters for upcoming releases out on the lobby counter that you can take on your way out of the movies.  I'll always grab one if it's for a film I'm interested in.  The "Men in Black 3" promo wasn't a poster though.  It was a copy of the tabloid magazine Weekly World News that featured articles and ads that are related to the movie.  I was surprised to discover that it was more than a promotional cover containing a page or two with info about the film.  Instead it is actually 32 (THIRTY-TWO) pages long!  There's a black and white poster for the movie on the back cover, but that's really the only thing that is an obvious direct ad for the film.

Front cover

Back cover--with MIB3 ad


The inside of the publication is filled with a number of stories that probably relate to the movie in one way or another.  There are also some ads sprinkled throughout for fictional products and companies--as well as some for Weekly World News products available online.  One of the few "real" ads is actually a clever full-page "article" about "Spikey Bulba" being found at a Dunkin' Donuts.  It's a pretty cool way to advertise without having to put a "real" ad in the fake magazine.  I've got a feeling that reading these "articles" will actually add to the enjoyment of watching "Men in Black 3" when I recognize references to some of them in the movie.

Here's a look at some of the magazine's contents:







An actual ad for some WWN stuff

Another Weekly World News ad

Here's the Dunkin' Donuts "story" mentioned above

Here's an "Undercover Black Cocoa Creme Donut"
...What can I say?  Advertising works.  Yum!

I LOVE the fact that this ad includes a phone number
but NO website--just like what would have been seen
in the WWN back in the 80s!
It's obvious that a lot of time and effort (as well as a few bucks I'm sure) went into making this movie promotional material.  It would have been a lot easier to simply hand out scaled down mini versions of the official movie poster.  But beyond the "thinking outside of the box" aspect of this piece, it might not seem all that great.  So why do I suggest in the title that it just might be the "Best Movie Promotion Ever"?  Well, you might need to be a person of a "certain age" to understand.  First off, I should mention that there used to be an actual Weekly World News publication that shared magazine rack space with such tabloid titles as the National Enquirer, Star and The Globe.  They were all similar in some ways, but the others focused much more on celebrity gossip while the Weekly World News was all about fantastic stories in the "real" world.  The magazine still has an online presence, but stopped publishing a paper edition in 2007.

Here are a few of my old issues of WWN from 1987-1989 still in my possession



According to Wikipedia, the Weekly World News started printing in 1979.  I would have been nine or ten at the time.  Back then there were precious few outlets for information about things strange phenomenon and unsolved mysteries.  This was a time long before The Internet.  The Weekly World News wasn't exactly a reputable news source, but it did feature stories on subjects like Bigfoot, UFOs, The Loch Ness Monster, Ghosts and anything else a Monster Kid might be interested in.  It was a great way for me to keep informed on the latest "news" about these subjects.  Because of this I had a strong affinity for it in spite of it's tabloid nature.  It was my best source for offbeat "news".  To see the magazine revived in such a complete way just to be used as promotional material for "Men in Black 3" was simply awesome to see for an old geek like me!  And it's a perfect match to pair the two together.

Here's a comparison of the new MIB issue and an old issue from the 1980s



KEEP WATCHING THE SKIES!

Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Separated at Birth 5: Lindsay Wagner and Julia Stiles




Okay, I REALLY did not intend for this whole Separated at Birth thing to become an ongoing series.  It's just that these strange and unexpected similarities keep popping up when I least expect them.  In this case we're actually going to be visiting a familiar "Separated at Birth" face.  Julia Stiles--star of such movies as "10 Things I Hate About You" (1999) and the "The Bourne Identity" trilogy (2002, 2004, 2007)--was one of the subjects of the very first Separated at Birth piece back in November 2011.  In that one she was linked to (of all people) Kiefer Sutherland.



This was not so much because of any real physical resemblance between the two actors, but more because of the fact that they looked strikingly similar in the posters or images from some of their best-known roles.  For Kiefer it was his pose atop a taxi for one of the seasons of his show "24" (2001-2010).  For Julia it was the poster for her movie "Save the Last Dance" (2001).




Other than the fact that "24" and "Save the Last Dance" both premiered in 2001 there's not a whole heck of a lot about them that's similar besides those two images.  Here's what I would see in my mind every time I encountered either one of them:



Strangely enough, the same image of Julia dancing seen above is behind this brand-new Separated at Birth example.  Lindsay Wagner is an actress best known for playing the role of The Bionic Woman back in the 1970s.  Other than both of them being attractive actresses with blond hair there isn't a whole lot of similarity between Lindsay and Julia.  But, at least in this case they're both females.

Julia Stiles

Lindsay Wagner (Then)

Lindsay Wagner (Now)

I have a collection of TV Guides from the 1970s and 80s that I use for researching stuff that I saw on TV back when I was a kid.  These old issues have given me plenty of nostalgic reading, as well as fuel for a lot of blog posts both here and (especially) at my other blog, TV Guide Time Machine.  One of these TV Guides, the May 8-14, 1976 issue, features a Lindsay Wagner cover that I just noticed looks very familiar for some reason.

TV Guide: May 8-14, 1976
Once again, something clicked in my warped brain.  Put the two images in question together and you just may be able to see some similarity.  Check it out for yourself:


Hey, who knows, maybe I've stumbled onto something huge here.  Could Julia Stiles be the secret love child of Kiefer Sutherland and Lindsay Wagner? I mean, they all certainly do have the same moves!  Just remember, you heard it here first!

If you just can't get enough of this Separated at Birth phenomenon, please feel free to check out the other installments in this growing series that you may have missed:


Until next time, keep your eyes open for strange and unexpected doppelgangers.  Something tells me there will be more to come...


Friday, May 4, 2012

The Incredible Hulk (1977)



So today, May 4, 2012 (the 35th anniversary of the release of "Star Wars" by the way*) is the day that "The Avengers" is finally being released.  I never really read The Avengers comics as a kid (or the comics of the individual members of The Avengers for that matter), but the years-long build-up to this movie's release has certainly gotten me interested.  While many anticipated movies will start releasing teaser trailers a couple years in advance, "The Avengers" actually managed to release a number of highly successful movies that sort of acted like teaser trailers themselves ("Iron Man", "Iron Man 2", "The Incredible Hulk", "Captain America", "Thor"...) leading up to this moment.  Seeing all the neat little Samuel L Jackson bits at the end of these films got me pretty stoked to see what "The Avengers" would be all about.  Early buzz sounds very promising.  Due to the blockbuster status of the film I will most likely wait a while before seeing it.  Last night I went to a 9:40 showing of "The Three Stooges"--mostly to give myself a good laugh during a stressful time.  As I'm not a big fan of big crowds, I enjoy going to late-night, mid-week showings of movies that have been out for a while.  It tends to be a LOT quieter and more enjoyable than going to see a popular movie during its opening weekend.


The interesting thing about going to see "The Three Stooges" last night was that many theaters (including the one I went to) were having midnight showings of "The Avengers".  The one I went to advertised 12:01 and 12:05AM screenings.


I didn't think much of this (other than giving a passing thought about trying to sneak into one of the midnight "Avengers" showings after my film got out).  I'm used to leaving the theater after a late night movie and finding the lobby and parking lot very quiet and deserted.  That wasn't the case last night of course.  The first time I saw "The Three Stooges" a couple weeks ago I left during the end credits and didn't get to see the extra stuff at the end.  Last night I made a point of staying through all the credits.  There were a surprising number of employees waiting for me to leave so they could clean the theater.  I felt a bit rushed, but still remained in my seat until the last credits rolled.  My first indication that something was really different was when I was getting up to leave and Thor (or actually an employee in a Thor costume) wished me a pleasant night as I left.  Then I walked out of the theater and was confronted with a long line of people waiting to get in to the same theater for one of the midnight "Avengers" shows (at about 11:30).  Many of the other theaters had similarly long lines waiting to enter.  It was pretty obvious that my idea to sneak into one of these showings wasn't going to fly.  On the way out I not only saw a LOT of other Avengers fans preparing to see the movie, but I also saw another employee dressed as Captain America leading a group of people toward one of the multiplex's 14 theaters.


With the opening of "The Avengers" being today it seems like a good time to reflect on the one member of the Avengers team that I spent the most time with as a kid--The Incredible Hulk.  As was the case with the other members, I didn't really read Hulk comics as a kid, but I did watch the Bill Bixby/Lou Ferrigno series "The Incredible Hulk" on CBS pretty regularly (in fact, probably just short of "religiously") on Friday nights back then.


There have been a wide range of mixed reviews for the two most recent big screen "Hulk" movies (2003's Ang Lee directed one and the 2008 "re-boot" that starred Edward Norton).  I pretty much hated the 2003 version, and was only slightly more impressed with the 2008 one.  The big problem for me with both of these films was the computer generated character of The Hulk.

2003 Hulk CGI
2008 Hulk CGI
1970s Non-CGI Hulk played by Lou Ferrigno
Well, I think that if I had read the comics as a kid I might have been a bit more forgiving of those CGI effects and would have enjoyed the movies more.  I do have to admit that a CGI Hulk would be much more able to look and act like the character in the comics than any human ever could.  While I have an aversion to CGI effects in general, I think my problem with those recent movies had more to do with the fact that I grew up knowing the character of The Hulk as being played by an actual person (Lou Ferrigno).  There were probably comic book fans who were hugely disappointed with the direction that the 1970s TV show took, but that was pretty much how I got to know The Hulk.

Coincidently, I just recently (within the last week or so) started watching the old "The Incredible Hulk" show again through Netflix streaming.  I've only seen the pilot movie and part of the first episode so far, but am already enjoying this trip back in time.  I saw a few episodes over the past couple of years on the RTV (Retro Television) network when they had them on weeknights, but they stopped showing them in my area a while ago.  It was nice to be able to start at the very beginning with Netflix.  I've always been familiar with the story of how Dr. David Banner was exposed to an accidental overdose of gamma radiation and turned into The Hulk when angered or outraged--by seeing the opening credit sequence for the show week after week.


But, I don't know if I ever actually ever saw the original pilot movie for the show or not.  If I did, I can't say I remember it.  A lot of it did feel familiar because of the fact that the regular opening of the series is made up of footage from the pilot ("Mr. McGee Don't make me angry.  You wouldn't like me when I'm angry").


I was originally going to look for the ads and listings of the pilot movie and early episodes of "The Incredible Hulk" in my TV Guide collection and post this entry in my TV Guide Time Machine blog instead of here, but it turns out that I don't have the issues from November 1977, when the show premiered, in my collection.  The pilot aired on Friday, November 4, 1977 and the first regular episode was on a few weeks later on Sunday, November 27th.

I don't know exactly when I started watching "The Incredible Hulk" (I was only 8 when it first aired), but I know that once I did it was a staple of my Friday nights for what seemed like a long time.  I had a nephew who slept over most Friday nights for a while and we'd always watch "Doctor Who" (the Tom Baker era) at 7:00 PM on PBS and then "The Incredible Hulk" at 8:00 and "The Dukes of Hazzard" at 9:00.  Around the time of the whole "Who shot J.R.?" phenomenon we also started watching "Dallas" at 10:00 too.  The TV schedules changed from year to year of course, but that's the lineup which I remember best.


I've introduced my older daughter (The Little Monster) to a lot of the stuff I lived watching and reading about as a kid.  We even watched a few episodes of "The Incredible Hulk" on RTV when the show was broadcast there.   But I started my recent re-watching of the show by myself.  At least I intended to watch it by myself anyway.  Interestingly enough, my younger daughter (The Insane Beast) started watching it with me.  She's about to turn three and I was a little surprised to find her so interested in the show.  She seems to understand that David Banner and The Hulk are the same person.  She refers to the show as either "David" or "Scary" (meaning David Banner and The Hulk), or "David and Scary".  She will say "I wanna watch Scary" or "I wanna watch David" when she wants to see the show.  It's amazing that something so old and not-really-for-kids-that-young like "The Incredible Hulk" would hold her interest so well.  I also started showing Tom Baker "Doctor Who" episodes to The Little Monster a few months ago and was surprised that they both really enjoy watching that show too.  I guess good entertainment is good entertainment--regardless of how old it is and whether it was shown on TV 30-35 years ago or whether it was just on Nickelodeon or The Disney Channel today!  Since we don't have cable, my Little Monsters seem very susceptible to the charms of old cartoons and TV shows I enjoyed when I was a tyke.  Now I feel a little guilty about not having The Little Monster watch "The Incredible Hulk" with The Insane Beast and myself.  But in a way it does seem appropriate for the little one to be watching the show--as she tends to be a pretty destructive creature who can get pretty danged Hulk-like at times.


*Oh, and by the way...