Welcome to the Lessons Taught

 …but didn’t sink in.

Have y’all ever wondered how much media is out there about World War 2. I have - mostly because while cleaning out my one parent’s apartment, I came across so many books and movies about World War 2. Books about ships and weaponry, books about major battles, mysteries that took place during the war, thrillers and spy novels mostly set in Europe, multiple copies of the same movie (why were there three versions of Tora! Tora! Tora!?), and documentaries galore. 

I ended up getting rid of a lot of it, but I still wanted to take my time and appreciate some of the books and DVDs. I am also still finding multiple copies of the some movies that I didn’t catch earlier. 

This is an old photo of the Mighty Mo where World War 2 officially ended.

World War 2 was a major event - there is no denying that. It shaped a lot of media in the mid- to late- 20th century. From the early propaganda films to turn of the century miniseries like “Band of Brothers” and “The Pacific”, there isn’t a lack of shortages in documentaries, TV shows, books (fiction and non), art, and video games.

Tons of which are still coming out today.

I’ve even won a few books seeped in World War 2 influence from GoodReads giveaways. Three to be precise. One is a post war mystery thriller featuring Julia Child as a side character - the first in a series I’d like to keep reading - called Mastering the Art of French Murder. Another is the non-fiction account of the writer’s grandfather’s tank unit called Task Force Hogan: The World War II Tank Battalion That Spearheaded The Liberation of Europe. That one is worth the read if you enjoyed stories like “Band of Brothers” or if you had a family member who served in a similar setting. The third was a strange thriller called Her Father’s Daughter which focused on recovering stolen art and finding Nazis who escaped justice. Sadly, it was not as good as the summary might suggest. I don’t recommend that one.

Because of its cultural significance, World War 2 was a major part of my education. History classes would focus on how appeasement didn’t work to keep the Nazis from their expansionist goals and how Japan wanted to join in on colonialism since it worked so well for western countries (though much less so for all colonized people). Pearl Harbor, D-Day, and Hiroshima were studied inside and out. We watched parts of movies and miniseries like “Saving Private Ryan”, “Barefoot Gen”, and (of course) “Band of Brothers”. Our English teachers had us read A Thousand Paper Cranes, Night, and The Dairy of a Young Girl (i.e. Anne Frank’s Diary). We visited the Holocaust museum in 12th grade for a field trip and discussed the results of the Nuremberg Trials.

Yet with all this history and media, the current state of the world has me questioning if anything was actually learned. I grew up knowing the Nazis were bad guys, not only because Indiana Jones fought them, but because we learned about the Holocaust and how their actions compounded into one of the greatest mass murders in world history. Yet now, an Indiana Jones game comes out and there are people mad that Nazis are the bad guys. We also have people denying the Holocaust happened.

I could argue that there’s a similar over saturation of media about the American Civil War. Again, it was a major event that killed hundreds of thousands and ended the horrific practice of slavery. Except it took another century for the Civil Rights Act to take effect - that was during my parents’ childhood.

About two years ago, I was fortunate enough to see a stage performance of “Cabaret” at my local theater. I loved it and wrote a post about it. In the post, I noted that we lived in interesting times and that if you didn’t think they were interesting, then you weren’t paying attention. Well, I hope you are paying attention now.

I continue to hope for better times, but the lessons I was taught in my history and English classes indicate that things are likely to get a lot worse. What will be the new “normal” is up in the air.

But if we can’t learn the lessons from World War 2 (like how appeasement never works), why should more and more media about that time period keep coming out? There have been other wars, other world conflicts, and genocides that could and likely should be studied. Is it because many Americans view themselves as the ultimate “good guys” during that time (at least in the European theater - the Pacific is a lot more complicated)? 

On another hand, World War 2 media often tops the lists of banned books. Two books I’ve read, Night and The Diary of a Young Girl. Others include Maus and Number the Stars - both of which I’ve been recommended. All of these books were either written by people who experienced the Holocaust first hand, had family who survived the Holocaust, or conducted on site research.

Everyone wants to be a hero in some capacity. I often wondered what I might have done during some of history’s biggest events. Where I’d have been or how I might have contributed. You, dear reader, likely have as well.

The answer is, whatever you are doing right now. History is happening. The ordinary and nameless are who make the biggest impact. What stories are you leaving behind? In 20 or 30 or 50 years from now, someone might ask you what you were doing today. Will you be proud of your answer?

Until next week.

If you enjoyed this post or it really pissed you off, please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you all like hearing from me.

Welcome to Not Enough Lifeboats

A few weeks ago, I was reading up on people’s reactions to the current chaos plaguing the Federal Government (of the United States). One person noted that they felt like they were in the scene in the movie Titanic when the musicians start playing the song “Nearer My God to Thee”. This triggered my goblin brain to start watching scenes from the 1997 movie, a few documentaries, and interviews from survivors.

Which led me to the movie A Night to Remember (1958).

A Night to Remember is probably the most accurate movie about the maritime disaster ever made (sorry Cameron fans). It was based on a book with the same name by Walter Lord, who had been obsessed (much like Cameron) with the tragedy. Lord interviewed 63 survivors of the sinking, creating cohesive timeline of events.

I have not yet had the chance to read the book, but I have watched the movie. And I liked it better than the 1997 one.

A Night to Remember primarily focuses on the sinking of the Titanic. The narrative follows several characters - some fictional, but most based on real people - and how they either survive or parish. My personal favorite is the survival of the baker. In the movie (his story varies by retelling), he gives up his seat in a lifeboat for another person, knowing he’d likely die. He then gets blind stinking drunk, starts throwing deck chairs overboard for people to use for flotation, climbs to the back part of the ship, and rides his way down before gently entering the water. He then treads water for about two hours in near freezing temperatures before he is pulled into a lifeboat. He doesn’t give in to hypothermia, he doesn’t drown, and he doesn’t panic. 

Normally, that amount of alcohol that the baker (may have) consumed would have actually been a detriment to surviving the cold. But because of the alcohol, the baker didn’t panic. Nor did he go into shock - which is likely why so many people died of hypothermia. 

He stayed calm and survived. His name was Charles Joughin.

Joughin was an outlier. His odds of survival were almost nil when gave up his seat.The vast majority of Titanic’s staff died with the ship along with a disproportionate number of third class passengers and men. The laws of the sea (in those days) dictated that women and children were to be given priority for lifeboats…at least the upper and middle class ones. Poor women and children were still given priority, but not as much as their first and second class counterparts.

Classism at its finest.

And though women and children were first asked to enter the lifeboats, some of them refused to. At first it was because the women felt safer staying on the Titanic. After all, they’d been told the Titanic was unsinkable, so why would they get in a much smaller “less safe” wooden lifeboat? Then they began to realize their actual danger, and the women wanted to stay with their husbands. Such was a woman’s duty in those days. They knew they would likely die or maybe they were still in denial about the danger they were in. It’s not fully clear.

Still, sexism at its finest.

Of the children on board, only every second class child escaped the ship. Only one first class child died - a two year old whose parents lost track of her baby brother and refused to be separated until he was found. The girl’s baby brother had already been placed in a lifeboat by the boy’s nurse. The family never knew he had already escaped. 52 children (a little over half) from third class died. More first class men survived than third class children.

The Titanic did not have enough lifeboats for every passenger on the ship, but it had enough for regulations. Those regulations had never imagined a ship Titanic’s size, so had never been updated. It was also assumed that ships in the area (because there were so many in the Atlantic at that time) would get to a wreck site in time for people to be picked up from the first round of lifeboats, then go back to the sinking ship, and pick up more distressed passengers.

On the night Titanic sank, the California was the closest ship. However, after a nasty interaction it’s Titanic’s wire operator, the California’s operator signed off and went to bed. There wasn’t another operator on the ship to take his place. The Titanic set off multiple rockets which the California saw. However, again, it was assumed that such a large ship was unsinkable and that the rockets were some kind of weird celebration in the middle of the night. 

Should the California have checked out what was going on?

The California was significantly smaller than the Titanic. I think that even if they had responded and tried to help, it wouldn’t have made huge difference. People would have still ended up in the water and quickly died of hypothermia. However, the losses wouldn’t have been as terrible. We’ll never know though.

So, the partially filled lifeboats had nowhere to drop off the first round of evacuees. Why didn’t they go back to the pull people out of the water?

To be blunt, the people in the water would have likely swarmed the lifeboats and caused capsizing. More people would have likely died.

Thus, the survivors in the lifeboats got front row tickets to the horror of listening to people die. They heard the screams and they could do nothing to help without risking more people dying. Eventually, a boat was able to go back and a few people were pulled from the water. It was too little too late for the majority.

At the end of A Night to Remember, the following text is shown: “despite the tragedy, the sacrifice of those lost on the Titanic was not in vain, as new maritime safety measures like sufficient lifeboats, constant radio monitoring, and the International Ice Patrol were implemented to prevent similar disasters in the future.”

But why weren’t these things implemented before the tragedy. Why did it take the deaths of over 1,500 people - over two thirds of the passengers on the Titanic - for these changes to be made? Why did the Titanic crew ignore the ice warnings? They did the radio and wire operators prioritize sending passenger messages over ensuring they could still communicate with the ship closest to them?

Tragedy begets change. Disaster begets action.

We aren’t at the part of the Titanic sinking where the orchestra plays “Nearer My God to Thee”. We are at the part where the lifeboats are just starting to be filled. The first class is boarding first, but not all of them know or even think the ship is sinking yet. 

The next little while is going to be painful and chaotic. The people who are going to be the most impacted will not be offered seats on those lifeboats.

Walter Lord provides a hard critique on Edwardian culture and class. He points out the classism and the final dregs of Gilded Age hyper capitalism that caused the disaster. He calls out the hubris of man over nature.

I wonder what history will say about this era of American history.

Until next week.

If you liked this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like to hear from me.

Welcome to Love Letter Events

This weekend marked the beginning of a big event. This event so big and monumental that it might bring people together to celebrate the past and potential future.

I am of course talking about the theatrical release of “Deadpool and Wolverine”…

…and the Paris Olympics.

Let me explain…or at least gush.

I’ve been in a funk the past little while and a doctor’s visit hasn’t helped much. So, Friday night, I got home from my evening walk and realized that the Paris Opening Ceremonies were going on. I missed maybe the first half hour (which is fine, I can look up what I missed). I thought the big performance was over and I could watch the barges (an experiment this year with mixed results) with the athletes make their way through Paris.

And then I saw the parkour Assassin’s Creed* cosplayer carrying the Olympic torch and realized that the performance was still going on throughout the parade of athletes. Lady Gaga then took stage right on the river and performed admirably as it started to rain. 

All of the performers did an amazing job. They weren’t able to do a full dress rehearsal on stage due to the secrecy around the performances, which is an amazing achievement, but then they turned it up by 1000x because it poured. And those performers didn’t bat an eye (well I’m assuming they didn’t), they kept it up and put on a great show dedicated to the history and culture of Paris.

The choreographer and director clearly wanted to write a love letter to Paris and France and they succeeded. 

My personal favorite was the transition from Les Mis to the screaming beheaded body of Marie Antoinette  which heralded the start of a heavy metal opera mashup that I was not expecting. It was fabulously camp with just a hint of tasteful gore.

I also really liked the love story section in the library that ends with an implied threesome. It just was nowhere near as amazing as an entire building with shrieking beheaded Marie Antoinettes. 

Surprisingly, the Paris Opening Ceremonies paired well with “Deadpool and Wolverine”as a double feature. (Technically, I watched them on two separate days, but it’s my life so I’m counting it.)

I’m going to do my best here to NOT spoil “Deadpool and Wolverine”, but I can’t help you if you read past this sentence.

You have been warned!

“Deadpool and Wolverine” is a love letter to the 20th Century Fox era of Marvel comic book hero movies. It accepts that that era of movies is over, but it goes out with a bang. It is a fans dream gift wrapped in references, cameos, and so many Deadpools.

Yes, there are other references. The Avengers get a shout out and there are some questions that are left unanswered (if you know, you know). Also, I loved the montage of Wade trying to find a certain someone for very noble reasons and messing it up.

Do you need knowledge about everything Marvel to understand the movie?

No.

But knowing that certain things that happened in other movies helps. The ending of “Logan” (2017) might be required background knowledge, but it’s not necessary. Wade in all of his Deadpool-ness knows that the audience may not have seen everything Marvel in the past 30 odd years (oh man…when did that movie come out?). He’s also aware that some people have, and read all the comics, and can quote every cartoon that popped up on Saturday morning, and all the video games…you get the picture. 

Wade is good at balancing the wink, wink nudge, nudge with the “I have no idea what’s going on”. He’s like the commentators at the Olympic Opening Ceremonies trying to explain everything we’re seeing. They might not know everything, but they know more than the average viewer and might also admit when they too are confused.

Is it a perfect movie?

No.

There were a couple of cameos I was hoping for that didn’t happen and there were a few things that were left open that I didn’t think needed to be. Plus not enough of Wade’s main team.

But it is a solid mood lifter and I’d watch Deadpool fight with Wolverine against the TVA any day (if you know, you know). I also liked that Deadpool and handle the ridiculous, mix it with the dramatic, and spit out God’s Perfect Idiot. 

Definitely stick around for the credits. You can tell that the film makers grew up with the 20th Century Fox movies and wanted to give them one final send off. It was a total throw back for me.

So go watch “Deadpool and Wolverine” if you want and check out the Paris Opening Ceremonies performances if you feel like it. I’m not going to tell you what to do.

But if you do watch both or one or the other, please let me know what you thought. Because…

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y’all like hearing from me.

Until next week.

*I don’t actually know if they were cosplaying Assassins Creed, that’s just what it looked like to me.

Welcome to a Happy DC Universe

Please note that this is a piece on my own experience with superhero media. My experience was very limited in the 1990s and 2000s and was often drawn from early incarnations of the characters shown on TV. I started reading the comics more in the 2010s.

In an era where Marvel has taken over (thanks to Disney) and the latest X-Men animated series has taken pop culture by storm (pun loosely intended), it seems that Marvel is currently winning the long standing rivalry between them and DC. My first introduction to Marvel was through the Spiderman movie from 2002 and the animated series X-Men Evolution. I was aware of other animated Marvel shows from the 1990s, but they weren’t often on the kids channels as reruns. 

Though both the Spiderman movie and X-Men Evolution TV series had their dark moments (Uncle Ben dying and learning Nightcrawler’s origin were both traumatic for little me), they were overall lighthearted and fun. Those properties are what I associated with Marvel for a long time and wasn’t familiar with other heroes like Captain America, Iron Man, or Deadpool.

I was much more familiar with DC heroes.

The 1992 Batman the Animated Series (which introduced me to Kevin Conroy as the best Batman) along with the 1989 movie were some of the first superhero properties I watched. Plus, with my dad being a fan of Scooby Doo, Justice Friends, and the 1960s live action TV show, Batman popped up a lot. Sure the older versions were lighthearted like Marvel, but it was the dark and brooding 90s incarnation that caught my attention. That didn’t mean that these versions didn’t have their fun moments. The animated Batman is still one of my favorites, even if his story ends more on the tragic end, and that series joined up with Superman the Animated Series to bring us Justice League and Justice League Unlimited, Batman Beyond, and a ton of crossovers with the amazing Static Shock. 

Sure, there were dark moments (like what happened to Tim Drake and Richard Grayson), but overall things were still pretty light hearted going into the mid-2000s with Teen Titans (minus any of that “go” nonsense).

And if you’re wondering how I can say all this without mentioning the comics, well… I wasn’t yet a comic book reader. In fact, the only graphic novels I was familiar with, at this time, were the Asterix ones my dad had from the 60s and started bring back from Europe for me to read (I didn’t see an Asterix book in the United States until the early 2010s). My sibling read Tintin. 

Superheroes were fun to young me. They could be dark and brooding, but they still smiled and laughed. They had friends and trusted people. Their villains were evil, but never to the point where the good guys lost hope.

Again, wasn’t reading the comics at this time. I had no idea who Jason Todd or how he died. I was only familiar with the Teen Titans version of Slade, not the comic book one. I didn’t know about Bane breaking Batman’s back. The animated series wasn’t allowed to kill anyone, but a child was tortured to the point of insanity on my screen.

And then “Batman Begins” hit theaters.

Suddenly broody superheroes were all the rage. It was quickly followed by the incredible “Dark Knight” and “Dark Knight Rises”. Both had huge body counts, intimidating villains, and high stakes without a happy Batman insight (probably because he didn’t have a Robin dressed as a traffic light to make bad puns while taking down bad guys).

You can even see how it influenced the early “Iron Man” and second iteration of “Spiderman” (the Andrew Garfield version) movies. However, they still maintained some level of fun. It wasn’t until I saw “Avengers” in 2012, that I felt that superheroes were being shown as fun again in theaters.

And while, Marvel (now owned by Disney) had taken Superheroes in a more fun adventure direction, 2010s DC cinema seemed to think that dark and gritty was the only way to go for more “realism” (or that’s the argument I’ve heard). By this point, the CW’s Smallville had ended and the “Arrowverse” was taking off. DC fans, luckily, still had fun adventures with DC Animation, but even that had gotten darker and grittier when not explicitly made for teens and kids (Young Justice was fantastic and was canceled because allegedly the “wrong” demographic liked it more than than the targeted one, it was later resurrected for two more seasons). 

DC fans may have liked “Wonder Woman”, but they hated “Batman v. Superman”. “Suicide Squad” was a mess and the less said about “Justice League” the better. DC did have a cool take with “Titan” and “Gotham” has the right mix of Batman 1989 and the 1992 animated series, but they seriously botched the ending.

And then the 2020s came and fans were given the light and joy that is My Adventures with Superman. Superman was suddenly fun again. He was young, inexperienced and hopeful. He wasn’t carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders and he wasn’t fighting with any other hero. He was a dork on a mission to fit in apnea become a reporter. Of course he had to save cats in his down time, he’s a good guy. 

The second season is coming out soon and it’s like I’m back in time on a Saturday morning watching Justice League or Static Shock again. I’m excited and happy and, above all, hopeful.

More recently, I’ve become familiar with the Webtoon Batman: Wayne Family Adventures. It is everything I want in a BatFam (what the fans have dubbed Bruce Wayne’s growing collection of children and Gotham based superheroes) media. And it’s officially a DC publication!

Bruce is a tired single dad raising a gaggle of feral children while Alfred tries to keep everything somewhat stable. It is a must read for anyone who has ever wanted Bruce to finally find some measure of happiness. There’s a YouTuber who has been narrating the comic and, though I don’t love all the voices, it does add an extra layer to the experience. Some are calling it the best Batman comic to come out in a long time. 

I’ve talked before about the Scooby Doo and Batman crossover comics. The webtoon is similar in tone in that it’s a lighthearted adventure. However, the difference is that the webtoon is a bit more mature. It doesn't shy away from topics like Jason’s PTSD, Tim being a disaster bi icon, and the fact that Bruce makes mistakes, lots and lots of mistakes. He even has a mug that says “World’s Okay-est Dad”. 

I hope that DC listens to fans and understands that fans want a balance of fun adventure with the angst. We don’t want “Teen Titan Go”. We want 2000s “Teen Titans”. We like campy Batman villains that are actually threatening (“Gotham” has some seriously scary moments, but still has time for 1960s antics). Superman is a dork. He believes in Santa Claus (who actually does exist in the DC universe) and his costume was made by his mom. We really enjoy Harley Quinn post Joker breakup (she and Ivy are a truly iconic queer couple). 

A lot of us grew up with fun superheroes who dealt with tough topics, especially those of us who are products of the 1980s and 1990s.

So, please DC, let your heroes be happy.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you like hearing from me.

Until the next week.

Welcome to Some Cozy Horror

I recently finished reading Howl’s Moving Castle by Diana Wynn’s Jones. I was familiar with the 2004 Hayao Miyazaki animated movie, but had never read the book. It was delightfully cozy - probably the coziest fantasy book I’d ever read. The book and the movie match maybe a third of the way through the beginning before both go off into their own adventures. Though, Calcifer does get the last word in about rain in both versions.

Typically, when I think of fantasy stories, I think of grand adventures, good versus evil, and epic battles (even when the stakes aren’t very high). Cozy fantasy was new for me and I loved it. Though, if I really think about it, a lot of Miyazaki films are fairly cozy in nature (like “My Neighbor Totoro” or “Ponyo”). Much the same could be said about Science Fiction, too, with the likes of “Castle in the Sky” or “Nausaicaä of the Valley of the Wind”. 

That got me thinking about other genres that occasionally have the cozy sub-genre attached to it.

 Mystery, is probably the best well-known genre to have a cozy sub-genre. There are a ton of cozy-mysteries out there (usually starring a middle aged female protagonist with a bookshop, a pet, and a cop boyfriend - though that’s not always the case).  My personal favorite was The Cat Who series by Lillian Jackson Braun (which starred a retired male newspaper columnist with his two cats 500 miles north of everywhere).

Romance might also have a lot of cozy sub-genre stories. I’m not super familiar with the romance genre, but I’d say that a lot of Jane Austin and the movie “The Princess Bride” are cozy romances. However, I’d probably have to ask an actual romance reader for their opinion on the genre.

Now horror seems like it shouldn’t have anything to do with the cozy sub-genre. Yet, I would argue there are several horror stories, films, and books that could count as being a part of the cozy horror sub-genre.

Gather around the campfire kids.

I’m not the first to ponder the cozy horror sub-genre. I’ve seen conversations on the-app-formerly-known-as-Twitter, posts on Instagram, and YouTube videos all discussing the idea. I identified a few children’s movies (mostly Disney or Disney Channel Original Movies) and books that could fit the bill. Think “Don’t Look Under the Bed”, “Phantom of the Megaplex”, “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” (the animated short), “Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman” (which has a lot of great callbacks to the original movie and Frankenstein book), “Over the Garden Wall”, R L Stein’s Goosebumps books, and Coraline (the movie and book). These stories may scare kids (and some adults), but they focus more on atmosphere rather than cheap jump scares.

A good balance of cozy mystery and spooky horror that usually spring boards kids into either adult versions of the genres would be Scooby Doo. Scooby Doo typically starts the mystery out with a spooky legend, curse, or ghost story that leads the gang on a merry chase looking for clues that culminates with the reveal that there wasn’t anything supernatural at all going on (minus movies like “Zombie Island” and “The Witch’s Ghost”).

During the Halloween season, “Hocus Pocus” and “Halloweentown” are fairly cozy movies - though, maybe, only “Hocus Pocus” could be considered a horror movie.

But what about the jump from children to adult horror. Sure adults can enjoy Scooby Doo and the animated or TV-movies of their youth, but are there any strictly adult cozy horror movies?

This Batman likes cozy horror.

Well, I think that depends on what we define as cozy. A quick Google search brought me to Kim Berkley’s 2022 blog post where she links readers to a 2021 Nightmare Magazine post by Jose Cruz where he lays out what defines cozy horror (I know that was convoluted, but it’s accurate to my search history). There are four basic components:

1. Familiarity

2. Sensuousness 

3. Distance

4. Fun

These four components, when applied to horror, allow people to have a safe space to explore all things spooky without causing true trauma. Much of this can be applied to children’s horror like the above named media. 

Cross stitch cozy horror!

It’s a lot harder to see how these apply to adult horror media.

Except, sometimes I do crave a spooky movie that’s not meant for children, but also mind numbingly scary. These might be “Practical Magic” (granted this is a bit of a romance, too), “Sleepy Hollow” (the Tim Burton movie that was described like being on a Scooby Doo movie set), “House of Wax” (the Vincent Price version), “Crimson Peak”, “The Woods”, “Willy’s Wonderland” (don’t ask), many Hammer Horror movies, and (probably most odd) “The Ring”. All can be scary, especially for the younger audience, but overall are just delightfully spooky after multiple viewings.

Books might be a little more difficult, but I’d argue that Abram Stoker’s Dracula, Mexican Gothic, and Kingfisher’s What Moves the Dead are good examples of cozy horror (I also recognize that two of those books mentioned prominently feature mushrooms). Why Dracula, you may wonder? There are parts of Dracula that are oddly quaint - once you get past the first third of Jonathan’s “wacky fun times” in Transylvania (that quote is from Overly Sarcastic Production’s summary of the book).

The manga “Another” and video games like Silent Hill (at least the first one) and Luigi’s Mansion would also fall under cozy horror - in my not so humble opinion. They are atmospheric, spooky, and, most importantly, fun.

And remember these are my opinions. What I find cozy versus what someone else finds cozy in the horror genre might vary greatly. It’s all subjective and relative anyway.

If you enjoyed this post (or if it really pissed you off), please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y’all like hearing from me.

Until next week.

Welcome to a Love of B Horror Movies

Here’s a not so secret about me, I un-ironically love bad horror movies. My favorites are campy horror movies from the 50s and 60s, typically star Vincent Price or Christopher Lee, and are overacted by a factor of 10,000. Whether these movies are actually good can be debatable. I don’t think I’d call The Blog a good movie (let alone a good horror movie), but I would call it an entertaining one.

When I’m having a tough time and need a good laugh, I like put on one of these movie. There’s no denying the VelociPaster is a mess of a movie, but I will laugh my butt off when there are explosions being heard and the screen just says “VFX: Car on Fire”. Leprechaun (the 1993 version with pre-famous Jennifer Aniston) has some actual scary moments, even if it is hard to take Warwick Davis’s character seriously when he’s laughing like a Saturday morning cartoon villain.

Recently, I was able to watch Killer Klowns from Outer Space, which is a classic B Horror movie from the late 1980s. It is a glorious example of a so bad it’s good kind of horror movie. There were some genuinely horrifying moments between the campy acting and costumes. It was a clear throw back to the creature features of the 1950s (30 something teenagers et. all). However, I was actually disturbed by the clown klown that was luring a little girl away from her family, or the klown pretending to be a statue outside of a pharmacy, or the ending where it’s implied that pretty much everyone but the final characters die in the town.

Also the costumes are by far the creepiest clown costumes - beating out all three It movies  by a landslide.

Old B horror movies might be my go to, but sometimes a gem of a B horror movie comes out now. However, these movies typically aren’t shown in theaters. 

Thanks to the streaming wars and Internet critics, B horror movies have had a bit of a renaissance. Some are actually pretty good, others are so bad they’re good (VelociPaster on Amazon Prime falls here), and then you have the so boring I can’t watch this anymore. That last category is the worst. I watch B horror movies for a cheap thrill and a hearty laugh, not because I want to fall asleep.

Willy’s Wonderland, starting a completely mute Nick Cage, is one of those so bad it’s good. I love this movie. Did it scare me? Not really. I may have jumped a couple of times because of a loud noise or jump scare. I did laugh my butt off and did care about the characters (even if I knew most were gonna die). My cat, however, did find the movie scary and didn’t like the humans dying (she’s a sensitive kitty).

It was because I’d watched Willy’s Wonderland that a new horror movie popped up on my recommendations. 

Haunt (2019) is a legit intense B horror movie. It’s not the most amazing horror movie I’ve ever seen - it is very much a B horror movie and was made with a shoe-string budget. However, what it lacks in effects it makes up for solid performances and seriously creepy moments. This movie doesn’t rely on jump scares. There’s only one that I can think of and it’s deserved for all of its dumbness. Instead, this movie uses voyeuristic techniques, long stretches of silence, and effective theming to create a fantastic horror experience. There are still a few funny moments - the movie takes place in an extreme haunted house experience and knows how to have fun with the setting. 

It’s not The House October Built, but Haunt knows what it’s doing.

B horror movies walk a fine line. They still need to be scary on some level, while still being fun. There might be a wink at the camera and some self awareness, but the best also take the material they are working with seriously. There’s a reason Killer Klowns from Outer Space and Leprechaun are considered cult classics. Heck, I’d argue Poltergeist is a classic B movie with an A list director to give it credibility.

But the overarching message of this post is a simply silly one: horror movies can be comfort movies, especially the campy, overacted ones with 30 somethings playing teenagers.

Until next week.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y’all like hearing from me.

Welcome to Fear

 Happy first weekend of Fall. Spooky season is in full swing and Halloween is just around the corner. I’m currently read “Mexican Gothic” by Silvia Moreno-Garcia. I’m about a third of the way through the story and so far it’s hitting all the right notes for my love of spooky atmosphere and gothic tropes. I’m hoping things carry through the whole story.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for the novel I just finished. Luke Dumas’s “A History of Fear” comes out in December, yet I managed to score an advanced reader’s copy through a GoodReads giveaway. It’s premise sounded promising - a young man claiming the devil had made him commit a murder. I love a good murder mystery and the idea of supernatural forces intrigued me.

Sadly, the book didn’t live up to my expectations, falling into some of my least favorite horror tropes and setting off my social anxiety to the extreme. Overall, I didn’t find this book scary or horrific and everything is (purportedly) explained in an afterword.

Don’t get me wrong, this book has some good points. There’s an intense scene in a library that is excellently paced and thoroughly creepy, but this type of horror is rare. If the book had capitalized on those moments, I think I would have had a more enjoyable spooky experience.

I admit that I have my own standards for horror that don’t always align  with what is popular or conventional.

For example, I really like creepy atmosphere and quiet moments in my horror media. This can allow for a bigger build up in a scare or paranoia. These moments without action give me time to reflect and think - or overthink - about what is happening. I still crave that release of buildup and tension, but a solitary character lost in a fog can be just as terrifying as a monster popping up saying “boo”. 

I consider a story scary if it follows me off the pages of a book or the images on a screen and into my everyday moments. What would I do if my family was slowly starving and possibly being stalked by a witch? (The VVitch). Could I battle a button eyed version of my mother? (Coraline). Would I be able to find who the dead person is before dying myself? (Another). Could I defeat ancient Lovecraftian gods and save the multiverse without losing my mind? (Eternal Darkness: Sanity’s Requiem) What would I do if my town was suddenly possessed by spirals? (Uzumaki).

Honestly, only Junji Ito could make a spiral scary and he truly succeeds. The scene where the woman realizes that there is a naturally occurring spiral in her ear haunts me. 

When I was little, I couldn’t handle a lot of horror. I had a reoccurring nightmare of Fidget from “The Great Mouse Detective” popping out (if you’ve seen the movie, y’all know the scene) and kidnapping me while I’m trying to find my way home. The movie (with horror veteran actor Vincent Price as the villain) along with “Scooby Doo Where Are You” were my introduction to horror. As long as the scary images were clearly separate from the real world, I enjoyed it (with maybe a nightmare or two).

And then one of my parents thought it would be an excellent idea to show young me “Arachnidphobia”. For some background, I thought spiders were the coolest before watching this movie. After watching it, I wanted nothing to do with the eight legged arachnids. Suddenly, there was no longer the barrier of animation for my young mind and the real world became a little less safe.

As I’ve matured, I’ve found that I still prefer some kind of barrier between me and my horror media. I much prefer ghost stories and creature features to serial killers and psychological thrillers. If my horror story is too “real”, the less I feel like I’m escaping into a story. Real life is full of terrifying things - many I can’t do anything about. The less plausible a scenario, the more likely I am to jump in without questioning the details of the plot that otherwise might cause it to colapse on itself. As soon as my brain can start poking holes into things, I become frustrated rather than entertained.

Again, this is just my opinion. And these preferences aren’t inflexible.

Once I figured out what was going on with the plot of “A History of Fear”, I became less invested and more annoyed with the author’s choices. I almost completely left the plot and instead powered through to finish the book and move on to a new one.

However, one movie that did scare the crap out of me was “Oculus”. In someways it has some similarities to “A History of Fear”, but only surface level. There’s an element of reality to “Oculus”. The story could be about the mental break down of a family. However, the lore and presentation of the movie creates a narrative that takes me out of reality and into the internally logical world the characters are navigating. I completely buy that the mirror is evil. I also buy that the family had a mental breakdown unrelated to the evil mirror. The fact that there’s no explanation that ties up the plot in a neat little bow and spoon feeds me the explanation is a plus. This movie loved rent free in my mind for weeks.

So did the book (and movie) “Coraline”. As did the manga “Uzumaki”. 

Also, the less jump scares a movie or video game has, the better. I don’t have to worry about these too much in books and graphic novels since books don’t make obnoxiously loud sounds, but movies and video games love jump scares with unnecessarily grating noises. This is why I can’t do haunted houses despite loving the aesthetic and decorations - they’re too loud. Jump scares also don’t leave room for thinking. It’s an almost complete release of tension when they happen. Yes, “Oculus” has a few jump scares, but those weren’t the scenes that got under my skin. (No, that honor goes to the apple/lightbulb scene).

I’ve long since grown out of a need to line by bed with an army of stuffed animals to defend me against vampires and other nighttime terrors. My preferred horror stories have me buying into their internal logic and leave me with questions to mull long after I’ve finished the narrative. I prefer creepy quiet scenes mixed in with my horrific images. I want to escape into a story rather than be forced to live my reality.

Also the less jump scares, the better.

I gave “A History of Fear” 2.5 stars (rounded up to 3) on GoodReads. For all its flaws, I can see fans of true crime enjoying this book. As for me, if the paranormal is promised in my story, I want some really good, actually in the narrative’s world, paranormal stuff to go down.

What are some of your favorite horror media? I’ve listed a few of mine here, but this list is nowhere near complete. For one thing, “Dracula” is still one of my all time favorite horror novels (even if only the first part is truly horrifying) and the first time I mention it is this sentence.

Pleasant nightmares.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y’all like hearing from me.

Until next week.

Welcome To Spooky Season Recommendations Part 1 Of ?

 It's officially Spooky Season!

Okay - technically fall starts in roughly two week, but pumpkin spice non-sense has hit the shelves and I am eating it up (literally and figuratively).

So far, I've tried the Dunkin Donuts and Goldfish brand mashup of pumpkin spice donut goldfish (they are unsurprisingly addictive) and the Special K pumpkin spice cereal (it's good, has a nice pop of spice). Both are good, but you don't need to go out of your way to pick them up (unlike the amazing pumpkin spice mini ice cream cones from Trader Joe's - those are worth every penny).

Non-pumpkin spice related flavored non-sense, my local giant has a lovely honey crisp flavored seltzer water. I normally don't go for apple flavored things, but this one I do enjoy picking up at this time of year. It's light, not overly artificial apple flavored, and disappears by the end of September.  

Sadly, I have yet to see my favorite baked chips hit the shelves yet this year. These are the ghost baked chips Trader Joe's has between September and October. If you see these, stock up, they also go fast. Trader Joe's also hasn't yet had their pumpkin spice mini ice cream cones yet, so I'll have to keep my eyes peeled. 

Other reoccurring fall themed foods that are back on the market and I can recommend are the pumpkin spice coffee blends - though they vary by brand, apple cider (local is best), and apple butter (seriously, shop local, it's so much better than store brand). I'm also fond of the pumpkin spice tea by Harney & Sons Fine Tea. It's an herbal blend with rooibos and pumpkin pie spices (no actual pumpkin included). It's great for cold nights by a roaring fire. 

Alright, I've written enough about the food and drinks that have hit the shelves. What about the media? Are there any good spooky TV shows or movies to enjoy my time? What about books or graphic novels?

Well...

I've recently become obsessed with the recently released Netflix series Dead End: Paranormal Park. Netflix is currently in my bad books for some of their recent choices, but they at least have kept their animation line up (unlike certain other platforms - see my last post for salty details). This series came out in June and takes place in a theme park that might be described as 1 part Dollywood, 2 parts Disneyland on steriods. The main characters consist of a transgender boy named Barney, his talking dog Pugsley (who happens to be voiced by the actor who played Beetlejuice on Broadway), an autistic Pakistani-American girl named Norma, and the demon Courtney. 

This show is amazing - like Gravity Falls levels of amazing. 

The first season only has ten episodes, but we're left on the finale with an open ending that allows for a season 2 (and there had better be a season 2 Netflix). It checks all of my boxes for spooky season animated shows including good comedy, excellent representation, an intriguing mystery, and really well written complex characters. I love it.

Other spooky season animated shows to recommend on Netflix include Hollow (I've only seen the first season though), Castlevania (I've watched through season 2), and Hilda (which is less spooky and more fun adventures with a dash of mythical...and trolls).

Sadly, Disney has yet to put House of Mouse or House of Villains on Disney+, but they have released the trailer for Hocus Pocus 2. No I haven't seen it, I'm in denial that it will exist in a couple of months.

A movie I'm actually excited for (based on the trailer) is The Invitation, which looks like a modern take on "Dracula". Will I see it in theaters? Probably not, but I will stream it when I have the opportunity.

As for books, I'm currently in the middle of "A History of Fear" which will be released in December. I won this in a Goodreads giveaway and am determined to finish and review it soon. I'm about half way through and very confused. Is it spooky? Parts are, but overall it's more confusing. I do plan on ready "The Only Good Indians" and "Mexican Gothic" for the season - which I can recommend through reputation.

As the season goes on, I hope to have a few more recommendations for you guys. I plan on seeing a "Sleepy Hollow" ballet in the middle of October and might have a review in the works (not that I really know much about ballet, but I love Sleepy Hollow). Additionally, I watched Perfect Blue which deserves it's own blog post simply because it is an intense experience. It's not really spooky season themed, but it fits into the season by virtue of it being such a trip.

If you have any Spooky Season suggestions, please feel free to let me know. I enjoy this season and I hope you guys do to.

Until next week. 

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.

Welcome to the Many Adaptations of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

 Did y'all know that there's a musical version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde starring David Hasselhoff and can be found on YouTube (link here)? Well there is and it's as ridiculous as you think it is. Go check it out if you want to spend two and a half hours of your time watching a man angst about his life and commit murder while drinking a special potion that makes him look like something out of the uncanny valley (at least that's the impression the book gives). 

If you'd rather watch the twenty-two minute summary from Musical Hell on YouTube, you're welcome to do that instead.

What I find interesting about this version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde isn't it's misstep in stunt casting, but how far it deviates from the original source material.

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a compact novella by Robert Louis Stevenson. The same guy who famously wrote Treasure Island. Mr. Stevenson is probably one of my favorite late Victorian writers (along with Stoker, Carroll and Doyle). His prose are, for the most part, are easy to read for modern audiences. The one exception I'm familiar with is the short story "Thrawn Janet", which is written entirely in Scots. (I internally screamed the entire time I tried to read this one.) 

Most people know of Stevenson's work. Treasure Island has had many adaptations and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde has become well intertwined with horror pop culture. My first introduction to both stories was through children's media. The Muppets did fantastic adaptation of Treasure Island, while Scooby and the Gang met Jekyll and Hyde in the episode "Nowhere to Hyde". Interestingly enough, The Scooby Doo episode is actually somewhat closer to the original mechanics and motivations of the story than that musical adaptation I mentioned at the start of this post.

Don't believe me? 

I could tell you to read the book, but that takes a lot more time than you probably want to spend (though you should read the book because it is excellent). Instead, you can watch the wonderfully sarcastic summary by Overly Sarcastic Productions on YouTube (click here). 

Yes, the big twist at the end has been spoiled by pop culture. However, that's not what makes the book so interesting. It's the suspense. We know Hyde is bad news, but what evil will he do next? Will he ever be caught? And will Dr. Jekyll put an end to Hyde for good?

It's also a little more complicated than a split personality (or Dissociative Identity Disorder as is the mental illness's proper name). 

However, this fore knowledge of the main twist somewhat necessitates the changes to the plot. Most people know going in what the connection between Jekyll and Hyde is (I'm not going to outright type it out because you might be the 0.0001% of my readers who aren't familiar with the story). So, adaptions need to keep the audience interested in the story another way.

Insert the love interest(s).

The original novella has very few female characters. The two most important are a little girl and a maid - neither of these characters have a name. 

Thus adaptations love to add a lady or two - usually as a love interest (or two) - to add some drama to the plot. This has been done in a lot of movie adaptations, the previously mentioned hilarious musical, and some cartoon adaptations. The Scooby Doo episode included a maid character who is a suspect in the mystery. In Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman, their school is putting on a stage version of the story that includes a love interest.

These love dramas are not in the original story at all. The main drama starts out as a mystery that eventually leads to the questioning of human nature. The question drifts from who Mr. Hyde is and becomes what makes a person evil and can that part be carved out. Dr. Jekyll struggles with personal issues (that are left incredibly vague in the novella). 

I find that most adaptations drift from this theme to focus more on the added love drama. Which is a shame because the original theme is much more interesting.

Recently, I read a graphic novel adaptation of Stevenson's novella. Klimowski and Schejbal collaborated to create hauntingly beautiful drawings (which is the reason I brought the book in the first place). It's an extremely faithful adaptation, including characters who are typically left out such as Mr. Enfield and Dr. Lanyon. It even has one of my favorite lines ("if he be Mr. Hyde, then I shall be Mr. Seek"). However, the novella in its original state doesn't seem to take well to a visual adaptation and the narrative felt a little too streamlined.

They also made (in my opinion) the mistake of showing Dr. Jekyll's struggles...and they aren't all that shocking.

Okay, they're shocking by Victorian standards (maybe). But one of the most creepy aspects of Stevenson's original work is how vague he is about the evil being committed. The author leaves it up to the reader to fill in the gaps and that makes for a more interesting experience while reading the text. 

The graphic novel decided to just show their readers this "evil" and I didn't find it all that "evil". If they had left it vague, my imagination would have definitely come up with something a lot worse (especially with the creepy charcoal drawings to go off of). Instead they chose something pretty generic - even for the Victorian standards of the time. 

Which brings me back to why any adaptations of this novella need to have some narrative changes to keep the reader interested. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a very internally driven narrative. It's a fight between the good and evil within a person rather than an external one. Any visual medium has to add an external drama element to draw out the story.

The original novella on its own is really good and I do recommend y'all check it out if you haven't yet. If you have read the novella, let me know what you think of it. Also let me know if you enjoyed Mr. Hasselhoff on Broadway. I can assure you that I was entertained. 

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y'all like hearing from me.

Welcome to a Happy Halloween

 Today was quiet. Once again, not one trick or treaters at my apartment complex, but I could hear them the next street over. That’s okay because I still had a great Halloween.

I started with a pumpkin chocolate muffin with pumpkin butter and finishing my Halloween cross stitch project. I hung them up with care in one of my doorways.

I sent out texts to all of my friends and family I have in my phone’s address book wishing them a Happy Halloween. Most texted back and a few called. Pictures of younger family members were shared and my cousin managed to get her dog into a Harley Quinn outfit.

I had a lunch of pumpkin empanadas and watched The Haunting, then went for a walk to a small lake shopping center.

While enjoying a pretzel and hops tea at the local micro brewery, a man set up some music and his kids (dressed as Michael Jackson) danced to the joy of everyone at each of the restaurants. At about 2:30, a group of witches on paddle boards, kayaks, and a pontoon boat paraded into the docking area. A few of the witches had kids and dogs on their paddle boats. There was even a skeleton with a small graveyard on his board.

I then wandered a bit.

I spotted a fox sunning himself on a neighbor’s yard. I danced among some falling leaves on the wooded trail. I also pet several very fluffy dogs.

I returned home nearly two hours later to carve my first pumpkin in nearly a decade. I chose a sun and moon combo to represent the changing of the seasons. I had Over the Garden Wall on while I scooped the pumpkin’s guts out and drew the design on its face. 

My apartment filled with the scent of cinnamon and nutmeg as my soul cookies baked and I lit some pumpkin spice candles. I ate a silent dinner with the spirits on my balcony and wished a family dressed as black cats a “Happy Halloween”.

I rounded out the night with a pumpkin spice bath (with a bath bomb and haunted scented soap) to get ready for my spell casting. A good witch knows how to harness the wonderful energy of Halloween to work their magic. I built a fire and cast some bay leaves with wishes into the flames. The universe will hear me and guide me.

The cat especially loves the fire.

I plan on ending the night with some spiced hot apple cider and a tarot reading. Overall a simple, relaxing, and my kind of Halloween. 

I hope you all have a fun night, stay safe, and have a spooky time. This season passed by fast (though part of that might have been because I was deeply depressed for part of it). Know that how you celebrate during this time of year is up to you. Go to parties, commune with the dead, or watch some scary movies.

Until next week.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y’all like hearing from me.

Welcome to the Horrors of a Wax Museum

 Have you guys every been to a wax museum? 

I’ve gone to one...maybe two in my life time and I wasn’t that impressed. Seeing fake celebrities that creepily smile at me with soulless glass eyes wasn’t all that fun. I did kind of like the Chamber of Horrors portion because it looked really fake,  it even that wasn’t as cool as some of the decorations that would go up around my neighborhood at Halloween.

However, one of my favorite classic horror movies takes place in a wax museum. House of Wax, the 1958 starring Vincent Price, makes a great case for visiting wax museums. Then again, that might just be the amazing Vincent Price’s charm and ability to camp everything to an eleven out of ten. He is the star of this movie for a reason and every scene he is in is fantastic - no part of the scenery goes in chewed!

Now, it’s well known in the horror community that this movie got a remake in 2005. It’s basically an in-name-only remake and not even Supernatural’s Jared Padalecki or Paris Hilton at her peak can save it from being terrible. I’ve seen it a couple of times (the first thinking it was the Price version) and was left annoyed and confused.

But what’s less well known is that the 1958 version is also a remake. In 1933 Warner Brother’s released Mystery of the Wax Museum. What’s cool about this movie is that it’s pre-Hays Code. Without the moral demands placed upon it, the movie can get away with characters having questionable motivations, doing illegal activities without facing (narrative) consequences, and not being subjected to silly censorship rules.

Honestly, the Hays Code is a pox on classic movies and story innovation. The number of stories that had to be changed when they were being adapted for the big screen is long and includes the likes of Rebecca, The Bad Seed, and even Pride and Prejudice. Sex was a big NO during the hay’s code period - which is why the famous train coming out of a tunnel became a symbol of sex in movies. Also married couples weren’t even allowed to share a bed on screen. 

I can’t list all the annoying stipulations of the Hays Code in this post (I’m sure I’ll go through it eventually), but if you’re curious, you can read more on the TV Tropes page. Needless to say, the sticky fingers of the Hay’s Code is all over the 1958 version. It’s made even more obvious compared to the 1933 version.

The 1933 Mystery of the Wax Museum was considered lost for a long time. This happened to a lot of movies in the early days of Hollywood. Most classic silent films have been lost to history and it’s a miracle that we still have the ones we do. Fortunately, the film was rediscovered in one of the producer’s collections and recently remastered.

And I was fortunate enough to catch it on this week’s Svengooli!

For those of you unfamiliar with the METV weekly show. Svengooli hosts a science fiction or classic horror movie every Saturday at 8:00 PM ET. He’ll talk about the history of the movie, who is in it and other movies we’ll know the actors from, do some silly games, and even sing a song. 

I learned most of my information on Mystery of the Wax Museum from him. He even pointed out a lot of the similarities between the 1933 and 1958 versions. Some of the scenes really were redone shot for shot or the dialogue was a direct carryover. One of my favorite scenes is in both movies and it’s when the coroner’s are wheeling a body through the morgue, a body pops up, and the mortician goes “you’ll get used to it, it’s the embalming fluid makes them jump.” Because clearly embalming fluid causes a body to just sit up on its own.

 However there were a lot of differences. A lot of them were due to the Hays Code. Some were because the 1958 was shot to be in 3D - a gimmick that is still driving up movie tickets today.

The biggest difference between the two films is when they are set. The 1933 version takes place in the 1930s, whereas the 1958 version is set at the turn of the 1900s. The main leading lady in the 1933 version, Florence (played by  Glenda Farrell), is a reporter chasing a story to the point where she doesn’t want to involve the cops in case someone else poaches the scoop before her. Whereas the 1958 version mostly follows Sue Allen (played by Phyllis Kirk), whose character in the 1933 version was Florence’s friend Charlotte Duncan (played by the famous Fay Wray). The Florence character is instead merged with another to become Cathy Gray (played by the original Morticia Addams herself Carolyn Jones), Sue’s flirtatious roommate.

Why are the characters changed around? 

There are a few reasons. One is that the 1958 version streamlines the 1933 movie’s plot with the changes. There’s no longer a side plot with an accused boyfriend of a murdered heiress, Florence’s character isn’t snooping around to catch the latest scoop, and the Charlotte/Sue character gets a lot more developed in the 1958 version. Honestly I kind of miss the Florence character. She added a lot of humor to the movie.

Where the Hays Code comes in is within the details. Both Sue and Charlotte are targeted by the evil bad guy, but Sue is saved by her boyfriend and a couple of conveniently places cops instead of a snooping Florence, a concerned Charlotte’s fiancé, and a gaggle of police officers. I found Charlotte’s character in the 1933 version to be dull and bland compared to Florence, whereas Sue has character...and a very strong moral compass (which is probably what saves her). Sue doesn’t flirt, she doesn’t go out all the time, and she finds can-can to be scandalous. Cathy is a flirt and bares more than a passing resemblance to the 80s slasher trope that insists that the sexually active characters must die.

Oh yes, I’m saying that the Hays code directly influenced 80s slasher horror tropes. I don’t find it a coincidence at all that the less conservative, more freethinking Cathy gets axed, while conservative and repressed Sue is saved at the last second. Florence might have jumped a foot in the air when faced with a moving box (honestly I would have too), but she’d have also beaten  the crap out of the 1933 bad guy. Charlotte just kind of stands there and screams as the wax mask falls off big-bad’s face.

They also changed one character from having a drug problem to being an alcoholic. I’m not sure how one is worse than the other, but Svengooli assures me that that was a Hays Code change. Also the cops openly talk about meeting up with bootleggers in the 1933 version, so the police were allowed to be corrupt in 1933, but not in 1958 as far as I can tell.

I’m not going to sit here and tell you guys that one film is better than the other. I like both for different reasons. They both have flaws. I much prefer the friendship between Sue and Cathy over the sniping shared between Charlotte and Florence. Sue and Cathy seem to genuinely like and care for each other, which makes Cathy’s death and Sue’s motivations all the more emotional. 

Finally, these films are far from perfect. There’s the period typical sexism, the city of New York is far too homogeneous to actually be the city of New York, and I really have to question those ending scenes.

Both of the films have really weird endings. After Sue is saved in the 1958 version, the cops, Sue, and Sue’s boyfriend are at the police station joking about a wax head growing a long beard. It ends with all the characters laughing and there’s little emotional fallout from Sue nearly being killed by hot wax. In the 1933 version, Charlotte is saved and then it cuts to Florence finishing up her story and her editor (who has been a bit of a jerk the whole movie) proposes. Florence accepts the proposal despite having spent most of the movie flirting with a nice rich guy and squabbling with the editor. I legit yelled “no don’t” as this was happening.

Oh well, maybe this is how Hildey and Walter got together the first time in His Girl Friday.

If you’re interested in classic horror movies, Vincent Price, or ore-Hays Code films, I’d recommend checking both movies out. They’re cool to compare and contrast. And further proof that Hollywood will remake anything.

Oh and about the 2005 version...I’d give it a pass.

Will I ever go to another wax museum? Maybe if it’s a Groupon deal. The art might be amazing, but I have a hard time being around wax figures.

Until next week.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope y’all like hearing from me.

Welcome to the Tragedy in Horror

 This past week, I watched the Netflix original The Haunting of Bly Manor. Based on the classic gothic horror novel, The Turn of the Screw, and a spiritual successor to the fabulous The Haunting of Hill House, I was excited to see how this mini series was going to do. 

I wasn't disappointed. 

Though I don't think The Haunting of Bly Manor is nearly as good as The Haunting of Hill House, I did enjoy watching it. And like the first miniseries, it left me crying my eyes out by the end.

Ghost Stories are Never Just About the Ghosts

At least good ghost stories are never just about the ghosts. 

At their heart ghost stories are about people. Their actions, their emotions, and what they leave behind. My favorite ghost stories not only scare me, but also leave me in tears. The tragedy is part of the horror. 

One of the first ghost stories I remember watching as a kid was The Others (2001). I'd seen other horror movies as a kid (Arachnophobia might have hindered my interest in spiders for a few years), but not many serious ghost stories.

And boy did I have an interest in ghosts and haunted houses as a kid.

One of my favorite shows as a kid was the History Channel's Haunted History series. They'd go to cities, visit some haunted locations and explain the history with some ghost stories thrown in. It wasn't like the ghost hunting shows that are on now. You can find a lot of them on Amazon Prime (though it takes some digging to find them) and a few channels on YouTube.

So, when I watched The Others, my kid self was expecting a haunted house story. I was not ready for the twist ending or how much I was going to cry (and I was one of those kids that cried at the drop of a hat). 

I freaking loved it.

The Others is a ghost story about ghosts not knowing they're dead and their need to come to terms with that. Their feelings of isolation, hopelessness, and guilt permeate the film. The horror isn't that there are ghosts haunting a house, but how they handle the stressful situations they are in. 

Going back to The Haunting of Hill House and The Haunting of Bly Manor, much of the horror is realizing who was fated to die, how they were unable to prevent it, and the response to those deaths. Nell's death in particular ticks all of these boxes. 

We learn that Nell is dead in the first episode of The Haunting of Hill House. Her spirit is waiting in her brother Steve's apartment when he gets home. He grumbles to her for a bit, then he gets a phone call from his dad stating she's dead, and finally we get that awesome jump scare. Much of the rest of the series that takes place in the present focuses on how her death brought her family back together.

However, we do get a full episode dedicated to Nell's life. We see her falling in love, getting married, and then losing her husband to an unforeseeable health problem. We see her pain and deepening depression as she struggles with her husband's death. I wanted to see her get better. I wanted her to be happy.

Throughout the episode, we also see the bent neck lady haunting Nell. She shows up at some of the worst moments of Nell's life - including the death of her husband. Right before going back to Hill House, Nell sees her again. I don't know if this vision was the final straw for Nell to go to the house or if she would have gone regardless of seeing her, but she goes back to the house. And she relives some of her happiest moments with her family. She even dances with her husband again like she did on her wedding day.

She seems so happy, even though we, the audience, know it's not real. We want Nell to be happy. But she's destined to die. We've known this from episode one. When she does die (and we find out who the bent neck woman is) we're horrified. I was so upset that I burst into tears. 

Same thing happened at the end of the series, when Steven is learning the whole truth of his mother's death. The ending of Bly Manor also left me in tears between the lady of the lake (though I honestly didn't need an entire episode dedicated to her), Hannah, Rebecca, and the inevitable death of Dannie.

I was horrified and full of sorrow.

I seem to like these types of horror stories a lot.

A couple of nights ago, despite knowing that I was going to cry again anyway, I decided to put on the movie Paranorman (2012) after finishing Bly Manor. Paranorman is one of Laika studio's best all around animated films. It's got horror, humor, and one of the biggest tear-jerk moments in a movie about witches and zombies. 

If you haven't seen the movie, I recommend going and watching (because I might spoil a couple of key plot points) it. Norman is a little different - mainly because he can talk to dead people like the kid in the Sixth Sense. He's given the responsibility of reading the spirit of a witch a bed time story to keep her asleep for another year. He fails, zombies rise from their graves, and the town descends into chaos.

The resolution and ending is so sad.

(Spoilers - next paragraph)

Nothing bad happens to Norman. It's the witch's story that's depressing. Because of course the witch wasn't actually a witch. She was a little girl like Norman - a little different. She was killed because they were afraid of her.

(Spoilers - ended)

No matter how much I'm enjoying the movie, I know that I'm going to be in tears by the end. That doesn't stop me from watching, but I do have to prepare myself for it.

Go watch Paranorman, it's great. Plus there is this hilarious scene where you find out one of the characters is gay and it's one of the best reveals I've ever watched. 

But this is my opinion on horror stories. I can't just be terrified or in a state of anxiety the whole time. Tragedy rounds out the story and adds depth to characters' back stories...especially if they're ghosts. 

Why are some of my favorite horror movies also ones that make me cry?

Probably because I like ghost stories, where the ghosts aren't what's really doing the haunting.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.

Until next week.

Welcome to Adaptation as Fanfiction

Here's a not so secret fact about me: I enjoy fanfiction.

There's nothing wrong with enjoying fanfiction - sometimes I want to see what other authors think was happening with two background characters while the main characters were ignoring them or sometimes I want to speculate on what happened after the story ended.

Fanfiction is fan taking a work they love and adapting that work into a new story. This is not a new idea and often adaptation is in itself a type of fanfiction. There's a very fine line between what is cannon and what is not cannon and sometimes a work can be removed from the cannon (see any fan arguing about the Star Wars Legends demotion).

I'd argue some of the most popular plays, movies, and TV shows of the past decade could easily fall within the category of fanfiction as well as adaptation.

Hey look, mythological fan art!

For example, Hamilton is a "real person" fanfiction (yes they exist, no I'm not very fond of them, though there are a few I like) as is the movie/play 1776 (though they really do Judge Wilson dirty in 1776). Hadestown is one of my all time favorite plays...and totally an alternate reality version of the story of Orpheus and Eurydice. Pretty much anything that features Sherlock Holmes is a fanfiction (unless it's a direct story adaptation).

But do these examples really count? Aren't they just adaptations of materials in the public domain or of real events?

Yes and they are also a form of fanfiction.

A Cinderella and historical fiction fanfiction (because Da Vinci is in it)

Go re-watch Hamilton on Disney+ and tell me that Lin-Manuel Miranda isn't a fan of the real historical Alexander Hamilton. He spent 6 years developing that play. His passion had to have been sparked somehow.

Look! More public domain adaptations that are also fanfiction.

Oh Brother Where Art Thou takes a lot of liberties with the plot of The Odyssey, but clearly someone was a big enough fan of the original story to create an alternative universe where George Clooney (as Odysseus) escapes from prison to get back with his wife. It is so blatantly obvious in places, that I -without knowing the movie had any ties to The Odyssey before watching - picked up on the imagery (especially with John Goodman as the cyclops and the sirens scene).

And don't even get me started on anything and everything related to Sherlock Holmes (the original toxic fandom). Watching the old movies where Holmes goes up against the Nazis is trippy because I think of Holmes in the 1880s or 1890s - when there weren't Nazis. Though I admit to a deep fondness for all of the Wishbone adaptations of the books.

However, fanfiction goes even further back than this past century and the insane copyright laws currently in existence - one of many reasons fanfiction has become so prevalent. These works were often held in such regard that they helped change how a society saw the origins of the works.

Shakespeare created several plays about the English Kings (starting with Edward III and ending with Richard III) as this really cool adapted history of his country. These adaptations can also fall into fanfiction territory as Shakespeare had to take many liberties when adapting the narratives into plays. He had to write parts for the actors in his companies, speak to the audience in a way they would understand, and keep his wealthy patrons happy. Henry V didn't have a friend named Sir John Falstaff, he's fictional and also appears in The Merry Wives of Windsor which I'm fairly certain isn't part of the English Kings plays. However, Falstaff was (supposedly) a fan favorite of the audience and is speculated to be based off of a real person (speculations include the actor playing him, but no conclusive evidence exists).

This series of plays by Shakespeare are often seen as helping educate and shape public opinion on English history (particularly where the monarchs are concerned). Henry V is the tragic hero the public needs because he was on the right side of the War of the Roses, while Richard III is a total villain because he was on the wrong side of the war (he also likely murdered his nephews and rightful heirs to the throne, so...).

You guys might not have read the epic poems of Dante's Divine Comedy or John Milton's Paradise Lost, but by the universe you've either heard of them or been exposed to something that has been influenced by them.

 I've seen Paradise Lost referenced by Mary Shelly in Frankenstien, Neil Gainman in Sandman, a scene in the movie Animal House, the Star Trek episode "Space Seed", and more video games and songs than I have space to list. Needless to say, it's popular.

It's also this very long angsty fanfiction about the fallen angel Lucifer and the war between heaven and hell. I wouldn't even call this an adaptation of a Bible story, this is just straight up fanfiction about things that are referenced or barely mentioned in The Good Book.

That goes double for The Divine Comedy. The trilogy is a prime example of self insert fanfiction (written by a good writer) if I ever read such a story. The guy gets to meet his favorite Latin poet, get a VIP tour of hell, puragory, and heaven, damn two Popes to hell (it's complicated), and meets all the whose who of dead guys in 14th century western culture (seriously there are a lot of side conversations that could easily have been skipped over Dante).

This particular work of fiction was so popular by the time's powers at be that it influenced the Christian religion up to, well...now. Half the reason westerners and Christians think of hell the way they do is because of Dante. Heck, who else would have sentenced Marcus Junius Brutus to be eaten for eternity by the devil himself? An Italian with a grudge - that's who.

But you don't have to listen to my arguments for this. Overly Sarcastic Productions on YouTube has a fantastic summary of all three books and why they are the most fanfiction of fanfiction writings in existence that are also held in such high regard. Seriously check out the videos, they're hilarious.

So the next time you bash someone for writing or enjoying fanfiction, just remember that you might be a fan of someone else's fanfiction...that was just given a budget.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.

Until next week.

Welcome to that One Movie Obsession

If there’s one movie that I have un-ironically fallen in love with in recent years, it’s the 2006 “The Woods”. I have no idea if this is an obscure movie or one that fell to the wayside because audiences didn’t like it (but critics mostly liked it -it’s fresh on Rotten Tomatoes), however I love this movie.

And not just because Bruce Campbell has a minor role.

“The Woods” is one of those quasi horror movies that isn’t so much scary as it is a fairy tale with horror elements. Much in the same way that the original 1977  “Suspiria” or the more recent “Pan’s Labyrinth” and "Sleepy Hollow", it’s a mix of terrifying concepts, beautiful imagery, and dreamlike storytelling.

Fairy tale elements can be found throughout the movie. The setting is at an all girl’s school located deep in the woods (hence the  title) in the 1960s. There’s a sense of mystery, some of the girls start to go missing, there’s a mean girl who bullies our protagonist, and there are witches. 

If the location weren’t enough to indicate that we’re in a fairy tale, the music certainly does. It’s haunting, a little off putting, and at times down right creepy. However, I do like the use of “You Don’t Own Me” peppered throughout at key moments. It helps reinforce the overarching themes of individuality and rebelliousness that embodies the protagonist.

However, I can see why movie goers might not have been drawn to it. The story is a little confusing and inconsistent at times. Motivations aren’t always clear outside of the protagonist. And some characters seem to know more than they should (though that could be because of their undefined “gift”).

Yeah a lot of the girls in these films are “gifted” or, in lame man’s terms, psychic, telepathic, or otherwise magically inclined. How do these gifts connect to the larger world? Never explained, they just have them. It’s established early that the protagonist, Heather, has some sensitivity to psychic phenomena, but her real talents are revealed during an emotionally charged scene between her and the headmistress.

Honestly, I love picking a part this movie. The ending, though entertaining, doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Some of the earlier information is contradictory to what ends up happening, but it also isn’t clear who is a reliable source of information and who isn’t. Furthermore, the inciting incident of the course is a little confusing and not explained well.

These issues could easily turn off the average movie goer. 

I freaking love them. All of the ambiguity has the wheels in my head turning over and over. I’ve got a few theories and ideas. Personally I think the woods the school was located in were always evil and possessed the witches or acted as their puppet masters. I also like to think that they only needed to “feed” the curse at certain times. Then again, “feed” probably isn’t the right word, but provide new hosts to continue what the woods want. 

And my favorite theory is that Heather from “The Woods” is Sarah’s deceased mother from “The Craft”. They have some similar powers and ticks that make me wonder if the actress who played Heather was a fan of “The Craft”. Plus the timelines for the character’s ages align.

All the proof I need that Heather is Sarah's mother

Seriously, check out this movie and tell me that Heather couldn’t potentially be Sarah’s mom. It’s on Amazon Prime right now.

I love fairy tale dreamlike quality of some movies. There’s a reason I go back to “Suspiria”, “Sleepy Hollow”, “Pan’s Labyrinth” and “The Woods”. They remind me of a time when the woods were filled with imagined monsters and there were still mysterious places to be explored with danger around every corner. They transport us from reality and into a realm where anything is possible.

This is also likely why I enjoyed “Sleep No More”.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off), please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.

Until next week.