egafd.com

Then check out what our forebears had to put up with! !laugh!



another terrifying clip!

Yes, I can see Mr Slip that you are a fan of great movies too ! ROBOT
MONSTER was made to cash in on 3D with a shoestring budget. The
director, Phil Tucker, could not afford to book a stuntman with a robot
suit, but paid his buddy, George Barrows, just $40 a day to use his own
gorilla costume. They added a silver-painted diving helmet and George
wore a stocking mask so that his face would not be seen thru the glass.
Two jiggling TV antennae completed the odd effect.
The whole movie was shot in a week....
Poor old George almost died in the scene when he has to carry a girl up
a hill. He later told a reporter, " It was hot the whole time. Maybe 90
degrees, maybe more....I was sweating up a storm, but hey, thats show
biz !"
Needless to say, ROBOT MONSTER is considered one of the worst sci-fi
movies of all time !

Sounds to me that Phil Tucker would have done well in the World of Porn!!laugh!

Yes, I realise this is a tounge-in-cheek post, but I find I cannot watch most modern mainstream big budget Hollywood movies.

Modern films seem to be mainly made as promotion platforms for allied marketing ventures or simply to promote certain actors. Most 'actors' now give the impression when appearing in scenes that they can't get over how magnificent they look. They seem to be more concerned with posing than making their character believable and this comes through and puts me off. Russel Crowe in particular pisses me off with his pretentious manner - even off set he seems to believe he's a major historical figure with the whole world hanging on to his every word.

That might be why old movies are still popular - -the actors were just there to create the story and let you enjoy it.

Oh come now Deano! Russell Crowe comes in for a lot of unwarranted stick but he is one of those actors I actually think takes acting so serious that he hates the bull shit trimmings of stardom such as those who chase him all the time looking for a story.

Proof? He refused to lose weight for Robin Hood (so he isnt vain) and nor is he bothered by the chubby jokes levelled at him for his recent movie Three Days Later which I thought was great.

Robin Hood was a disappointment though but not because of Crowe

I wish that programmers agreed with you that old movies are popular, Deano. I fear they don't. I'm a bit of a movie geek and there's an increasing paucity in the choice of good old movies on telly. Yes, in the afternoon you get them. But that's because the stations are catering to an older audience at home. The spectrum of movies they can show at that time is quite limited. At night, the only time when a lot of the more adult-orientated stuff from the 60s onwards can be shown, the choice is depressingly limited. There's a wealth of brilliance from yesteryear that never sees the light of day anymore.

This was reflected to me by a piece on Jeff Bridges in The Observer today. A box-out highlighted his 'essential' movies. Five or six films. It kicked off with his first movie 'The Last Picture Show', then it jumped to 'Tron' 11 years later, then to 'The Fabulous Baker Boys', then 'The Fisher King', and it ended with 'Seabiscuit'. 'Seabiscuit'? Essential? Where did 'Fat City' and 'Cutter's Way' and even 'Starman' (by sheer force of his brilliant performance) go? This guy has enjoyed the blessing of being in the greatest number of highly-accomplished movies of any modern-day actor (to which, doubtless, he brought his own magic). But popularity, common-denominator reputation, governed the thinking of the journalist, not aesthetic value. Thus a box-off that advertised itself as being educational was actually anything but (in The Observer of all newspapers).

Our memories of our cultural heritage are getting shorter, in no small part thanks to a media that couldn't really give a fuck anymore.

You're right - there is a wealth of great material from years gone by that might never be seen again by any mass audience.

The networks would claim they're simply responding to viewer preferences obtained by ratings figures. But you could put the best show ever made on at half past two on a Wednesday morning and I'll guarantee it will fail.

My guess is that the advertisers push for 'target demographics' to be drawn in and the networks simply put on endless fucking celebrity cooking shows because they are most likely to pull twenty somethings with two incomes, no kids and a predisposition to buy trendy crap.

Here's a good 'un:

jimslip wrote:

> Here's a good 'un:
>

'Plan 9' wasn't a movie - it was filmed as it actually happened and is in fact a news report from the 1950's. But the Government doesn't want us to know the truth and has created the myth that its just a bad movie.

It's time THE TRUTH WAS TOLD!

Robot Monster was a pile of crap!
Half-robot, half-ape rubbish.

Man, I thought Howard the Duck was bad!
What was George Lucas thinking?